Sustained anxiety is considered as a chronic and future-oriented state of apprehension that does not belong to a specific object. It is discussed as an important characteristic of anxiety disorders including panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Experimentally, sustained anxiety can be induced by contextual fear conditioning in which aversive events are unpredictably presented and therefore the whole context becomes associated with the threat. This thesis aimed at investigating important mechanisms in the development and maintenance of sustained anxiety: (1) facilitated acquisition and resistant extinction of contextual anxiety due to genetic risk factors (Study 1), and (2) the return of contextual anxiety after successful extinction using a new reinstatement paradigm (Study 2). To this end, two contextual fear conditioning studies were conducted in virtual reality (VR). During acquisition one virtual office was paired with unpredictable mildly painful electric stimuli (unconditioned stimulus, US), thus becoming the anxiety context (CXT+). Another virtual office was never paired with any US, thus becoming the safety context (CXT-). Extinction was conducted 24 h later, i.e. no US was presented, and extinction recall was tested another 24 h later on Day 3. In both studies context-evoked anxiety was measured on three different response levels: behavioral (anxiety-potentiated startle reflex), physiological (skin conductance level), and verbal (explicit ratings). In Study 1, participants were stratified for 5-HTTLPR (S+ risk allele vs. LL no risk allele) and NPSR1 rs324981 (T+ risk allele vs. AA no risk allele) polymorphisms, resulting in four combined genotype groups with 20 participants each: S+/T+, S+/LL, LL/T+, and LL/AA. Results showed that acquisition of anxiety-potentiated startle was influenced by a gene × gene interaction: only carriers of both risk alleles (S+ carriers of the 5-HTTLPR and T+ carriers of the NPSR1 polymorphism) exhibited significantly higher startle magnitudes in CXT+ compared to CXT-. However, extinction recall as measured with anxiety-potentiated startle was not affected by any genotype. Interestingly, the explicit anxiety level, i.e. valence and anxiety ratings, was only influenced by the NPSR1 genotype, in a way that no risk allele carriers (AA) reported higher anxiety and more negative valence in response to CXT+ compared to CXT-, whereas risk allele carriers (T+) did not. Study 2 adopted nearly the same paradigm with the modification that one group (reinstatement group) received one unsignaled US at the beginning of the experimental session on Day 3 before seeing CXT+ and CXT-. The second group served as a control group and received no US, but was immediately exposed to CXT+ and CXT-. Results showed a return of anxiety on the implicit and explicit level (higher startle responses and anxiety ratings in response to CXT+ compared to CXT-) in the reinstatement group only. Most important, the return of contextual anxiety in the reinstatement group was associated with a change of state anxiety and mood from extinction to test, that is the more anxiety and negative mood participants experienced before the reinstatement procedure, the higher their return of anxiety was. In sum, results of Study 1 showed that facilitated contextual fear conditioning on an implicit behavioral level (startle response) could be regarded as an endophenotype for anxiety disorders, which can contribute to our understanding of the etiology of anxiety disorders. Results of Study 2 imply that anxiety and negative mood after extinction could be an important facilitator for the return of anxiety. Furthermore, the present VR-based contextual fear conditioning paradigm seems to be an ideal tool to experimentally study mechanisms underlying the acquisition and the return of anxiety. Future studies could investigate clinical samples and extend the VR paradigm to evolutionary-relevant contexts (e.g., heights, darkness, open spaces).

Extinction is an important mechanism to inhibit initially acquired fear responses. There is growing evidence that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) inhibits the amygdala and therefore plays an important role in the extinction of delay fear conditioning. To our knowledge, there is no evidence on the role of the prefrontal cortex in the extinction of trace conditioning up to now. Thus, we compared brain structures involved in the extinction of human delay and trace fear conditioning in a between-subjects-design in an fMRI study. Participants were passively guided through a virtual environment during learning and extinction of conditioned fear. Two different lights served as conditioned stimuli (CS); as unconditioned stimulus (US) a mildly painful electric stimulus was delivered. In the delay conditioning group (DCG) the US was administered with offset of one light (CS+), whereas in the trace conditioning group (TCG) the US was presented 4s after CS+ offset. Both groups showed insular and striatal activation during early extinction, but differed in their prefrontal activation. The vmPFC was mainly activated in the DCG, whereas the TCG showed activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) during extinction. These results point to different extinction processes in delay and trace conditioning. VmPFC activation during extinction of delay conditioning might reflect the inhibition of the fear response. In contrast, dlPFC activation during extinction of trace conditioning may reflect modulation of working memory processes which are involved in bridging the trace interval and hold information in short term memory.

Relief from pain is positively valenced and entails reward-like properties. Notably, stimuli that became associated with pain relief elicit reward-like implicit responses too, but are explicitly evaluated by humans as aversive. Since the unpredictability of pain makes pain more aversive, this study examined the hypotheses that the predictability of pain also modulates the valence of relief-associated stimuli. In two studies, we presented one conditioned stimulus \((_{FORWARD}CS+)\) before a painful unconditioned stimulus (US), another stimulus \((_{BACKWARD}CS+)\) after the painful US, and a third stimulus (CS−) was never associated with the US. In Study 1, \(_{FORWARD}CS+\) predicted half of the USs while the other half was delivered unwarned and followed by \(_{BACKWARD}CS+\). In Study 2, all USs were predicted by \(_{FORWARD}CS+\) and followed by \(_{BACKWARD}CS+\). In Study 1 both \(_{FORWARD}CS+\) and \(_{BACKWARD}CS+\) were rated as negatively valenced and high arousing after conditioning, while \(_{BACKWARD}CS+\) in Study 2 acquired positive valence and low arousal. Startle amplitude was significantly attenuated to \(_{BACKWARD}CS+\) compared to \(_{FORWARD}CS+\) in Study 2, but did not differ among CSs in Study 1. In summary, predictability of aversive events reverses the explicit valence of a relief-associated stimulus.