- Page 1 and 2:
THE EMOTIONAL ENHANCEMENT OF MEMORY
- Page 3 and 4:
the memory effects. Surprisingly, t
- Page 5 and 6:
and motivation was waning. Most imp
- Page 7 and 8:
Meta-analysis: Experiments 6-10…
- Page 9 and 10:
negative, neutral or positive objec
- Page 11 and 12:
Figure 6.2. Summary of findings fro
- Page 13 and 14:
Table 3.5. Criteria for giving resp
- Page 15 and 16:
avoidance task ………………
- Page 17 and 18:
loved one could block their ability
- Page 19 and 20:
eport, physiological response and c
- Page 21 and 22:
Section 1.2. What effects do emotio
- Page 23 and 24:
due to external influences. In cont
- Page 25 and 26:
of naturally occurring emotions or
- Page 27 and 28:
ecause mood inductions generally re
- Page 29 and 30:
(e.g. Conway et al., 1994). Memory
- Page 31 and 32:
alternatives (Lockhart, 2000). The
- Page 33 and 34:
equired participants to distinguish
- Page 35 and 36:
een found when memory is assessed b
- Page 37 and 38:
peripheral elements of emotional an
- Page 39 and 40:
processing of the specific content
- Page 41 and 42:
failure to retrieve episodic memori
- Page 43 and 44:
effects on cognitive processes, eve
- Page 45 and 46:
ecollection and familiarity within
- Page 47 and 48:
emotional influence on memory. In t
- Page 49 and 50:
year (Dolcos et al., 2005). There a
- Page 51 and 52:
e suitable for investigating memory
- Page 53 and 54:
possible that having to distinguish
- Page 55 and 56:
of photographs of people, animals a
- Page 57 and 58:
Retrieval phase: Participants then
- Page 59:
y the ANOVA’s. These are only rep
- Page 62 and 63:
Table 2.1: Experiments 1 and 2: Res
- Page 64 and 65:
In these experiments the influence
- Page 66 and 67:
We found evidence of recognition me
- Page 68 and 69:
For the recognition test, which was
- Page 70 and 71:
Section 5. Experiments 2A and 2B: P
- Page 72 and 73:
items that had been seen previously
- Page 74 and 75:
Section 7. Experiment 2E: Recogniti
- Page 76 and 77:
Table 2.2. Experiment 2: Results of
- Page 78 and 79:
For the ‘know’ responses the ma
- Page 80 and 81:
Section 8. Experiment 2 - General D
- Page 82 and 83:
Presentation of stimuli in blocked
- Page 84 and 85:
It is possible that the act of maki
- Page 86 and 87:
enhancement can be influenced by re
- Page 88 and 89:
levels of memory between the positi
- Page 90 and 91:
the performance of any subsequent t
- Page 92 and 93:
experiment to provide a set of targ
- Page 94 and 95:
Experimental stimuli were presented
- Page 96 and 97:
Recognition performance in all thre
- Page 98 and 99:
Analysis of RKG responses We analys
- Page 100 and 101:
Further signal detection analysis o
- Page 102 and 103:
stimuli, which corresponded with mo
- Page 104 and 105:
could be generalised to the real-wo
- Page 106 and 107:
paradigm was first introduced by Tu
- Page 108 and 109:
The nature of recognition memory an
- Page 110 and 111:
The relation between Remember/Know/
- Page 112 and 113:
We proposed that a Remember respons
- Page 114 and 115:
to either the RKN or SSN memory tas
- Page 116 and 117:
change in a dimension (e.g., a ligh
- Page 118 and 119:
were prompted to indicate by key pr
- Page 120 and 121:
When you think the picture was not
- Page 122 and 123:
conducted to further analyse the ma
- Page 124 and 125:
interactions in the ANOVAs were fou
- Page 126 and 127:
Table 3.9. Same/Similar/New task: N
- Page 128 and 129:
Orthogonal contrasts revealed that
- Page 130 and 131:
Table 3.11. Remember/Know/New task:
- Page 132 and 133:
suitable responses were not equable
- Page 134 and 135:
We found that more ‘remember’ r
- Page 136 and 137:
say that context is easier to remem
- Page 138 and 139:
Levine & Bluck, 2004; Storbeck & Cl
- Page 140 and 141:
Figure 4.1. Examples of pairs of ne
- Page 142 and 143:
Familiarity i) Word frequency and w
- Page 144 and 145:
were not sure if there was going to
- Page 146 and 147:
Table 4.1. Experiment 5: Proportion
- Page 148 and 149:
memory for positive stimuli. These
- Page 150 and 151:
whether visual specificity for posi
- Page 152 and 153:
Figure 4.3. Examples of stimuli. St
- Page 154 and 155:
0.59 (-1.65 to 2.55; 0.98) respecti
- Page 156 and 157:
Section 3.3. Results The data for t
- Page 158 and 159:
Figure 4.4. Mean average specific a
- Page 160 and 161:
The possibility of a response bias
- Page 162 and 163:
Section 4. Experiment 7: Biases in
- Page 164 and 165:
of an attentional encoding explanat
- Page 166 and 167:
esults will be found as for Experim
- Page 168 and 169:
of one second was displayed before
- Page 170 and 171:
Table 4.3. Mean responses (SE) for
- Page 172 and 173:
greater recognition for the objects
- Page 174 and 175:
Table 4.4. Mean average (SE) number
- Page 176 and 177:
eveal a significantly longer total
- Page 178 and 179:
difference between scenes with a ne
- Page 180 and 181:
of memory for positive objects was
- Page 182 and 183:
independent of attention, which is
- Page 184 and 185:
lack of a central-peripheral trade-
- Page 186 and 187:
to a detriment in memory for periph
- Page 188 and 189:
Alternative measures of memory: Ass
- Page 190 and 191:
associative binding (Touryan et al,
- Page 192 and 193:
greatly diminish or disappear with
- Page 194 and 195:
Factors unrelated to intrinsic emot
- Page 196 and 197:
faces or places (Puri & Wojciulik,
- Page 198 and 199:
We predict that the pattern of memo
- Page 200 and 201:
ackground they had seen in the stud
- Page 202 and 203:
component (F(2,34) = 5.45, MSe = 0.
- Page 204 and 205:
Associative Memory In the associati
- Page 206 and 207:
The number of fixations made were a
- Page 208 and 209:
longer total gaze duration on the e
- Page 210 and 211:
.54], nor on backgrounds of scenes
- Page 212 and 213:
the background when presented later
- Page 214 and 215:
Section 3.1. Introduction Section 3
- Page 216 and 217:
were then shown, preceded by a 20 s
- Page 218 and 219:
2.56, p < .001, partial eta 2 = .71
- Page 220 and 221:
(negative, neutral, positive) and s
- Page 222 and 223:
object in a scene. There was no sig
- Page 224 and 225:
eradication of any emotional enhanc
- Page 226 and 227:
possible that the emotional stimuli
- Page 228 and 229:
central-peripheral trade off in the
- Page 230 and 231:
Section 3.3. Results Results of the
- Page 232 and 233:
Planned contrasts revealed the impa
- Page 234 and 235:
component (object, background) inte
- Page 236 and 237:
ackground of the scene. There was n
- Page 238 and 239:
Section 3.4. Discussion There was e
- Page 240 and 241:
identify with eye movement recordin
- Page 242 and 243:
Table 5.7. Average ratings (standar
- Page 244 and 245:
emotional influence on the results
- Page 246 and 247:
Figure 5.7. Specific and general re
- Page 248 and 249:
ecognition of positive and negative
- Page 250 and 251:
Figure 5.9. Specific and General Re
- Page 252 and 253:
Section 5.3. Eye movement results T
- Page 254 and 255: .01). Post-hoc Tukey’s HSD were u
- Page 256 and 257: The number of fixations made on dif
- Page 258 and 259: (F(1.79,5.37) = 7.12, MSe = 232535.
- Page 260 and 261: emotional and neutral object [F(1,6
- Page 262 and 263: Figure 5.16. Experiments 7 - 10: Av
- Page 264 and 265: may be that the scenes were easier
- Page 266 and 267: Chapter 6. Discussion In the final
- Page 268 and 269: In chapter 4 I extended the experim
- Page 270 and 271: Figure 6.3 Summary of findings from
- Page 272 and 273: alternative measures of attention h
- Page 274 and 275: distribution of visual attention re
- Page 276 and 277: designing and conducting experiment
- Page 278 and 279: contributed to the difficulty in cr
- Page 280 and 281: whether these perceptual difference
- Page 282 and 283: Richardson-Klavehn, 2005) with the
- Page 284 and 285: High Threshold Theory (Macmillan &
- Page 286 and 287: participant and the artificial prod
- Page 288 and 289: References Adolphs, R. (2002). Reco
- Page 290 and 291: Buchanan, T. W. (2007). Retrieval o
- Page 292 and 293: Davidson, R. J. (1994). On emotion,
- Page 294 and 295: Gardiner, J. M., Ramponi, C., & Ric
- Page 296 and 297: James, W. (1884). What is an emotio
- Page 298 and 299: Levine, L. J., & Bluck, S. (2004).
- Page 300 and 301: components. Journal of Experimental
- Page 302 and 303: Rowe, G., Hirsh, J. B., & Anderson,
- Page 306 and 307: Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal e
- Page 308 and 309: Appendix 2.2. ANOVA Analyses for Ex
- Page 310 and 311: Table 2.2.4. Experiment 1: Separate
- Page 312 and 313: Appendix 3.2. Contamination of Retr
- Page 314 and 315: Appendix 4.1 Analysis of Same, Simi
- Page 316 and 317: Scene component* emotion* response
- Page 318 and 319: Section 4.1.2 Analysis for Experime
- Page 320 and 321: Emotion* Response type F(4,68) = 0.
- Page 322 and 323: esponse F(1,17) = 0.25, New respons
- Page 324 and 325: Scene component* Response type Tuke
- Page 326 and 327: Same response Similar response New
- Page 328 and 329: Effect ANOVA result Response type F
- Page 330 and 331: Similar response New response Same
- Page 332 and 333: Tukey’s post hocs: For objects Sa
- Page 334 and 335: esponse F(1,17) = 1.95, Similar res