Intolerance of uncertainty and threat reversal: A conceptual replication of Morriss et al. (2019)
Access DataAbstract
The ability to update responding to threat cues is an important adaptive ability. Recently, Morriss et al. (2019) demonstrated that participants scoring high in Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) were more capable of threat reversal. The current report aimed to conceptually replicate these results of Morriss et al. (2019) in an independent sample using a comparable paradigm (n = 102). Following a threat conditioning phase, participants were told that cues associated with threat and safety from electric shock would reverse. Responding was measured with skin conductance and fear potentiated startle. We failed to conceptually replicate the results of Morriss et al. (2019). Instead, we found that, for participants who received precise contingency instructions prior to acquisition, lower IUS (controlling for STAI-T) relative to higher IUS was associated with greater threat reversal, indexed via skin conductance responses. These results suggest that IU and contingency instructions differentially modulate the course of threat reversal.
ID 225
Authors
Gaëtan Mertens, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands; Department of Clinical Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands Jayne Morriss, School of Psychology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom
Year
2020
DOI of Publication
Persistent Identifier to Dataset
Where was the data collected?
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
How to Cite
Mertens, G., & Morriss, J. (2025, December 12). Intolerance of uncertainty and threat reversal: A conceptual replication of Morriss et al. (2019). https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PB9W7
Participant Information
Participant Age
Participant Gender
Experimental Group
3 experimental groups that differ by contingency instructions (precise vs. general vs. no) Precise Contingency Instructions Condition: - participants received detailed information on the CS-US contingencies (which stimulus would be followed by a shock and which stimulus wouldn't) General Contingency Instructions Conditions: - participants received general information on the CS-US contingencies (only information that one stimulus would sometimes be followed by a shock, while the other stimulus wouldn't) No Contingency Instructions Condition: - participants received no information on the CS-US contingencies (only information, that they's be presented with shape stimuli and sometimes receive an electrical shock)