Ritchie Timothy D, Skowronski John J, Walker W Richard, Wood Sarah E
Department of Psychology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA.
Memory. 2006 May;14(4):471-85. doi: 10.1080/09658210500478434.
Four samples of participants recalled autobiographical memories. While some evidence emerged from regression analyses suggesting that judgements of the amount of detail contained in each memory and judgements of the ease with which events could be recalled were partially independent, the analyses generally showed that these judgements were similarly predicted by various event characteristics (age, typicality, self-importance, emotional intensity at event occurrence, rehearsal types). Co-occurrence frequency data yielded similar conclusions, showing that while ease ratings and detail ratings occasionally diverged, they were more often consistent with each other. Finally, the data also suggested that events that prompted emotional ambivalence were not judged to be more easily recalled, or to contain more detail, than non-ambivalent events.
四名参与者样本回忆了自传体记忆。回归分析得出了一些证据,表明对每个记忆中包含的细节量的判断以及对事件回忆难易程度的判断部分是独立的,但分析总体表明,这些判断同样由各种事件特征(年龄、典型性、自我重要性、事件发生时的情感强度、复述类型)所预测。共现频率数据得出了类似的结论,表明虽然难易程度评分和细节评分偶尔会出现分歧,但它们彼此之间更常保持一致。最后,数据还表明,引发情感矛盾的事件并不被认为比非矛盾事件更容易回忆或包含更多细节。