5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implicit versus explicit associative learning and experimentally induced placebo hypoalgesia

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The present study examined whether 1) placebo hypoalgesia can be generated through implicit associative learning (ie, conditioning in the absence of conscious awareness) and 2) the magnitude of placebo hypoalgesia changes when expectations about pain are made explicit. The temperature of heat pain stimuli was surreptitiously lowered during conditioning trials for the placebo cream and the magnitude of the placebo effect was assessed during a subsequent set of trials when the temperature was the same for both placebo and control conditions. To assess whether placebo hypoalgesia could be generated from an implicit tactile stimulus, a 2 × 2 design was used with direction of cream application as one factor and verbal information about which cream was being applied as the second factor. A significant placebo effect was observed when participants received verbal information about which cream was being applied but not following implicit conditioning alone. However, 87.5% of those who showed a placebo response as the result of implicit conditioning were able to accurately guess the order of cream application during the final trial, despite a lack of awareness about the sensory manipulation and low confidence in their ratings, suggesting implicit learning in some participants. In summary, implicit associative learning was evident in some participants but it was not sufficient to produce a placebo effect suggesting some level of explicit expectation or cognitive mediation may be necessary. Notably, the placebo response was abolished when expectations were made explicit, suggesting a delicate interplay between attention and expectation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validation of a verbally administered numerical rating scale of acute pain for use in the emergency department.

          Verbally administered numerical rating scales (NRSs) from 0 to 10 are often used to measure pain, but they have not been validated in the emergency department (ED) setting. The authors wished to assess the comparability of the NRS and visual analog scale (VAS) as measures of acute pain, and to identify the minimum clinically significant difference in pain that could be detected on the NRS. This was a prospective cohort study of a convenience sample of adults presenting with acute pain to an urban ED. Patients verbally rated pain intensity as an integer from 0 to 10 (0 = no pain, 10 = worst possible pain), and marked a 10-cm horizontal VAS bounded by these descriptors. VAS and NRS data were obtained at presentation, 30 minutes later, and 60 minutes later. At 30 and 60 minutes, patients were asked whether their pain was "much less," "a little less," "about the same," "a little more," or "much more." Differences between consecutive pairs of measurements on the VAS and NRS obtained at 30-minute intervals were calculated for each of the five categories of pain descriptor. The association between VAS and NRS scores was expressed as a correlation coefficient. The VAS scores were regressed on the NRS scores in order to assess the equivalence of the measures. The mean changes associated with descriptors "a little less" or "a little more" were combined to define the minimum clinically significant difference in pain measured on the VAS and NRS. Of 108 patients entered, 103 provided data at 30 minutes and 86 at 60 minutes. NRS scores were strongly correlated to VAS scores at all time periods (r = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.93 to 0.95). The slope of the regression line was 1.01 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.06) and the y-intercept was -0.34 (95% CI = -0.67 to -0.01). The minimum clinically significant difference in pain was 1.3 (95% CI = 1.0 to 1.5) on the NRS and 1.4 (95% CI = 1.1 to 1.7) on the VAS. The findings suggest that the verbally administered NRS can be substituted for the VAS in acute pain measurement.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Conscious expectation and unconscious conditioning in analgesic, motor, and hormonal placebo/nocebo responses.

            The placebo and nocebo effect is believed to be mediated by both cognitive and conditioning mechanisms, although little is known about their role in different circumstances. In this study, we first analyzed the effects of opposing verbal suggestions on experimental ischemic arm pain in healthy volunteers and on motor performance in Parkinsonian patients and found that verbally induced expectations of analgesia/hyperalgesia and motor improvement/worsening antagonized completely the effects of a conditioning procedure. We also measured the effects of opposing verbal suggestions on hormonal secretion and found that verbally induced expectations of increase/decrease of growth hormone (GH) and cortisol did not have any effect on the secretion of these hormones. However, if a preconditioning was performed with sumatriptan, a 5-HT(1B/1D) agonist that stimulates GH and inhibits cortisol secretion, a significant increase of GH and decrease of cortisol plasma concentrations were found after placebo administration, although opposite verbal suggestions were given. These findings indicate that verbally induced expectations have no effect on hormonal secretion, whereas they affect pain and motor performance. This suggests that placebo responses are mediated by conditioning when unconscious physiological functions such as hormonal secretion are involved, whereas they are mediated by expectation when conscious physiological processes such as pain and motor performance come into play, even though a conditioning procedure is performed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The placebo effect: dissolving the expectancy versus conditioning debate.

              The authors review the literature on the 2 main models of the placebo effect: expectancy theory and classical conditioning. A path is suggested to dissolving the theoretical impasse that has long plagued this issue. The key is to make a clear distinction between 2 questions: What factors shape placebo effects? and What learning mediates the placebo effect? The reviewed literature suggests that classical conditioning procedures are one shaping factor but that verbal information can also shape placebo effects. The literature also suggests that conditioning procedures and other sources of information sometimes shape conscious expectancies and that these expectancies mediate some placebo effects; however, in other cases conditioning procedures appear to shape placebo effects that are not mediated by conscious cognition.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7090
                2011
                15 March 2011
                : 4
                : 67-77
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada;
                [2 ]Centre for Student Development and Counseling, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada;
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Joel Katz, Department of Psychology, York University, Behavioral Sciences Building, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada, Tel 416-736-2100 ext 40557, Fax 416-736-5814, Email jkatz@ 123456yorku.ca
                Article
                jpr-4-067
                10.2147/JPR.S15966
                3085265
                21559352
                © 2011 Martin-Pichora et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article