Boundary conditions of post-retrieval extinction: A direct comparison of low and high partial reinforcement

Destabilizing Different Strengths of Fear Memories Requires Different Degrees of Prediction Error During Retrieval

“…In our study, the difference in memory strength caused by unpredictably timed shocks could not be detected in the acquisition. This difference did not appear until the reactivation sessions, consistent with a previous study that manipulated fear strength in humans (Kitamura et al, 2020). Kitamura et al (2020) manipulated memory strength by changing the rate of learned reinforcement.…”

“…This difference did not appear until the reactivation sessions, consistent with a previous study that manipulated fear strength in humans (Kitamura et al, 2020). Kitamura et al (2020) manipulated memory strength by changing the rate of learned reinforcement. They found that the SCR difference caused by low and high partial reinforcement was reflected during memory retrieval, and this difference significantly predicted recovery of fear at test.…”

“…Thereafter, Schiller et al (2010) advanced these results in a human fear-training research. This experimental paradigm and its variants have been reported to extinguish fear-and addiction-related memory in humans (Bjorkstrand et al, 2016;Agren et al, 2017;Lee et al, 2017;Thompson and Lipp, 2017;Chen et al, 2019;Kitamura et al, 2020). However, reproducibility issues in the field (Kredlow et al, 2018;Zimmermann and Bach, 2020) have suggested that this effect is sensitive to procedural differences.…”

Reply to Beckers, McIntosh and Chambers on the verification of ‘preventing the return of fear using retrieval-extinction in humans’

“…Fortunately, studies with animal models verify memory destabilization following reactivation, including with the retrieval-extinction paradigm, but this research also shows that destabilization following reactivation depends on criteria that are not yet fully specified (Cassini et al, 2017;. A viable path forward for human studies would be to examine a wide parameter space in order to build mechanistic and computational insights in hopes of converging on a highly dependable procedure designed by those insights (e.g., Hu et al, 2018;Junijao et al, 2019;Yang et al, 2019;Kitamura et al, 2020). Another, more challenging path is the attempt to discover a human biological marker, such as a measurable neural state of destabilization/reconsolidation.…”

“…About 28 percent of replication attempts in humans fail to demonstrate the retrievalextinction effect (Table 1). Theoretical formulations (Gershman et al, 2017) and empirical work suggest that inconsistencies in reconsolidation effects may depend on the degree of memory destabilization, as not every memory recall involves neural destabilization; or on the efficacy of the interference, which could differ across individuals and populations (e.g., Cassini et al, 2017;Hu et al, 2018;Junijao et al, 2019;Yang et al, 2019;Kitamura et al, 2020).…”