Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRodriguez-Sobstel, C
dc.contributor.authorWake, S
dc.contributor.authorDodd, H
dc.contributor.authorMcSorley, E
dc.contributor.authorvan Reekum, CM
dc.contributor.authorMorriss, J
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-14T15:29:18Z
dc.date.issued2023-07-13
dc.date.updated2023-11-14T14:56:50Z
dc.description.abstractPrevious research has demonstrated that individuals with high levels of Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) have difficulty updating threat associations to safety associations. Notably, prior research has focused on measuring IU-related differences in threat and safety learning using arousal-based measures such as skin conductance response. Here we assessed whether IU-related differences in threat and safety learning could be captured using eye-tracking metrics linked with gaze behaviours such as dwelling and scanning. Participants (N = 144) completed self-report questionnaires assessing levels of IU and trait anxiety. Eye movements were then recorded during each conditioning phase: acquisition, extinction learning, and extinction retention. Fixation count and fixation duration served as indices of conditioned responding. Patterns of threat and safety learning typically reported for physiology and self-report were observed for the fixation count and fixation duration metrics during acquisition and to some extent in extinction learning, but not for extinction retention. There was little evidence for specific associations between IU and disrupted safety learning (e.g., greater differential responses to the threat vs. safe cues during extinction learning and retention). While there was tentative evidence that IU was associated with shorter fixation durations (e.g., scanning) to threat vs. safe cues during extinction retention, this effect did not remain after controlling for trait anxiety. IU and trait anxiety similarly predicted greater fixation count and shorter fixation durations overall during extinction learning, and greater fixation count overall during extinction retention. IU further predicted shorter fixation durations overall during extinction retention. However, the only IU-based effect that remained significant after controlling for trait anxiety was that of fixation duration overall during threat extinction learning. Our results inform models of anxiety, particularly in relation to how individual differences modulate gaze behaviour during threat conditioning.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipBrain and Behaviour Research Foundation, USAen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic and Social Research Council (ESRC)en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic and Social Research Council (ESRC)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 9, No. 1, article 82229en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.82229
dc.identifier.grantnumber27567en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberES/R01145/1en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberES/L010119/1en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/134536
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0003-1446-5338 (Dodd, Helen)
dc.identifierScopusID: 26667614900 (Dodd, Helen)
dc.identifierResearcherID: L-1430-2019 (Dodd, Helen)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherUniversity of California Pressen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://osf.io/985je/en_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://osf.io/2ugpv/en_GB
dc.rights© The author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.en_GB
dc.subjectintolerance of uncertaintyen_GB
dc.subjecttrait anxietyen_GB
dc.subjectthreat acquisitionen_GB
dc.subjectextinction learningen_GB
dc.subjectextinction retentionen_GB
dc.subjecteye-trackingen_GB
dc.subjectgazeen_GB
dc.subjectdwellingen_GB
dc.subjectscanningen_GB
dc.subjectfixation counten_GB
dc.subjectfixation durationen_GB
dc.titleShifty eyes: The impact of Intolerance of Uncertainty on gaze behaviour during threat conditioningen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2023-11-14T15:29:18Z
dc.identifier.issn2474-7394
exeter.article-numberARTN 82229
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from University of California Press via the DOI in this record. en_GB
dc.descriptionAvailability of data and materials: All data have been made publicly available via OSF and can be accessed at https://osf.io/985je/. The hypotheses and analyses reported here were not preregistered. Data from the original study can be accessed at https://osf.io/2ugpv/. The design and analysis plan for the original study was preregistered and can be accessed at https://osf.io/2ugpv/.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalCollabra: Psychologyen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofCollabra Psychology, 9(1)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-06-13
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2023-07-13
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2023-11-14T15:21:43Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2023-11-14T15:29:25Z
refterms.panelAen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2023-07-13


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
(CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © The author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.