ArticleMemory & cognition2025
Mental association of time and valence revealed with a novel chronometric approach: The positive-future effect.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two recent studies utilized indirect response procedures (i.e., a sentence completion task and the Implicit Association Test) and suggest that people evaluate the future more positively than the past (Kaup et al., Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 612,720, 2021; Ulrich et al., Memory & Cognition, 52, 444-458, 2024). This present article reports a novel chronometric approach and a self-report study examining whether this relationship can be observed consistently. In one part of the chronometric study, participants were instructed to respond verbally with the words "past" and "tomorrow" to negatively and positively connotated words. In the positive-future condition, participants responded with "tomorrow" to positive and "yesterday" to negative words; in the positive-past condition, they responded with "yesterday" to positive and "tomorrow" to negative words. In the other part, participants responded verbally with "good" and "bad" to time-related words. In the positive-future condition, they responded with "good" to future-related and "bad" to past-related words; in the positive-past condition, they responded with "good" to past-related and "bad" to future-related words. Response times were shorter in the positive-future than in the positive-past condition, suggesting that participants consistently evaluate the future more positively than the past (i.e., the positive-future effect). This strengthens the view that the positive-future effect is robust and general. Several possible mechanisms of why this effect emerges are discussed. The self-report study, in contrast, indicated no significant difference in individuals' perceptions of the past compared to the future. This may be attributed to a positivity bias in recalling past events, which may mask the differences in how people perceive the past versus the future.
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.