Valenced dual tasking in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Dual-tasking studies show that emotionality and vividness of aversive memory decrease by engaging in a working memory task and simultaneous recall of that memory. Adding positive valence to a dual task might be a promising innovation in the amelioration of lab-induced memory. However, studies aiming to translate these findings into autobiographical memory of a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) population find conflicting results or show methodological flaws. The current study assesses the benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-tasking procedure in PTSD patients. METHOD: In a cross-over design PTSD patients (N = 33) recalled their traumatic memory and received the following three conditions in randomized order: rating positive pictures + exposure, rating neutral pictures + exposure, and exposure only. Each of the three conditions consisted of four sets of 1 min. In the first cycle, participants were exposed to each condition in a randomized order, which was then repeated in a second cycle. Before and after each condition, emotionality and vividness were rated on a visual analog scale (VAS), resulting in seven measurement timepoints in total. RESULTS: Firstly, repeated measures ANOVAs showed a time effect: memories were less emotional and vivid after our summed (three) interventions. Secondly, repeated measures ANCOVAs indicated no evidence for differences between the conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence for a benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-task procedure in PTSD patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Tell me all about it: Narrated memories are less emotional than imagined memories.

People often re-live memories by talking about them. Verbal thinking is usually less emotive than imagery-based thinking but it is not known if this finding generalises to recollection. We tested if narrating memories aloud reduces their affective charge compared with recollecting them using imagery. Participants were randomised to two conditions: imagery (recalling the memory silently as vividly as possible) or narration (describing the memory out loud as clearly as possible). After practicing with a neutral topic, they recalled three aversive (Experiments 1 and 2) or three happy (Experiment 3) memories using narration or imagery, and rated emotionality of the memory after each recall. Before and after the procedure, they completed the PANAS to measure effects on mood. Experiments 2 and 3 included a 24 h follow-up. Emotionality was consistently lower following narrated recollection than imaginal recollection: narrated M = 5.3, SD = 2.5; imaginal M = 7.2, SD = 2.0; effect size (difference in mean values divided by overall SD) = 0.78. Negative affect increased after recollection of aversive memories and positive affect decreased, but there were no effects of condition upon mood. Recalling a positive memory had no effect on mood. Follow-up data showed no lasting effects of recall mode on availability of memories or mood. We conclude that narration of emotional autobiographical memories reduces the emotionality of the recollection, but does not differentially change mood compared with image-based recall.