Model-Free and Model-Based Learning in Human Fear Conditioning.

Overview

1. Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Abstract

Learning to predict threat and to adapt behavior accordingly is critical to human survival. This type of learning is governed by distinct systems in the brain. Model‐free learning is reflexive and computationally efficient, allowing for rapid responses based on past experience, but is also resistant to environmental change. In contrast, model‐based learning is more flexible and relies on an internal model of the environment that can be updated without direct experience. To enhance the translational value of human fear‐conditioning research and facilitate the interpretation of fear‐reduction interventions, we examined whether commonly used measures of conditioned responding reflect model‐free and/or model‐based learning. Based on prior observations and the defensive‐reflex nature of the fear‐potentiated startle (FPS), we hypothesized that FPS responses would reflect model‐free learning, whereas skin conductance responses (SCRs) would reflect model‐based learning. To test this hypothesis, we decoupled the experienced US value (i.e., model‐free) from the expected value (i.e., model‐based) by US devaluation/revaluation manipulations delivered via instructions (Exp1), physical disconnection of the US electrode (Exp2), or their combination (Exp3). By design, instantaneous changes in conditioned responding, prior to any new learning by experience, must indicate model‐based updating rather than model‐free cached value. Across three fear‐conditioning experiments (total n = 131), we found that SCRs most likely reflected model‐based learning, whereas FPS responses reflected aspects of both model‐free and model‐based learning. These results show that common indices of conditioned fear are not simply interchangeable: they tap distinct learning systems, and treating them as equivalent risks missing the more affective, experience‐driven components of fear—thereby limiting translation to clinical intervention.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• osf:tw3rb, at OSF; found in “Data Availability Statement”

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in OSF at https://osf.io/tw3rb/.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 2, 28 September 2026

• Publisher: n/a → Wiley

Version 1, 27 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 4 authors, 12 MeSH terms, 1 funder, 44 references.

Cite

This paper

Stemerding, L. E., Gerlicher, A. M. V., Reinhold, F. L., & Kindt, M. (2026). Model-Free and Model-Based Learning in Human Fear Conditioning. Psychophysiology, 63(7), e70349. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.70349

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1038/s41598-026-58046-4 [code]

Dissecting the interplay of model-based control, impulsivity and compulsivity on self-control in daily life.

Journal: Scientific reports

In common: cognitive, 4 references

[2] doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117454 [code]

Model-based and model-free valuation signals in the human brain vary markedly in relation to individual differences in behavioral control.

Journal: Cell reports

In common: cognitive, 4 references

[3] doi:10.7554/elife.106032 [code]

Neural signatures of model-based and model-free reinforcement learning across prefrontal cortex and striatum.

Journal: eLife

In common: cognitive, 4 references

[4] doi:10.3758/s13415-026-01450-0 [code]

Attentional processing in individual anxiety: Electrocortical correlates of threat- and safety-related declarative memory formation.

Journal: Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience

In common: cognitive, 3 references

[5] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-74783-6 [code]

Neural and computational correlates of strategic aborting and long-run policy optimization in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: 3 references

[6] doi:10.1038/s41537-026-00761-y [code]

The role of fear learning in the development of psychosis: an EEG study utilizing a differential fear conditioning paradigm in people with psychotic vulnerability.

Journal: Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)

In common: 2 references

[7] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-75706-1 [code]

Dissociable roles of prefrontal plasticity in decision-making strategy and execution of habitual behavior.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: cognitive, 2 references

[8] doi:10.1126/sciadv.aeb3005 [code]

Neural competition between prefrontal and auditory cortex constrains novel sound strategy learning.

Journal: Science advances

In common: 2 references

[9] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1292 [code]

Assessing adverse effects and unspecific effects of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS).

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: behavior only, 1 reference

[10] doi:10.7554/elife.106070 [code]

Dynamic fMRI networks of human emotion.

Journal: eLife

In common: cognitive, 2 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.