Simone Battaglia, researcher at the "Renzo Canestrari" Department of Psychology, doesn’t just study what we remember, but above all what happens in our body while we do so. When a memory is linked to fear, or even to trauma, it can profoundly affect someone’s life. Is it possible to “switch off fear,” separating it from the memory it is associated with? That is the aim of his research.
His studies also focus on the interactions between the brain and the heart, on emotional memory, and on the potential of new technologies in diagnosing and treating post-traumatic stress disorder.
In this interview, he talks about his journey — the challenges he has faced, the possibilities ahead, and the scientific and human value of his research.
Simone, what do your studies focus on?
I work in neuroscience — the sciences that study how the brain works, not only from an anatomical perspective, but also from a functional one. More specifically, I study memory, emotions, attention, perception, and how these processes interact with each other. Above all, I focus on the link between memory and emotions, particularly in relation to fear and trauma. My research investigates which brain structures are involved in these experiences and how we might intervene to reduce the impact of fear while leaving the memory itself intact.
You have received the ESCAN 2024 award in affective neuroscience, the FESN Prize 2025 in clinical neuropsychology, and recently the SPR Early Career Award 2025 in psychophysiology. What do these awards represent?
The SPR Early Career Award 2025, granted by the Society for Psychophysiological Research (SPR), is a world-class award given by one of the most prominent societies in the field of psychophysiology. It recognises the global relevance of my work and its scientific impact. In this field, my research has focused on the neuro-cardiac responses of fear — that is, how the brain influences heart rhythms when we experience fear. I have shown, for example, that before the tachycardia triggered by fear, the heart actually enters bradycardia — it slows down abruptly. This is likely an evolutionary mechanism, a sort of “preparation for threat.” It had been hypothesised in the past; now it is scientifically demonstrated.
Three international awards in two years. In your view, what made the difference?
I believe it was innovation — in both topics and methods. I challenged old theories in order to propose and prove new ones, approaching problems from multiple angles: scientific, clinical and technical. By combining different approaches, ranging from engineering-based methods to psychiatric perspectives, it was possible to address complex questions concerning the relationship between the brain, emotions and behaviour. Alongside methodological rigour, equal importance was given to the effort to build bridges between disciplines and to move research findings towards practical application.
Have international collaborations played a key role in your path?
Absolutely: I collaborate with research groups from Melbourne to Los Angeles. These connections are essential for accessing different technologies, skills and perspectives.
What have been the most difficult challenges to face?
My research area is relatively new in Italy; as a result, it is not yet fully established and funding opportunities are still limited.
Has your research had clinical applications?
Yes, mainly in the United States, where some studies have been translated into clinical trials. We are working to ensure that these findings become standard clinical practices for diagnosing and treating conditions such as anxiety, phobias and PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder). We have identified a neuro-cardiac biomarker that could one day be used to understand how well a treatment is working or to help diagnose certain psychiatric disorders at an early stage.
Are there ethical implications in “modifying” fear-related memory?
Yes, and we follow very strict ethical protocols. But it is important to clarify: we do not modify memories, nor do we erase traumatic experiences. Instead, we work on the emotional response associated with those memories. If someone has suffered trauma, the goal is to help them stop feeling fear — not to make them forget. This is a fundamental principle.
How do you think neuroscience will evolve over the next 10–20 years?
I believe current techniques will become more powerful and precise, and we will move toward greater integration between tools. Artificial Intelligence will play an increasingly important role — not to replace researchers, but to help them detect things that the human eye cannot see.
What impact would you like your research to have on society?
I hope it doesn’t remain confined to laboratories. I hope that one day the results of my studies can become part of the healthcare system, accessible to everyone. I would like, for example, to see the introduction of a basic psychologist, just as we currently have a general practitioner. We all go through difficult times: we should have concrete tools to face them.
Is it more socially acceptable today to talk about trauma and psychological distress?
Yes, much more. Young people in particular talk about their emotions openly and ask for help. Twenty years ago, all of this was almost taboo. It’s a major step forward, but we need a system capable of responding: we must provide real support.
One piece of advice for young researchers?
Never give up. I have failed many times, but I always tried again. Failing may actually be the key to success. What you truly need is deep, genuine motivation — the kind that comes from within. I choose collaborators not for the skills they already have, but for their motivation. Because that cannot be taught. If you believe in what you do, and in yourself, you can make it.
Photo by Juliane Weicker, Leipzig
