Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat

Abstract Successful responding to acutely threatening situations requires adequate approach–avoidance decisions. However, it is unclear how threat-induced states—like freezing-related bradycardia—impact the weighing of the potential outcomes of such value-based decisions. Insight into the underlying...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Felix H. Klaassen, Leslie Held, Bernd Figner, Jill X. O’Reilly, Floris Klumpers, Lycia D. de Voogd, Karin Roelofs
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/844069b861864f3b943cb7c9c3aa8662
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:844069b861864f3b943cb7c9c3aa8662
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:844069b861864f3b943cb7c9c3aa86622021-12-02T17:52:22ZDefensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat10.1038/s41598-021-90968-z2045-2322https://doaj.org/article/844069b861864f3b943cb7c9c3aa86622021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90968-zhttps://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Successful responding to acutely threatening situations requires adequate approach–avoidance decisions. However, it is unclear how threat-induced states—like freezing-related bradycardia—impact the weighing of the potential outcomes of such value-based decisions. Insight into the underlying computations is essential, not only to improve our models of decision-making but also to improve interventions for maladaptive decisions, for instance in anxiety patients and first-responders who frequently have to make decisions under acute threat. Forty-two participants made passive and active approach–avoidance decisions under threat-of-shock when confronted with mixed outcome-prospects (i.e., varying money and shock amounts). Choice behavior was best predicted by a model including individual action-tendencies and bradycardia, beyond the subjective value of the outcome. Moreover, threat-related bradycardia (high-vs-low threat) interacted with subjective value, depending on the action-context (passive-vs-active). Specifically, in action-contexts incongruent with participants’ intrinsic action-tendencies, stronger bradycardia related to diminished effects of subjective value on choice across participants. These findings illustrate the relevance of testing approach–avoidance decisions in relatively ecologically valid conditions of acute and primarily reinforced threat. These mechanistic insights into approach–avoidance conflict-resolution may inspire biofeedback-related techniques to optimize decision-making under threat. Critically, the findings demonstrate the relevance of incorporating internal psychophysiological states and external action-contexts into models of approach–avoidance decision-making.Felix H. KlaassenLeslie HeldBernd FignerJill X. O’ReillyFloris KlumpersLycia D. de VoogdKarin RoelofsNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Felix H. Klaassen Leslie Held Bernd Figner Jill X. O’Reilly Floris Klumpers Lycia D. de Voogd Karin Roelofs Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
description	Abstract Successful responding to acutely threatening situations requires adequate approach–avoidance decisions. However, it is unclear how threat-induced states—like freezing-related bradycardia—impact the weighing of the potential outcomes of such value-based decisions. Insight into the underlying computations is essential, not only to improve our models of decision-making but also to improve interventions for maladaptive decisions, for instance in anxiety patients and first-responders who frequently have to make decisions under acute threat. Forty-two participants made passive and active approach–avoidance decisions under threat-of-shock when confronted with mixed outcome-prospects (i.e., varying money and shock amounts). Choice behavior was best predicted by a model including individual action-tendencies and bradycardia, beyond the subjective value of the outcome. Moreover, threat-related bradycardia (high-vs-low threat) interacted with subjective value, depending on the action-context (passive-vs-active). Specifically, in action-contexts incongruent with participants’ intrinsic action-tendencies, stronger bradycardia related to diminished effects of subjective value on choice across participants. These findings illustrate the relevance of testing approach–avoidance decisions in relatively ecologically valid conditions of acute and primarily reinforced threat. These mechanistic insights into approach–avoidance conflict-resolution may inspire biofeedback-related techniques to optimize decision-making under threat. Critically, the findings demonstrate the relevance of incorporating internal psychophysiological states and external action-contexts into models of approach–avoidance decision-making.
format	article
author	Felix H. Klaassen Leslie Held Bernd Figner Jill X. O’Reilly Floris Klumpers Lycia D. de Voogd Karin Roelofs
author_facet	Felix H. Klaassen Leslie Held Bernd Figner Jill X. O’Reilly Floris Klumpers Lycia D. de Voogd Karin Roelofs
author_sort	Felix H. Klaassen
title	Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
title_short	Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
title_full	Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
title_fullStr	Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
title_full_unstemmed	Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
title_sort	defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/844069b861864f3b943cb7c9c3aa8662
work_keys_str_mv	AT felixhklaassen defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT leslieheld defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT berndfigner defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT jillxoreilly defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT florisklumpers defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT lyciaddevoogd defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat AT karinroelofs defensivefreezinganditsrelationtoapproachavoidancedecisionmakingunderthreat
_version_	1718379237045436416

Defensive freezing and its relation to approach–avoidance decision-making under threat

Ejemplares similares