Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26907480›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2016

How social interactions affect emotional memory accuracy: Evidence from collaborative retrieval and social contagion paradigms.

Elizabeth A Kensinger, Hae-Yoon Choi, Brendan D Murray, Suparna Rajaram

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Elizabeth A KensingerDepartment of Psychology, Boston College, McGuinn Hall Rm. 300, 140 Commonwealth Avenue., Chestnut Hill, MA, 02467, USA. Elizabeth.kensinger@bc.edu.
Hae-Yoon ChoiDepartment of Psychology|, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Brendan D MurrayDepartment of Psychology, Boston College, McGuinn Hall Rm. 300, 140 Commonwealth Avenue., Chestnut Hill, MA, 02467, USA.
Suparna RajaramDepartment of Psychology|, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In daily life, emotional events are often discussed with others. The influence of these social interactions on the veracity of emotional memories has rarely been investigated. The authors (Choi, Kensinger, & Rajaram Memory and Cognition, 41, 403-415, 2013) previously demonstrated that when the categorical relatedness of information is controlled, emotional items are more accurately remembered than neutral items. The present study examined whether emotion would continue to improve the accuracy of memory when individuals discussed the emotional and neutral events with others. Two different paradigms involving social influences were used to investigate this question and compare evidence. In both paradigms, participants studied stimuli that were grouped into conceptual categories of positive (e.g., celebration), negative (e.g., funeral), or neutral (e.g., astronomy) valence. After a 48-hour delay, recognition memory was tested for studied items and categorically related lures. In the first paradigm, recognition accuracy was compared when memory was tested individually or in a collaborative triad. In the second paradigm, recognition accuracy was compared when a prior retrieval session had occurred individually or with a confederate who supplied categorically related lures. In both of these paradigms, emotional stimuli were remembered more accurately than were neutral stimuli, and this pattern was preserved when social interaction occurred. In fact, in the first paradigm, there was a trend for collaboration to increase the beneficial effect of emotion on memory accuracy, and in the second paradigm, emotional lures were significantly less susceptible to the "social contagion" effect. Together, these results demonstrate that emotional memories can be more accurate than nonemotional ones even when events are discussed with others (Experiment 1) and even when that discussion introduces misinformation (Experiment 2).

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsSocial PerceptionAdultEmotionsHumansMental RecallRecognition, PsychologyYoung AdultEmotionFalse memoryRecognitionSocial influencesValence

Identifiers

PMID26907480
PMCPMC4942488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.