16 Figure 1. A representation of typical experimental procedures for delivering classical conditioning and negative suggestions. At baseline before any intervention, an inert treatment has no effect. In the case of a conditioning paradigm this becomes a conditioning stimulus, CS, but in verbal suggestion paradigms no conditioning takes place and suggestions can be delivered once, verbally or in writing. A nocebo treatment is here represented as an inert pill. During a learning paradigm, the negative association between the nocebo treatment and pain aggravation (unconditioned stimulus, UCS) is experienced by the subject (unconditioned response, UCR). If learning a negative association comes in form of a verbal suggestion, continuous learning is not required, and one suggestion can in principle suffice. Thereafter, a nocebo effect on pain (conditioned response, CR in the case of classical conditioning) is formed, as a result of learned negative expectations regarding the nocebo treatment. Biobehavioral underpinnings In recent years, fundamental research has focused on unravelling how nocebo responses are formed and how they may integrate in pain processing. In order to reach a better understanding of the neurocognitive components of nocebo effects, it is imperative to build on previous nocebo research, by utilizing consistent experimental models. In this way, results are comparable, and the reliability of findings can be tested over multiple studies. Theories and findings from the nocebo literature should also be connected to what is currently known about overlapping cognitive and emotional processes. Comprehensive reviews of the current state of research into the neural correlates of
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw