Suppr超能文献

情绪记忆(通常)更难忘记:项目-方法定向遗忘文献的元分析。

Emotional memories are (usually) harder to forget: A meta-analysis of the item-method directed forgetting literature.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.

Student Wellness and Counselling Centre, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada.

出版信息

Psychon Bull Rev. 2021 Aug;28(4):1313-1326. doi: 10.3758/s13423-021-01914-z. Epub 2021 Apr 12.

Abstract

The current meta-analysis explored whether emotional memories are less susceptible to item-method directed forgetting than neutral memories. Basic analyses revealed superior memory for remember (R) than forget (F) items in both the neutral, M = 19.6%, CI [16.1, 23.1], and the emotional, M = 15.1%, CI [12.4, 17.7], conditions. Directed forgetting in either valence condition was larger for (a) words than for other stimuli; (b) recall than recognition tests; (c) studies that used recall prior to recognition testing; (d) shorter lists; and (e) studies that included buffer items. Direct comparison of the magnitude of the directed forgetting effect across neutral and emotional conditions within studies revealed relatively diminished directed forgetting of emotional items compared to neutral items, with an average difference of 4.2%, CI [2.0, 6.4]. However, the nature of this finding varied broadly across studies, meaning that whether - and to what degree - emotional memories are more resilient than neutral memories likely depends on the methodological features of the study in question. Moderator analyses revealed larger differences (a) in studies for which the emotional items were more arousing than the neutral items, and (b) when buffer items were included. Together, these findings suggest that emotional memories are often more resilient to intentional forgetting than neutral memories, although further research is necessary to characterize the circumstances under which these differences emerge.

摘要

当前的荟萃分析探讨了情绪记忆是否比中性记忆更不容易受到项目-方法导向的遗忘。基本分析显示,在中性(R = 19.6%,置信区间 [16.1, 23.1])和情绪(R = 15.1%,置信区间 [12.4, 17.7])条件下,对记住(R)项目的记忆优于忘记(F)项目。在两种效价条件下,无论是单词还是其他刺激,(a)回忆测试比再认测试的导向遗忘更大;(b) ;(c)在再认测试之前使用回忆测试的研究;(d)列表较短;(e)包括缓冲项目的研究。在研究内直接比较中性和情绪条件下导向遗忘效应的大小,发现与中性项目相比,情绪项目的导向遗忘相对较小,平均差异为 4.2%,置信区间 [2.0, 6.4]。然而,这一发现的性质在研究之间存在广泛差异,这意味着情绪记忆是否比中性记忆更具有弹性,以及在何种程度上具有弹性,可能取决于具体研究的方法学特征。调节分析显示,在(a)情绪项目比中性项目更具唤醒性的研究中,以及(b)包括缓冲项目的研究中,差异更大。这些发现表明,情绪记忆通常比中性记忆更能抵抗有意遗忘,尽管需要进一步研究来描述出现这些差异的情况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验