Omitting continuous memory recall from dual-task interventions does not reduce intervention effectiveness.

In Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing a patient recalls a traumatic memory, while simultaneously performing a dual-task (e.g., making horizontal eye movements, tapping a pattern). Earlier lab studies show that increasing the load of a dual-task -and leaving fewer resources for memory recall-results in larger decreases in memory vividness and emotionality compared to control conditions. Therefore, we investigated whether it is necessary to continuously and deliberately recall the memory next to performing high taxing dual-tasks. In two online experiments, participants (N = 172, N = 198) recalled a negative autobiographical memory and were randomly assigned to (1) Memory Recall + Dual-Tasks, (2) Dual-Tasks Only, or (3) No Intervention Control. The dual-tasks were complex pattern tapping and spelling out loud. Before and after the intervention the memory was rated on vividness, emotionality, and accessibility. High taxing dual-tasks, regardless of whether there was continuous memory recall, resulted in the largest reductions in all dependent variables compared to control. Unexpectedly, there was no evidence that the addition of continuous memory recall added to these reductions. These results suggest that continuous memory recall might not, or only minimally needed for the beneficial effects of the dual-task procedure. We discuss the necessity of memory (re)activation, alternative explanations, and implications for practice.

On the role of inhibition in suppression-induced forgetting.

Suppressing retrieval of unwanted memories can cause forgetting, an outcome often attributed to the recruitment of inhibitory control. This suppression-induced forgetting (SIF) generalizes to different cues used to test the suppressed content (cue-independence), a property taken as consistent with inhibition. But does cue-independent forgetting necessarily imply that a memory has been inhibited? Tomlinson et al. (Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:15588-15593, 2009) reported a surprising finding that pressing a button also led to cue-independent forgetting, which was taken as support for an alternative interference account. Here we investigated the role of inhibition in forgetting due to retrieval suppression and pressing buttons. We modified Tomlinson et al.'s procedure to examine an unusual feature they introduced that may have caused memory inhibition effects in their experiment: the omission of explicit task-cues. When tasks were uncued, we replicated the button-press forgetting effect; but when cued, pressing buttons caused no forgetting. Moreover, button-press forgetting partially reflects output-interference effects at test and not a lasting effect of interference. In contrast, SIF occurred regardless of these procedural changes. Collectively, these findings indicate that simply pressing a button does not induce forgetting, on its own, without confounding factors that introduce inhibition into the task and that inhibition likely underlies SIF.

A randomized controlled trial to pilot the efficacy of a computer-based intervention with elements of virtual reality and limited therapist assistance for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Although well-established therapies exist for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), barriers to seek mental health care are high. Technology-based interventions may play a role in improving the reach of efforts to treat, especially when therapist availability is low. The goal of the current randomized controlled trial was to pilot the efficacy of a computer-based trauma intervention with elements of virtual reality (VR; 3MR system) and limited therapist involvement for the treatment of PTSD in a childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and war veteran sample and to compare this to "treatment as usual" (TAU). TAU consisted of evidence-based approaches such as imaginal exposure, EMDR, or narrative exposure therapy. A total of 44 patients with PTSD were included and randomly assigned to 12 sessions of 3MR intervention or TAU (completer n 3MR = 12, TAU = 18). Several measures (PCL-5, BDI-II, OQ-45-2, and the M.I.N.I. 5.0.0.) were administered to measure symptoms of PTSD and depression and scores of overall well-being at pre, post, and a three-month follow-up measurement. Analyses suggest that symptoms of PTSD and depression in the 3MR condition decreased, and overall well-being increased between pre and post measurements. Results did not indicate any clear differences between the treatment conditions over time which suggests that treatment gains of the 3MR intervention seem no less than those of TAU. Finally, both treatment conditions produced similar remission rates of PTSD and depression. Therefore, the 3MR intervention could possibly constitute an appropriate treatment alternative. The small sample size as well as evident drop-out rates in the 3MR condition (45%) do warrant further research. The procedures of this study were approved by the Medical Ethical Research Committee (MERC) of the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam (MEC-NL46279.078.13) and pre-registered via ClinicalTrials.gov (Protocol Record CI1-12-S028-1).

Boosting long-term effects of degraded memories via acute stress.

Combining recall of an emotional memory with simultaneous horizontal eye movements (i.e., Recall + EM) reduces memory aversiveness. However, the long-term persistence of this effect is inconsistent across studies. Given that stress may aid in the consolidation of memories, we examined whether acute stress can boost the long-term effects of degraded memories. To test this, participants recalled two negative memories, which were assigned to a Recall + EM or Recall Only condition. Before and after each intervention they rated memory aversiveness (i.e., immediate effects) followed by a stress-induction or control procedure. After a 24h-period, participants rated each memory again (i.e., long-term effects). We found that Recall + EM produces immediate effects but that these effects dissolve over time. Moreover, acute stress did not boost potential long-term effects of Recall + EM. Degraded memories were not retained better by applying stress. We discuss these results and how long-term effectiveness may still be achieved.

Verbal suggestions fail to modulate expectations about the effectiveness of a laboratory model of EMDR therapy: Results of two preregistered studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For many psychotherapies, like Eye Movement and Desensitization Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy, there is an ongoing discussion about the role of specific versus non-specific mechanisms in their effectiveness However, experimental research directly examining the potential role of non-specific mechanisms is scarce. Here, we address the role of a non-specific factor that is often put forward for EMDR, namely treatment effectiveness expectations, within a laboratory model of EMDR therapy. METHODS: In a lab-based (N = 96) and an online experiment (N = 173), we gave participants verbal instructions to manipulate their treatment expectations. Instructions emphasized EMDR's effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Then, participants were asked to recollect an unpleasant autobiographical memory with or without making eye-movements. RESULTS: In line with previous studies, we found significant reductions of reported vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories in the eye-movements condition. These reductions did not differ between the verbal suggestions conditions in both experiments, suggesting a limited effect of treatment effectiveness suggestions. LIMITATIONS: Treatment effectiveness expectations were not successfully manipulated by the suggestions manipulation. This suggests that treatment expectations may be more difficult to influence than anticipated, thus limiting the interpretation of our findings. CONCLUSIONS: These findings tentatively corroborate the results of two earlier reports, suggesting that the effects of verbal suggestions about treatment effectiveness in a laboratory model of EMDR therapy may be limited.

Making eye movements during imaginal exposure leads to short-lived memory effects compared to imaginal exposure alone.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A plethora of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) analogue studies has shown that, in the short term, making eye movements (EM) during brief imaginal exposure ("recall + EM") blurs memories more than just imaginal exposure ("recall only"). Yet, results of the few studies that included a follow-up test are inconsistent. We improved this paradigm's ecological validity by including an extended intervention phase and multiple assessments per phase. We hypothesized that recall + EM results in larger immediate and 24 h reductions in memory vividness, negative valence, and distress than recall alone. We explored the persistence of the effects, as well as the predictive value of memory characteristics and individual differences. METHODS: Students (N = 100) selected a negative autobiographical memory and were randomized to recall + EM or recall alone; both interventions lasted 32 intervals of 24s. During the interventions they rated the memory after every four intervals. RESULTS: After 4 × 24s intervention, recall + EM resulted in memory deflation, while recall only caused memory inflation. After the full intervention (i.e., 32 × 24s), both conditions resulted in immediate and 24 h reductions on all outcome measures. Crucially, memory effects in the recall + EM condition partially relapsed 24 h later, while the effects in the recall only condition persisted. Change patterns were hardly explained by predictive variables. LIMITATIONS: We used a non-clinical sample; replication in clinical samples is warranted. CONCLUSION: Making EM during imaginal exposure leads to short-lived effects compared to imaginal exposure alone. However, EM may offer a response aid for those who avoid imaginal exposure.

The effects of dual-tasks on intrusive memories following analogue trauma.

Patients with post-traumatic stress disorder frequently and involuntarily experience intrusions, which are strongly linked to the trauma hotspot. Voluntary memory characteristics (i.e., vividness and unpleasantness) of this hotspot can be reduced by performing a dual-task, such as making horizontal eye movements, which is frequently used in Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing. We tested whether such dual-task interventions would also reduce involuntary memory (i.e., intrusions). Moreover, we examined if changes in hotspot vividness and unpleasantness predicted intrusion frequency. Additionally, we examined whether the effects were dependent on dual-task modality. We tested this in three experiments. Participants watched a trauma film and performed one of the interventions 10-min post-film (1) Recall + Eye movements, (2) Recall + Counting, or (3) No-Task Control. Before and after the intervention, participants rated the hotspot vividness and unpleasantness. They recorded intrusive memories about the film in a diary for a week. Unexpectedly, we found that hotspot vividness and unpleasantness ratings were not affected by the intervention. However, the prolonged (experiment 2), but not standard (experiment 1), dual-task interventions resulted in a lower number of intrusions, regardless of modality. However, this effect was not replicated in experiment 3. We discuss potential explanations and present suggestions for future research.

On EMDR: Measuring the working memory taxation of various types of eye (non-)movement conditions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A recent, large randomized controlled trial employing different forms of eye (non-)movements in eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) showed that fixating the eyes either on a therapist's moving or non-moving hand led to equal reductions in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, numerous EMDR lab analogue studies found that eye movements produce larger memory effects than eyes stationary. These beneficial effects are typically explained by differences in working memory (WM) taxation. We tested the degree of WM taxation of several eye (non-)movement conditions used in the clinical trial. METHODS: All participants (N = 40) performed: (1) eyes moving by following the experimenter's moving finger, (2) eyes fixed on the experimenter's stationary finger, (3) eyes closed, or (4) looking unfocused into the room. Simultaneously they performed a simple reaction time task. Reaction times are an objective index of the extent to which different dual attention tasks tax WM. RESULTS: Eyes moving is more taxing than eyes fixed, while eyes fixed did not differ from eyes unfocused. All conditions were more taxing than eyes closed. LIMITATIONS: We studied WM taxation in a laboratory setting; no clinical interventions were applied. CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous lab studies, making eye movements was more taxing than eyes fixed. We discuss why this effect was not observed for reductions in PTSD symptoms in the clinical trial (e.g., differences in dependent variables, sample population, and intervention duration). For more comprehensive future insights, we recommend integration of mechanistically focused lab analogue studies and patient-oriented clinical studies.

No evidence for the inverted U-Curve: More demanding dual tasks cause stronger aversive memory degradation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Simultaneously making eye movements and recalling a memory leads to competition in working memory (WM), which reduces memory vividness and emotionality. The dose-response relationship between WM taxation and aversive memory degradation is predicted to be either linear (i.e., more cognitively demanding tasks exhibit stronger effects) or follow an inverted U-curve (i.e., there should not be too little, but also not too much taxation). METHODS: Participants (N = 44) recalled four aversive autobiographical memories under four conditions that differed in WM taxation: complex, intermediate, simple, or no counting. Before and after each intervention, and at 24 h follow-up, participants recalled the aversive memory and rated it on vividness and unpleasantness. Using a Bayesian approach the linear and inverted U-shape relationships were directly compared. RESULTS: Pretest to posttest drops in vividness and unpleasantness became larger with increased WM taxation of the counting conditions. There was no support for either hypotheses from pretest to follow-up for memory unpleasantness, whereas for memory vividness anecdotal evidence was found for a linear relationship. LIMITATIONS: A reaction time (RT) task was used to select counting tasks of varying difficulties. However, the validity of this task appears to be compromised under very strenuous conditions. Higher levels of WM taxation might have been possible with more difficult counting tasks. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence for a linear dose-response relationship between WM taxation and memory degradation immediately after the intervention, and some unconvincing evidence for this pattern one day later. There was no evidence for an inverted U-curve.

Dual-tasking during recall of negative memories or during visual perception of images: Effects on vividness and emotionality.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Several treatments are effective in reducing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. We tested the effectiveness of an experimental intervention that consists of elements from two of these: virtual reality (VR) exposure therapy and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing. The latter is characterized by a dual-task approach: the patient holds a traumatic memory in mind while simultaneously making voluntary eye movements, resulting in reduced vividness and emotionality of the traumatic memory. If the experimental intervention is effective, it could provide a useful approach for highly avoidant individuals. METHODS: Participants recalled negative memories induced by a VR paradigm. The experimental group viewed VR screenshots that represented these negative memories while carrying out a dual-task. One control group recalled negative memories while carrying out the same dual-task (a standard dual-task condition) and another merely viewed the VR screenshots. Pre-to-post changes in self-rated memory vividness/emotionality were measured. RESULTS: The results indicate that viewing a screenshot only was outperformed by both dual-task interventions in terms of reductions in vividness/emotionality. Furthermore, the dual-task interventions had a comparable impact on vividness, but the screenshot variant led to greater decreases in emotionality. LIMITATIONS: Changes in memory vividness/emotionality were only assessed shortly after the interventions and no measures of avoidance behavior were included in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Looking at an image in VR that represents a memory while carrying out a dual-task may be at least as effective as recalling the memory during the dual-task. Interestingly, visually supporting a negative memory does not seem to prevent memory degrading by dual-tasking.

The Effect of modality specific interference on working memory in recalling aversive auditory and visual memories.

Both auditory and visual emotional memories can be made less emotional by loading working memory (WM) during memory recall. Taxing WM during recall can be modality specific (giving an auditory [visuospatial] load during recall of an auditory [visual] memory) or cross modal (an auditory load during visual recall or vice versa). We tested whether modality specific loading taxes WM to a larger extent than cross modal loading. Ninety-six participants undertook a visual and auditory baseline Random Interval Repetition task (i.e. responding as fast as possible to a visual or auditory stimulus by pressing a button). Then, participants recalled a distressing visual and auditory memory, while performing the same visual and auditory Random Interval Repetition task. Increased reaction times (compared to baseline) were indicative of WM loading. Using Bayesian statistics, we compared five models in terms of general and modality specific taxation. There was support for the model describing the effect on WM of dual tasking in general, irrespective of modality specificity, and for the model describing the effect of modality specific loading. Both models combined gained the most support. The results suggest a general effect of dual tasking on taxing WM and a superimposed effect of taxing in matched modality.

Modification of episodic memories by novel learning: a failed replication study.

Background: After reactivation, memories can become unstable and sensitive to modification before they are restored into long-term memory. Using behavioural manipulations, reactivated memories may be disrupted via the mechanism of interference (i.e. novel learning). In a laboratory study, Wichert et al. (2013a) showed that new learning after reactivation changed episodic memory, while new learning alone or reactivation alone did not. Objective: Given the potential clinical application of such a procedure in trauma-focused psychological treatments, such as CBT or EMDR, the aim of this study was to replicate Wichert et al. Method: On Day 1, participants (N = 96) viewed and recalled a series of emotional and non-emotional pictures. Then, participants were randomized to one of four groups. One week later, on Day 8, Group 1 reactivated the previously learned pictures and learned new pictures. To control for specific effects of reactivation or new learning, Group 2 only reactivated the previously learned pictures, and Group 3 only learned new pictures. Group 4 received no reactivation and no new learning. On Day 9, all groups indicated for each picture out of a series whether they had seen it on Day 1. Results: The data were analysed using Bayesian hypothesis testing, which allows for quantifying the evidence in favour of the alternative and the null hypothesis. In general, results showed that Group 1 recognized fewer pictures from Day 1 compared to Groups 2 and 4 on Day 9. However, the expected difference between new learning following reactivation (i.e. Group 1) and new learning alone (i.e. Group 3) was not substantially supported by the data for any of our dependent measures. Conclusions: We replicated some of the findings by Wichert et al., but did not find substantial support for the critical difference between new learning following reactivation and new learning alone.

Exploring expectation effects in EMDR: does prior treatment knowledge affect the degrading effects of eye movements on memories?

Background: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective psychological treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. Recalling a memory while simultaneously making eye movements (EM) decreases a memory's vividness and/or emotionality. It has been argued that non-specific factors, such as treatment expectancy and experimental demand, may contribute to the EMDR's effectiveness. Objective: The present study was designed to test whether expectations about the working mechanism of EMDR would alter the memory attenuating effects of EM. Two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, we examined the effects of pre-existing (non-manipulated) knowledge of EMDR in participants with and without prior knowledge. In Experiment 2, we experimentally manipulated prior knowledge by providing participants without prior knowledge with correct or incorrect information about EMDR's working mechanism. Method: Participants in both experiments recalled two aversive, autobiographical memories during brief sets of EM (Recall+EM) or keeping eyes stationary (Recall Only). Before and after the intervention, participants scored their memories on vividness and emotionality. A Bayesian approach was used to compare two competing hypotheses on the effects of (existing/given) prior knowledge: (1) Prior (correct) knowledge increases the effects of Recall+EM vs. Recall Only, vs. (2) prior knowledge does not affect the effects of Recall+EM. Results: Recall+EM caused greater reductions in memory vividness and emotionality than Recall Only in all groups, including the incorrect information group. In Experiment 1, both hypotheses were supported by the data: prior knowledge boosted the effects of EM, but only modestly. In Experiment 2, the second hypothesis was clearly supported over the first: providing knowledge of the underlying mechanism of EMDR did not alter the effects of EM. Conclusions: Recall+EM appears to be quite robust against the effects of prior expectations. As Recall+EM is the core component of EMDR, expectancy effects probably contribute little to the effectiveness of EMDR treatment.

Intervention strength does not differentially affect memory reconsolidation of strong memories.

Recently, it has become clear that retrieval (i.e., reactivation) of consolidated memories may return these memories into a labile state before they are restored into long-term memory ('reconsolidation'). Using behavioral manipulations, reactivated memories can be disrupted via the mechanism of novel learning. In the present study, we investigated whether changing a strong memory during reconsolidation depends on the strength of novel learning. To test this, participants (N=144) in six groups acquired a relatively strong memory on Day 1 by viewing and recalling a series of pictures three times. On Day 8, these pictures were reactivated in three groups, and they were not reactivated in the other three groups. Then, participants viewed and recalled new pictures once (weak new learning) or three times (strong new learning), or they did not learn any new pictures. On Day 9, participants performed a recognition test in which their memory for Day 1 pictures was assessed. Two main results are noted. First, the groups that reactivated pictures from Day 1 and received weak or strong new learning did not differ in memory performance. Second, these two groups consistently performed similar to groups that controlled for new learning without reactivation. Because these results contradict what was expected based on the reconsolidation hypothesis, we discuss possible explanations and implications.

Successfully controlling intrusive memories is harder when control must be sustained.

After unpleasant events, people often experience intrusive memories that undermine their peace of mind. In response, they often suppress these unwanted memories from awareness. Such efforts may fail, however, when inhibitory control demands are high due to the need to sustain control, or when fatigue compromises inhibitory capacity. Here we examined how sustained inhibitory demand affected intrusive memories in the Think/No-Think paradigm. To isolate intrusions, participants reported, trial-by-trial, whether their preceding attempt to suppress retrieval had triggered retrieval of the memory they intended to suppress. Such counter-intentional retrievals provide a laboratory model of the sort of involuntary retrieval that may underlie intrusive memories. Using this method, we found that longer duration trials increased the probability of an intrusion. Moreover, on later No-Think trials, control over intrusions suddenly declined, with longer trial durations triggering more relapses of items that had been previously been purged. Thus, the challenges of controlling retrieval appear to cause a decline in control over time, due to a change in state, such as fatigue. These findings raise the possibility that characteristics often true of people with psychiatric disorders - such as compromised sleep, and increased demand on control - may contribute to difficulties in suppressing intrusive memories.

Blurring emotional memories using eye movements: individual differences and speed of eye movements.

BACKGROUND: In eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR), patients make eye movements (EM) while recalling traumatic memories. Making EM taxes working memory (WM), which leaves less resources available for imagery of the memory. This reduces memory vividness and emotionality during future recalls. WM theory predicts that individuals with small working memory capacities (WMCs) benefit more from low levels of taxing (i.e., slow EM) whereas individuals with large WMC benefit more from high levels of taxing (i.e., fast EM). OBJECTIVE: We experimentally examined and tested four prespecified hypotheses regarding the role of WMC and EM speed in reducing emotionality and vividness ratings: 1) EM-regardless of WMC and EM speed-are more effective compared to no dual task, 2) increasing EM speed only affects the decrease in memory ratings irrespective of WMC, 3) low-WMC individuals-compared to high-WMC individuals-benefit more from making either type of EM, 4) the EM intervention is most effective when-as predicted by WM theory-EM are adjusted to WMC. METHOD: Undergraduates with low (n=31) or high (n=35) WMC recalled three emotional memories and rated vividness and emotionality before and after each condition (recall only, recall + slow EM, and recall + fast EM). RESULTS: Contrary to the theory, the data do not support the hypothesis that EM speed should be adjusted to WMC (hypothesis 4). However, the data show that a dual task in general is more effective in reducing memory ratings than no dual task (hypothesis 1), and that a more cognitively demanding dual task increases the intervention's effectiveness (hypothesis 2). CONCLUSIONS: Although adjusting EM speed to an individual's WMC seems a straightforward clinical implication, the data do not show any indication that such a titration is helpful.

Speed Matters: Relationship between Speed of Eye Movements and Modification of Aversive Autobiographical Memories.

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an efficacious treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. In EMDR, patients recall a distressing memory and simultaneously make eye movements (EM). Both tasks are considered to require limited working memory (WM) resources. Because this leaves fewer resources available for memory retrieval, the memory should become less vivid and less emotional during future recall. In EMDR analogue studies, a standardized procedure has been used, in which participants receive the same dual task manipulation of 1 EM cycle per second (1 Hz). From a WM perspective, the WM taxation of the dual task might be titrated to the WM taxation of the memory image. We hypothesized that highly vivid images are more affected by high WM taxation and less vivid images are more affected by low WM taxation. In study 1, 34 participants performed a reaction time task, and rated image vividness, and difficulty of retrieving an image, during five speeds of EM and no EM. Both a high WM taxing frequency (fast EM; 1.2 Hz) and a low WM taxing frequency (slow EM; 0.8 Hz) were selected. In study 2, 72 participants recalled three highly vivid aversive autobiographical memory images (n = 36) or three less vivid images (n = 36) under each of three conditions: recall + fast EM, recall + slow EM, or recall only. Multi-level modeling revealed a consistent pattern for all outcome measures: recall + fast EM led to less emotional, less vivid and more difficult to retrieve images than recall + slow EM and recall only, and the effects of recall + slow EM felt consistently in between the effects of recall + fast EM and recall only, but only differed significantly from recall + fast EM. Crucially, image vividness did not interact with condition on the decrease of emotionality over time, which was inconsistent with the prediction. Implications for understanding the mechanisms of action in memory modification and directions for future research are discussed.

Taxing Working Memory during Retrieval of Emotional Memories Does Not Reduce Memory Accessibility When Cued with Reminders.

Earlier studies have shown that when individuals recall an emotional memory while simultaneously doing a demanding dual-task [e.g., playing Tetris, mental arithmetic, making eye movements (EM)], this reduces self-reported vividness and emotionality of the memory. These effects have been found up to 1 week later, but have largely been confined to self-report ratings. This study examined whether this dual-tasking intervention reduces memory performance (i.e., accessibility of emotional memories). Undergraduates (N = 60) studied word-image pairs and rated the retrieved image on vividness and emotionality when cued with the word. Then they viewed the cues and recalled the images with or without making EM. Finally, they re-rated the images on vividness and emotionality. Additionally, fragments from images from all conditions were presented and participants identified which fragment was paired earlier with which cue. Findings showed no effect of the dual-task manipulation on self-reported ratings and latency responses. Several possible explanations for the lack of effects are discussed, but the cued recall procedure in our experiment seems to explain the absence of effects best. The study demonstrates boundaries to the effects of the "dual-tasking" procedure.

Emotional and non-emotional memories are suppressible under direct suppression instructions.

Research on retrieval suppression has produced varying results concerning whether negatively valenced memories are more or less suppressible than neutral memories. This variability may arise if, across studies, participants adopt different approaches to memory control. Cognitive and neurobiological research points to two mechanisms that achieve retrieval suppression: thought-substitution and direct suppression (Benoit & Anderson, 2012; Bergström, de Fockert, & Richardson-Klavehn, 2009). Using the Think/No-think paradigm, this study examined whether participants can inhibit neutral and negatively valenced memories, using a uniform direct suppression strategy. Importantly, when strategy was controlled, negative and neutral items were comparably inhibited. Participants reported high compliance with direct suppression instructions, and success at controlling awareness predicted forgetting. These findings provide the first evidence that direct suppression can impair negatively valenced events, and suggest that variability in forgetting negative memories in prior studies is unlikely to arise from difficulty using direct suppression to control emotionally negative experiences.

Norms of valence, arousal, dominance, and age of acquisition for 4,300 Dutch words.

This article presents norms of valence/pleasantness, activity/arousal, power/dominance, and age of acquisition for 4,300 Dutch words, mainly nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and verbs. The norms are based on ratings with a 7-point Likert scale by independent groups of students from two Belgian (Ghent and Leuven) and two Dutch (Rotterdam and Leiden-Amsterdam) samples. For each variable, we obtained high split-half reliabilities within each sample and high correlations between samples. In addition, the valence ratings of a previous, more limited study (Hermans & De Houwer, Psychologica Belgica, 34:115-139, 1994) correlated highly with those of the present study. Therefore, the new norms are a valuable source of information for affective research in the Dutch language.