ArticleBrain and behavior2020
Neurophysiologic evidence for increased retrieval suppression among negative ruminators.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neurophysiologic evidence for increased retrieval suppression among negative ruminators.Brain and behavior · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvents (e.g., seeing a familiar face) may initiate retrieval of associated information (e.g., person's name), but not all cue-initiated memory retrieval is welcome (e.g., trauma). Retrieval suppression refers to the ability to halt unwanted retrieval, and any erosion of memory associations in response to repeatedly excluding a memory from consciousness. The current study sought to examine event-related potential (ERP, averaged scalp electrical recordings) correlates of inhibitory cognitive control of memory retrieval and any linkage of such control to ruminative memory styles.
methodsParticipants (N = 23) first learned face-picture pairings. ERPs were then recorded as they viewed face cues while either bringing the associated picture to mind (think trial), or not allowing the associated picture to come to mind (no-think trial).
resultsEmotional valence of learned pictures (negative versus neutral) modulated a posterior (P1, 100-150 ms) ERP associated with attention to the face cue. Memory strategy (think versus no-think) modulated a frontal (P3, 350-450 ms) associated with alerting of the need to control retrieval. Both valence and strategy worked in combination to modulate a late posterior (LC, 450-550 ms) ERP associated with successful memory retrieval. Brooding, a negative form of rumination, was found to be positively correlated with the LC ERP.
conclusionThe results suggest early separation of emotional and strategic control of retrieval, but later combined control over access to working memory. Moreover, the positive correlation of brooding and the LC suggest that individuals who are high in application of perseverative strategies to memory retrieval will show greater modulation of the retrieval-related LC ERP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.