Evaluating the effects of counterconditioning, novelty-facilitated, and standard extinction on the spontaneous recovery of threat expectancy and conditioned stimulus valence.

This article investigates whether counterconditioning (CC)—pairing a conditioned stimulus (CS) previously associated with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (USneg) with a positive US (USpos)—is more effective than novelty-facilitated extinction (NFE), which pairs the CS with a novel neutral US (USneu), or standard extinction (SE), which presents the CS alone, in reducing the spontaneous recovery of threat expectancies and altering CS valence. Using a two-day human threat conditioning paradigm with college students, the study found that all three interventions similarly reduced threat expectancy and improved CS valence after treatment, but none prevented the spontaneous recovery of threat expectancy or produced differential effects on CS valence at test. These results suggest that CC and NFE do not confer additional benefits over SE in preventing the return of fear as measured by subjective expectancy and valence ratings, highlighting the need for further research on the boundary conditions and mechanisms underlying extinction and relapse phenomena.