Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31222440›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2020

The devil is in the details: investigating the influence of emotion on event memory using a simulated event.

Adam R Congleton, Dorthe Berntsen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Adam R CongletonCenter on Autobiographical Memory Research (CON AMORE), Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Århus, Denmark. congleton@psy.au.dk.
Dorthe BerntsenCenter on Autobiographical Memory Research (CON AMORE), Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Århus, Denmark.

Funding

Danmarks Grundforskningsfond DNRF89
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In our everyday lives, the negative events we experience sometimes include powerful, salient details which are ultimately responsible for us interpreting the events as negative (i.e., they drive our interpretation of the emotional valence of the event). Here we examined how the presence of such details within an event shapes our memory of that event. Research on the role of emotion in memory suggests that negative events are often remembered more accurately than positive ones, and this advantage is especially pronounced for the emotion-defining details of the events. However, research rarely separates retrieval effects from effects of attention and information processing during encoding. Here we used a simulated event to examine (1) whether negative events are remembered more accurately than positive events, (2) whether this effect is more pronounced for the emotion-defining detail of the event, (3) whether participants display enhanced accuracy for all aspects of an event (i.e., general memory enhancement) or for only certain aspects of the event (i.e., selective memory enhancement), and (4) whether any enhancement effects for central aspects of the event occur at the expense of contextual information (i.e., memory narrowing). Across three experiments, participants showed superior memory accuracy for the central details of the event in general, while those who interpreted the event as emotionally negative also displayed selective enhancement of the peripheral details. The results further suggested that it was the unexpectedness and/or salience introduced by the emotion-defining detail that was essential to enhancing memory accuracy, and not its goal relevance.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionCognitionEmotionsFemaleHumansMaleMemoryMental RecallRecognition, PsychologyTime FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.