Turning negative memories around: Contingency versus devaluation techniques

Methods

Healthy participants received a fear conditioning paradigm followed by one of three interventions: extinction (EXT, contingency-based), imagery rescripting (ImRs, devaluation-based) or eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR, devaluation-based). A reinstatement procedure and test followed the next day. Results: EXT was indeed most successful in diminishing contingency-based US expectancies and skin conductance responses (SCRs), but all interventions were equally successful in reducing the averseness of the mental US representation.

After reinstatement EXT showed lowest expectancies and SCRs; no differences were observed between the conditions concerning the mental US representation. Limitations: A partial reinforcement schedule was used, resulting in a vast amount of contingency unaware participants. Additionally, a non-clinical sample was used, which may limit the generalizability to clinical populations.

Conclusion: EXT is most effective in reducing conditioned fear responses.