Effects of threat context and cardiac sensitivity on fear responding to a 35% CO2 challenge: A test of the context-sensitivity panic vulnerability model

Department of Psychology, Laboratory for the Study of Anxiety Disorders, The University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station, Mail Code A8000, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 2.23). 12/2010; 41(4):365-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2010.03.008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The present study tested several predictions of a context-sensitivity panic vulnerability model emphasizing the interaction between threat context and threat sensitivities. Participants without a history of panic (N=47) completed both global and domain-specific panic relevant sensitivity measures and were then randomized to undergo a 35% CO2 inhalation challenge in the presence or absence of a cardiac defibrillator (threat context). As predicted by the model, cardiac sensitivity (but not trait anxiety or anxiety sensitivity) potentiated the effects of the presence of the defibrillator on CO2 fear responding. Moreover, as predicted by the model, the observed potentiation effects of cardiac sensitivity on CO2 fear responding were mediated by participants' threat appraisals connected to the presence of the defibrillator. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to test how expectations and anxiety sensitivity influence respiratory and autonomic responses to caffeine. The current study investigated the effects of expected vs. unexpected caffeine ingestion in a group of persons prone to the anxiety-provoking effect of caffeine (high anxiety sensitive persons, that is, persons scoring at least one SD above the mean on the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (Peterson and Reiss 1992)) as compared to low-anxious controls. Autonomic arousal (heart rate, skin conductance level), respiratory responding (expired CO2, minute ventilation), and subjective report were assessed in high and low anxiety sensitive participants immediately after beverage consumption and at absorption peak (30 min post-consumption) in four separate sessions during which either coffee (expectation of caffeine) or bitter lemon soda (no expectation of caffeine) was crossed with 4 mg/kg caffeine vs. no drug. High and low anxiety sensitive persons showed comparable autonomic arousal and symptom reports to caffeine which was modulated by expectation, i.e., greater for coffee. Respiratory responding (CO2 decrease, minute ventilation increase) was more accentuated when caffeine was both expected and administered in the low anxiety sensitive group but more accentuated when caffeine was unexpectedly administered in the high anxiety sensitive group. Autonomic arousal and respiratory effects were observable within a few minutes after caffeine administration and were most pronounced at maximum absorption. The results highlight the modulating role of expectancies in respiratory responding to caffeine in low vs. high anxiety sensitive persons and might have important implications for the better understanding of unexpected panic attacks.
    Psychopharmacology 12/2014; 232(11). DOI:10.1007/s00213-014-3828-3 · 3.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    05/2013; 4(2):208. DOI:10.5127/jep.027512
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The current study attempted to replicate the finding obtained by Powers, Smits, and Telch (2004; Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 448-545) that both the availability and utilization of safety behaviors interfere with the efficacy of exposure therapy. An additional goal of the study was to evaluate which explanatory theories about the detrimental effects of safety behaviors best account for this phenomenon. Undergraduate students (N=58) with high claustrophobic fear were assigned to one of three treatment conditions: (a) exposure only, (b) exposure with safety behavior availability, and (c) exposure with safety behavior utilization. Participants in each condition improved substantially, and there were no significant between-group differences in fear reduction. Unexpectedly, exposure with safety behavior utilization led to significantly greater improvement in self-efficacy and claustrophobic cognitions than exposure only. The extent to which participants inferred danger from the presence of safety aids during treatment was associated with significantly less improvement on all outcome measures. The findings call into question the hypothesized deleterious effects of safety behaviors on the outcome of exposure therapy and highlight a possible mechanism through which the mere presence of safety cues during exposure trials might affect treatment outcomes depending on participants' perceptions of the dangerousness of exposure stimuli.
    Behaviour Research and Therapy 02/2011; 49(5):305-14. DOI:10.1016/j.brat.2011.02.005 · 3.85 Impact Factor