Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Jul;21(7):546-555.
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.04.010. Epub 2017 May 22.

Social Fear Learning: from Animal Models to Human Function

Affiliations
Review

Social Fear Learning: from Animal Models to Human Function

Jacek Debiec et al. Trends Cogn Sci. 2017 Jul.

Abstract

Learning about potential threats is critical for survival. Learned fear responses are acquired either through direct experiences or indirectly through social transmission. Social fear learning (SFL), also known as vicarious fear learning, is a paradigm successfully used for studying the transmission of threat information between individuals. Animal and human studies have begun to elucidate the behavioral, neural and molecular mechanisms of SFL. Recent research suggests that social learning mechanisms underlie a wide range of adaptive and maladaptive phenomena, from supporting flexible avoidance in dynamic environments to intergenerational transmission of trauma and anxiety disorders. This review discusses recent advances in SFL studies and their implications for basic, social and clinical sciences.

Keywords: emotional contagion; empathy; fear contagion; fear learning by proxy; intergenerational transmission; observational fear learning; vicarious fear learning.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Observational fear learning procedure used in human studies
During the training phase (left), an observer learns to fear a CS (blue rectangle) through watching on a screen a demonstrator receiving FC (electric shocks to the wrist paired with the CS). During the testing phase (right), the observer expresses fear during an exposure to the CS. (A white lightning bolt denotes an electric shock and red lightning bolts denote fear response).
Figure 2
Figure 2. Behavioral paradigms used in SFL studies in rodents
This figure depicts SFL behavioral paradigms used in rodent studies, with the left column showing the training and the right column showing the testing phase. In the most commonly used paradigm, during the training phase the observer (right) is placed together with a frightened demonstrator (left) and exposed to the CS (a shining light bulb for all experiments in our figure, although, various sensory modalities may be used) (A). In one variant of the SFL paradigm, the observer (right) and the demonstrator are physically isolated during training but are able to maintain a visual contact (B). In another variant of the SFL paradigm, the observer (right) is exposed to the prerecorded (or streamed life) vocalizations produced by the frightened demonstrator (C). In SFL studies relying on chemosignaling, the observer (right) and demonstrator (left) are physically isolated and the observer is exposed to the air delivered from the box with the frightened demonstrator (D).
Figure 3
Figure 3. A model of neural systems of SFL
The arrows describe the hypothetical flow of information between different functional brain regions that are most relevant to SFL. As in FC, the information about the CS and social cues signaling threat that is projected from the thalamus, hippocampus and cortical sites (or directly to the amygdala as in the case of olfactory cues) converges in the lateral nucleus of the amygdala (LA). The LA projects to the central nucleus of the amygdala (CE) that sends outputs to sites and systems directly controlling threat responses. Some information (e.g. about the context where learning occurs) reaches the LA through the basal nucleus of the amygdala (B) and some other cue representations project to the CE without the LA being involved. The medial nucleus of the amygdala (Me) mediates social behaviors and has bidirectional connections with the LA. The affective pain processing system, including midline nuclei of the thalamus (the ‘limbic’ thalamus), the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the anterior insula (AI) are believed to process information about social cues signaling fear. The ACC-amygdala projections appear critical for the delivery of the information about social cues signaling threat to the amygdala. SFL is modified by medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) which is responsible for interpretation of the other’s mental state and temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) that controls attention processes during learning. The dotted line represents a hypothetical alarm chemosignaling pathway that has been characterized in rodents but is mostly unknown in humans.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. LeDoux JE, Pine DS. Using Neuroscience to Help Understand Fear and Anxiety: A Two-System Framework. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(11):1083–1093. - PubMed
    1. McCullough KM, et al. Bridging the Gap: Towards a cell-type specific understanding of neural circuits underlying fear behaviors. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2016;135:27–39. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fox AS, et al. Extending the amygdala in theories of threat processing. Trends Neurosci. 2015;38:319–329. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Olsson A, Phelps EA. Social learning of fear. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:1095–1102. - PubMed
    1. Gunnar MR, et al. Parental buffering of fear and stress neurobiology: Reviewing parallels across rodent, monkey, and human models. Soc Neurosci. 2015;10:474–478. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources