Dataset title: The influence of threat on experimentally induced secondary hyperalgesia Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Victoria J Madden Institution: University of Cape Town Email: torymadden@gmail.com ORCID: 0000-0002-5357-4062 Date of dataset collection: 2019-10-01 - 2019-11-30 Date of dataset publication: [insert at publication] Keywords: pain, threat, secondary hyperalgesia, healthy volunteers, electrical stimulation, mechanical hyperalgesia Primary dataset contact: Victoria J Madden, torymadden@gmail.com This dataset can be accessed at [insert GitHub link after publication]. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ GENERAL OVERVIEW Data were analyzed using R (version 4.0.3, packages: tidyverse (Wickham et al., 2019), magrittr (Milton Bache and Wickham, 2014), ggplot2 (Wickham, 2016), readxl (Wickham and Bryan, 2019), lme4 (Bates et al., 2015), gridExtra (Auguie, 2017), grid (R Core Team, 2020), and here (Müller, 2017)) in RStudio (RStudio Team, 2019). +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ VARIABLE AND CODE LIST FILE: formal_data.csv id: participant's individualised study ID code. time: study timepoint relative to HFS induction. phase: the procedure consisted of 5 phases: (1) Orientation: orientation to the sensory rating scale and sensory testing battery, (2) Baseline: baseline sensory testing, excluding mapping of area of secondary hyperalgesia, (3) hfs: HFS induction, (4) test: follow-up sensory testing, and (5) test_sa: follow-up mapping of area of secondary hyperalgesia. site: left or right arm. modality: sensory testing modality. CW: cotton wool, BR: brush, VFF: von Frey Filament, 128: pinprick stimulator exerting force of 128 mN, 256: pinprick stimulator exerting force of 256 mN, estim: electrical stimulation. rating: participant self-reported sensation in response to stimulation from each modality, using the Sensation and Pain Ratings Scale. This scale provides for a range of non-painful and painful sensory experiences. The non-painful range, on the left-hand side of the scale, ranges from -50 – “no sensation” – to 0 – “the exact point at which what you feel transitions to pain". The painful range, on the right-hand side of the scale, ranges from 0 - +50 – “most intense pain you can imagine”. Group_allocation: participants were allocated to either group 1 or 2. Group 1 received the HFS under a condition of threat on their right arm. Group 2 received the HFS under a condition of threat on their left arm. Age: age of participant in years. Sex: self-reported sex of participant. Ethnicity: self-reported ethnicity of participant. Caffeine_intake: amount and description of caffeine intake on the day of testing. Medication_use: amount and description of medication intake on the day of testing. Detection_threshold_R: individual detection threshold to electrical stimulation on the right arm. Detection_threshold_L: individual detection threshold to electrical stimulation on the left arm. Intensity_used: intensity used for the HFS before multiplying by 10, determined by the average of the individual detection threshold at both arms. Dominance: self-reported hand dominance of participant. Time_and_day: time and day of testing. Notes: any additional notes made by the assessor during testing. damage_right: self-reported threat of tissue damage on the right arm during the HFS induction. Participants were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “At the time of receiving the intense electrical stimulation, I was concerned that it would cause damage to my skin on my right arm”. damage_left: self-reported threat of tissue damage on the left arm during the HFS induction. Participants were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “At the time of receiving the intense electrical stimulation, I was concerned that it would cause damage to my skin on my left arm”. anxious_right: self-reported anxiety during the HFS induction on the right arm. Participants were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “At the time of receiving the intense electrical stimulation on my right arm, I felt anxious". anxious_left: self-reported anxiety during the HFS induction on the left arm. Participants were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “At the time of receiving the intense electrical stimulation on my left arm, I felt anxious". notes: responses from the semi-structured interview. cidi_1 to cidi_27: 27 questions from the modified version of the World Health Organization’s Composite International Diagnostic Interview for post-traumatic stress disorder (WMH-CIDI). This questionnaire screens for specific traumatic events, by asking whether participants have/haven't experienced each specified trauma event. Participants respond yes or no. ctq_1 to ctq_28: 28 questions from the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. This questionnaire focuses on 5 criteria: emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional neglect, and physical neglect. Participants endorse items on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “never true” to “very often true”. FILE: demographic_information.csv id: participant's individualised study ID code. Group_allocation: participants were allocated to either group 1 or 2. Group 1 received the HFS under a condition of threat on their right arm. Group 2 received the HFS under a condition of threat on their left arm. Age: age of participant in years. Sex: self-reported sex of participant. Ethnicity: self-reported ethnicity of participant. Detection_threshold_R: individual detection threshold to electrical stimulation on the right arm. Detection_threshold_L: individual detection threshold to electrical stimulation on the left arm. Intensity_used: intensity used for the HFS before multiplying by 10, determined by the average of the individual detection threshold at each arm. Dominance: self-reported hand dominance of participant. Time_and_day: time and day of testing. FILE: RA_blind.csv id: participant's individualised study ID code. threat_arm_RA: the assessor stated (or guessed) which arm had received the HFS under a condition of threat (right/left). Confidence_level: the assessor rated her confience about which arm received the HFS under a condition of threat on a Likert scale (“not at all confident”, “not confident”, “neutral”, “confident”, “extremely confident”). +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Geographic information: Cape Town, South Africa +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ REUSE INFORMATION Recommended citation: [insert after publication] This dataset is provided under a Creative Commons BY 4.0 License. More details can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/