Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42377672›Full record

ArticleCognitive processing2026

More caution or more lenient: deciphering the role of negative affect in recognition and inference.

Lu Li, Hehe Lu, Ke Jiang, Huilin Qiu, Chunting Lin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive processing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Lu LiSchool of Education, The College of Arts and Sciences, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Hehe LuPsychology Teaching and Research Section, Hengdian Town Fourth Junior High School, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China.
Ke JiangSchool of Teachers' Education, Lishui University, Lishui, Zhejiang, China. jiangke200@126.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6715-0121
Huilin QiuEnglish Department, College of Foreign Languages and Cultures, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. qiuhl@scu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2560-1198
Chunting LinHuaxi MR Research Center (HMRRC), Department of Radiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 935584311@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When individuals encounter familiar situations, they may apply behaviors from past experiences. This could be due to recognizing similarities between the situations or inferring characteristics from the past to the present, leading to similar responses. Recognition becomes more cautious in negative contexts, showing increased discrimination and ability to discern differences, known as the "negative affective effect of recognition". Conversely, generalized inference in negative situations tends to overgeneralize past attributes to current contexts, termed the "negative affective effect of inference". This study examines how recognition and inference interact under different affective states and their impact on cognitive processing. It employed an symmetrical design with affective contexts (positive, neutral, negative) to evaluate performance in two task sequences: inference-recognition and recognition-inference, using Signal Detection Theory under varying time pressures. The findings reveal that the sequence of cognitive tasks influences the magnitude of negative affective effects in recognition and inference, particularly indicating a complex, bidirectional interaction between these processes.

Indexed as

Affective contextDiscrimination (d’)InferenceRecognitionSignal detection theory

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.