We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The recognition of the conditioned-unconditioned stimulus (CS-US) association in classical conditioning is referred to as contingency awareness. The neural underpinnings of contingency awareness in human fear conditioning are poorly understood.
Objectives
We aimed to explore the EEG correlates of contingency awareness.
Methods
Here, we recorded electroencephalography (EEG) from a sample of 20 participants in a semantic conditioning experiment. In the acquisition phase the participants were presented with sequences of words from two semantic categories paired with tactile stimulation followed by presentation of a neutral sound (US-) ((e.g., animals -> left hand vibration -> US-, clothes -> right hand vibration -> US-). In the test phase the association violated in 50% of trials which followed by a presentation of a loud noise (US+). The participants were only instructed to listen carefully. On the basis of self-reported contingency awareness, twenty participants were divided in aware (N=12) and unaware (N=8) group.
Results
The aware group expressed a non-lateralized effect of alpha-beta (12-23 Hz) suppression along with a more negative CNV at central channels preceding presentation of the vibration (main effect of Group). Also, CNV was more negative in expectation of US+ comparing with expectation of US- in the aware group but not in the unaware group.
Conclusions
The results indicate that contingency awareness is accompanied by neural patterns reflecting expectation as can be seen in the suppression of somatosensory alpha-beta activity before expected presentation of the vibration as well as in CNV in expectation of an aversive event.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.