Chapter 5 – Experimental fear 177 Manipulation checks for fear levels High-pain group Differences in reported fear in the High-pain group were more than double compared to the Control group, while startle responses were slightly higher for the High-pain compared to the Control group (Table 2). As expected, our analysis confirmed that the High-pain group reported to be more afraid than the Control group during nocebo compared to control trials (F (1,46) = 11.01, P = 0.002, ηp 2 = 0.19). No such difference occurred in eyeblink startle responses (F (1,42) = 0.75, P = 0.39, ηp 2 = 0.018). High-threat group Differences in reported fear in the High-threat group were more than 50% higher compared to the Control group and startle responses were higher for the High-threat group compared to the Control group (Table 2). The analysis showed that the High-threat group did not report more pain-related fear than the Control group during nocebo trials compared to control trials (F (1,46) = 3.13, P = 0.08, ηp 2 = 0.06). However, in the High-threat group startle responses were larger than in the Control group during nocebo trials compared to control trials (F (1,43) = 9.89, P = 0.003, ηp 2 = 0.19). Furthermore, a one-way ANOVA with group (High-threat, Control) as the between-subjects group factor confirmed that the High-Threat group was significantly more frightened by the mock skin sensitivity test (based on the exit questionnaire) than the Control group, F (1,46) = 10.9, P = 0.002, ηp 2 = 0.19, suggesting that our threat manipulation worked.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw