Key result
High-threat expectation of unpredictable temperature increases potentiated startle responses compared with low-threat expectation, but only when the high-threat condition was experienced first.
Why the study?
Does the expectation of unpredictable temperature increases (high threat) potentiate startle responses compared to constant stimulation (low threat) in healthy subjects?
Does the expectation of unpredictable temperature increases (high threat) potentiate startle responses compared to constant stimulation (low threat) in healthy subjects?
Subjective threat, influenced by expectations and previous experiences, plays a decisive role in the potentiation of the startle reflex by pain.
Threat may modulate experimental pain startle; leaves open clinical translation to patients.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have indicated that the startle reflex is potentiated by phasic, but not by tonic, heat pain, although the latter is seen as more strongly associated with emotional responses and more similar to clinical pain. The threat value of pain might be a decisive variable, which is not influenced alone by stimulus duration. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing startle responses to tonic heat pain stimulation with varying degrees of threat. We hypothesized that the expectation of unpredictable temperature increases would evoke higher threat and thereby potentiate startle compared with the expectation of constant stimulation. METHODS: Healthy, pain-free subjects (n = 40) underwent painful stimulation in two conditions (low/high threat) in balanced order. The only difference between the two conditions was that in the high-threat condition 50% of the trials were announced to include a short further noxious temperature increase at the end. Startle tones were presented prior to this temperature increase still in the phase of anticipation. RESULTS: We observed startle potentiation in the high-threat compared with the low-threat condition, but only in those participants who took part first in the high-threat condition. Habituation could not account for these findings, as we detected no significant decline of startle responses in the course of both conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that subjective threat might indeed be decisive for the action of pain on startle; the threat level appears not only influenced by actual expectations but also by previous experiences with pain as threatening or not.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Horn‐Hofmann et al. (2014) studied Healthy, pain-free (n=40). High-threat condition (expectation of unpredictable temperature increases) vs. Low-threat condition (expectation of constant stimulation) was evaluated on Startle responses to tonic heat pain stimulation. High-threat expectation of unpredictable temperature increases potentiated startle responses compared with low-threat expectation, but only when the high-threat condition was experienced first.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: