O'Brien Bronwyn, Kane Leanne, Houle Stephanie A, Aquilina Florence, Ashbaugh Andrea R
University of Ottawa, School of Psychology, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier Private, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2022 Mar;74:101694. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2021.101694. Epub 2021 Sep 15.
This study replicates and extends Houle-Johnson et al.'s (2019) findings to better understand the role of feedback modality, ambiguity and social anxiety in the recognition and recall of self-relevant feedback.
Participants gave a speech and were provided with positive, negative, and ambiguous feedback via written text, (n = 33) or recorded sentences (n = 31) and later completed a recognition and recall task for the feedback.
Recognition (p = .80, η = 0) and recall (p = .09, η = 0.08) did not differ between written or recorded feedback. All participants demonstrated a negative response bias (p < .001, η = 0.22) and recalled more negative than positive feedback (p = .02, η = 0.10) but were no more accurate in recognizing negative compared to positive feedback (p = .08, η = 0). Although social anxiety did not impact recognition accuracy (p = .94, η = 0), participants with high social anxiety demonstrated a more pronounced negative response bias (p < .01, η = 0.11) and negative recall bias (p = .02, SE = 1.12) than low social anxiety participants. Moreover, the more negatively ambiguous items were perceived, the more likely they were identified old in the high social anxiety group, whereas the opposite was true for the low social anxiety group (B = .13, p < .10).
Task believability was relatively low across all participants.
Our findings suggest that modality does not influence memory for feedback. Moreover, social anxiety might be characterized by a negative bias in recall and response bias, but not necessarily increased accuracy in recognition of negative feedback.
本研究重复并拓展了侯尔 - 约翰逊等人（2019年）的研究结果，以更好地理解反馈方式、模糊性和社交焦虑在与自我相关反馈的识别和回忆中的作用。
参与者进行一次演讲，并通过书面文本（n = 33）或录音句子（n = 31）获得积极、消极和模糊的反馈，随后完成对反馈的识别和回忆任务。
书面反馈和录音反馈在识别（p = 0.80，η = 0）和回忆（p = 0.09，η = 0.08）方面没有差异。所有参与者都表现出负性反应偏差（p < 0.001，η = 0.22），回忆起的负面反馈比正面反馈更多（p = 0.02，η = 0.10），但在识别负面反馈与正面反馈时的准确性并无差异（p = 0.08，η = 0）。虽然社交焦虑并未影响识别准确性（p = 0.94，η = 0），但高社交焦虑的参与者比低社交焦虑的参与者表现出更明显的负性反应偏差（p < 0.01，η = 0.11）和负性回忆偏差（p = 0.02，标准误 = 1.12）。此外，在高社交焦虑组中，被感知为负面模糊的项目越有可能被识别为旧项目，而在低社交焦虑组中则相反（B = 0.13，p < 0.10）。
所有参与者的任务可信度相对较低。
我们的研究结果表明，反馈方式不会影响对反馈的记忆。此外，社交焦虑可能表现为回忆中的负性偏差和反应偏差，但不一定表现为识别负面反馈的准确性提高。
