Overestimating the intensity of negative feelings in autobiographical memory: evidence from the 9/11 attack and COVID-19 pandemic.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition & Emotion Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1080/02699931.2024.2346757
Juan Castillo, Haoxue Fan, Olivia T Karaman, Jocelyn Shu, Yoann Stussi, M Alexandra Kredlow, Sophia Vranos, Javiera P Oyarzún, Hayley M Dorfman, Deshawn Chatman Sambrano, Robert Meksin, William Hirst, Elizabeth A Phelps
{"title":"Overestimating the intensity of negative feelings in autobiographical memory: evidence from the 9/11 attack and COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Juan Castillo, Haoxue Fan, Olivia T Karaman, Jocelyn Shu, Yoann Stussi, M Alexandra Kredlow, Sophia Vranos, Javiera P Oyarzún, Hayley M Dorfman, Deshawn Chatman Sambrano, Robert Meksin, William Hirst, Elizabeth A Phelps","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2024.2346757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When recalling autobiographical events, people not only retrieve event details but also the feelings they experienced. The current study examined whether people are able to consistently recall the intensity of past feelings associated with two consequential and negatively valenced events, i.e. the 9/11 attack (<i>N</i> = 769) and the COVID-19 pandemic (<i>N</i> = 726). By comparing experienced and recalled intensities of negative feelings, we discovered that people systematically recall a higher intensity of negative feelings than initially reported - overestimating the intensity of past negative emotional experiences. The COVID-19 dataset also revealed that individuals who experienced greater improvement in emotional well-being displayed smaller biases in recalling their feelings. Across both datasets, the intensity of remembered feelings was correlated with initial feelings and current feelings, but the impact of the current feelings was stronger in the COVID-19 dataset than in the 9/11 dataset. Our results demonstrate that when recalling negative autobiographical events, people tend to overestimate the intensity of prior negative emotional experiences with their degree of bias influenced by current feelings and well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11502283/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2346757","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When recalling autobiographical events, people not only retrieve event details but also the feelings they experienced. The current study examined whether people are able to consistently recall the intensity of past feelings associated with two consequential and negatively valenced events, i.e. the 9/11 attack (N = 769) and the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 726). By comparing experienced and recalled intensities of negative feelings, we discovered that people systematically recall a higher intensity of negative feelings than initially reported - overestimating the intensity of past negative emotional experiences. The COVID-19 dataset also revealed that individuals who experienced greater improvement in emotional well-being displayed smaller biases in recalling their feelings. Across both datasets, the intensity of remembered feelings was correlated with initial feelings and current feelings, but the impact of the current feelings was stronger in the COVID-19 dataset than in the 9/11 dataset. Our results demonstrate that when recalling negative autobiographical events, people tend to overestimate the intensity of prior negative emotional experiences with their degree of bias influenced by current feelings and well-being.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高估自传体记忆中负面情绪的强度:来自 9/11 袭击和 COVID-19 大流行的证据。
在回忆自传体事件时,人们不仅会检索事件细节,还会检索他们所经历的感受。本研究考察了人们是否能够持续回忆起过去与两个后果性和负向情感事件相关的情感强度,即 9/11 袭击(769 人)和 COVID-19 大流行(726 人)。通过比较经历过的和回忆起的负面情绪强度,我们发现人们系统性地回忆起了比最初报告的更高强度的负面情绪--高估了过去负面情绪经历的强度。COVID-19 数据集还显示,情绪健康状况改善较多的人在回忆自己的感受时表现出的偏差较小。在这两个数据集中,记忆中的情感强度与最初的情感和当前的情感相关,但在 COVID-19 数据集中,当前情感的影响比在 9/11 数据集中更大。我们的研究结果表明,在回忆负面自传事件时,人们往往会高估之前负面情绪体验的强度,其偏差程度会受到当前感受和幸福感的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
期刊最新文献
The dual-feature approach-avoidance task: validity, training efficacy, and the role of contingency awareness in changing food preference. Bouncing back from emotional ups and downs: insights in emotional recovery using survival analyses of burst ESM data. Emotional stimuli boost incidental learning through predictive processing. Rumination, but not mood, predicts prospective memory performance: novel insights from a derived measure of trait rumination. Overestimating the intensity of negative feelings in autobiographical memory: evidence from the 9/11 attack and COVID-19 pandemic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1