4.5 Article

Learning to like disgust: neuronal correlates of counterconditioning

Journal

FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS RESEARCH FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00346

Keywords

counterconditioning; classical conditioning; evaluative conditioning; fMRI; disgust; reward learning

Funding

  1. DFG [Graduiertenkolleg GRK 885 NeuroAct]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Converging lines of research suggest that exaggerated disgust responses play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of certain anxiety disorders. One strategy that might effectively alter disgust responses is counterconditioning. In this study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine if the neuronal bases of disgust responses are altered through a counterconditioning procedure. One disgust picture (conditioned stimulus: CS+(disg)) announced a monetary reward, while a second disgust picture ( CS-(disg)) was never paired with the reward. Two neutral control pictures (CS+(con)/CS-(con)) were conditioned in the same manner. Analyses of evaluative conditioning showed that both CS+ were rated significantly more positive after conditioning as compared to the corresponding CS-. Thereby, the CS+(disg) and the CS+(con) received an equal increase in valence ratings. Regarding the fMRI data, ANOVA results showed main effects of the conditioning procedure (i.e., CS+ vs. CS-) in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Further, main effects of the picture category (disgust vs. control) were found in the bilateral insula and the orbitofrontal cortex. No interaction effects were detected. In conclusion, the result simply that learning and anticipation of reward was not significantly influenced by the disgust content of the CS pictures. This suggests that the affect induced by the disgust pictures and the affect created by the anticipation of reward may not influence the processing of each other.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available