ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2023
Toward a computational understanding of how reminiscing about positive autobiographical memories influences decision-making under risk.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the impact of a short bout of stair-climbing on creative thinking in a between-subjects pretest posttest comparison study.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Trait mindful attention is associated with greater real-time emotional benefits of positive experiences: Evidence from experimental studies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Neural mechanisms of maladaptive risk decision-making across psychiatric disorders.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Review
- Editorial: Methods and applications in psychopathology: new methods and trends for the understanding of neuropsychiatric disorders.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent computational psychiatric research has dissected decision-making under risk into different underlying cognitive computational constructs and identified disease-specific changes in these constructs. Studies are underway to investigate what kind of behavioral or psychological interventions can restore these cognitive, computational constructs. In our previous study, we showed that reminiscing about positive autobiographical memories reduced risk aversion and affected probability weighting in the opposite direction from that observed in psychiatric disorders. However, in that study, we compared positive versus neutral memory retrieval by using a within-subjects crossover posttest design. Therefore, the change of decision-making from baseline is unclear. Furthermore, we used a hypothetical decision-making task and did not include monetary incentives. We attempt to address these limitations and investigated how reminiscing about positive autobiographical memories influences decision-making under risk using a between-subjects pretest posttest comparison design with performance-contingent monetary incentives. In thirty-eight healthy, young adults, we found that reminiscing about positive memories reinforced the commonly observed inverted S-shaped nonlinear probability weighting (f = 0.345, medium to large in effect size). In contrast, reminiscing about positive memories did not affect risk aversion in general. Given that the change in probability weighting after reminiscing about positive memories is in the opposite direction from that observed in psychiatric disorders, our results indicate that positive autobiographical memory retrieval might be a useful behavioral intervention strategy for amending the altered decision-making under risk in psychiatric diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37380917What 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.