When we learn something, for it to become a memory, the event must be imprinted on our brain, a phenomenon known as consolidation. In turn, every time we retrieve a memory, it can be reconsolidated—that is, more information can be added to it. Now psychologist Liz Phelps of New York University and her team report using this “reconsolidation window” as a drug-free way to erase fearful memories in humans.
Although techniques for overcoming fearful memories have existed for some time, these methods do not erase the initial, fearful memory. Rather they leave participants with
two memories—one scary, one not—either of which may be called up when a trigger presents itself. But Phelps’s new experiment, which confirms earlier studies in rats, suggests that when a memory is changed during the so-called reconsolidation window, the original one is erased.
Using a mild electric shock, Phelps’s team taught 65 participants to fear certain colored squares as they appeared on a screen. Normally, to overcome this type of fear, researchers would show participants the feared squares again without being given a shock, in an effort to create a safe memory of the squares. Phelps’s group did that, but in some cases investigators asked subjects to contemplate their fearful memory for at least 10 minutes before they saw the squares again. These participants actually replaced their old fearful memory with a new, safe memory. When they saw the squares again paired with shocks up to a year later, they were slow to relearn their fear of the squares. In contrast, subjects who created a safe memory of the squares without first contemplating their fearful memory for 10 minutes immediately reactivated their older, fearful memory when they saw a square and got a shock.
The researchers suspect that after calling up a memory, it takes about 10 minutes before the window of opportunity opens up for the memory to be reconsolidated, or changed, in a meaningful way, Phelps explains. “But there is some combination of spacing and timing that we need to figure out,” she adds—the scientists do not yet know how long the window lasts. Even more intriguing is the role contemplation plays—does sitting and thinking about the fearful memory make it more malleable than does simply recalling it? Although questions remain, Phelps and her colleagues hope their work will eventually help people with debilitating phobias or perhaps even post-traumatic stress disorder.
This article was originally published with the title Extinguishing Fear.
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentFear has been associate with right-wing beliefs and actions. If we eliminate fear does that mean the political center will swing to the left?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs one of those "right-wingers" may I offer another perspective on the idea of fear. Fear can be translated as awe or respect and in that context, if there is no fear, then there is no sense of awe or respect. In the case of this little experiment, if one of the participants had no sense of respect for the power of the electric shock it would be interesting, and in the real world would be obviously harmful to the individual. A healthy sense of awe or respect is necessary for a safe and healthy lifestyle. The question is what do you consider worthy of receiving awe or respect?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe answer, martin, is nothing.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would prefer to understand the nature of electricity, and understand that an electric shock will cause damage and pain, than rely on awe and "respect" for inanimate objects & concepts.
Awe and respect are not necessary for a healthy lifestyle. They're just the quicker & easier method. ...and more succeptible to corruption.
Martin, it is pretty obvious that your idea of fear is purely biblical and has little to do with its evolved purpose.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFear is a conditioned reflex to events or situations which present a threat to survival or well-being. Some sources for this response are cultural, ie, the belief in spirits or vampires via folklore or religious training, but most of them are based on actual events or experience, either firsthand or transferred by another, which have caused or are known to cause some form of harm.
In many situations it would not be strictly accurate to call one's response 'fear'; I am simply generalizing the resulting action, which is one of avoidance - for instance, if you burn your finger on a hot stove burner, that does not necessarily instill a phobia of stove burners, but it does ensure that you will not touch one again on purpose if you see it glowing red.
Your definition of fear as being awe or respect -can- be accurate in a purely philosophical context. However, for the purpose of this discussion, that definition is not appropriate.
One question I have is how did the researchers discover that it takes ten minutes to reconsolidate a memory into a safer form? If one goes by the experiment described, they could reach the conclusion that this observation was based on pure arbitration. Unless they tested for a wide range of times for this sort of mental exercise, I would not be convinced that their results are definitive.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI guess mankind needs to revisit fear and stare straight in its eyes to work with it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAndrea Akutagawa
http://liberate.it/
Ten minutes comes to mind when dealing with a cranky child's attention span. Parents who may have feared that "being normally noisy" may wake up their child, may be supporting a preprogrammed cycle of "between the lights" anxiety. Multitasking through behaviour modification therapy may contain a memory negating mechanism that could encourage some of us to eventually look at ourselves from outside the box :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this