项目法定向遗忘(通常)在临床人群中受损:一项荟萃分析。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Noah W Pevie, Maddison M Baldwin, Emily J Fawcett, Chelsea A Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett
{"title":"项目法定向遗忘(通常)在临床人群中受损:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Noah W Pevie, Maddison M Baldwin, Emily J Fawcett, Chelsea A Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett","doi":"10.1037/cep0000316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The item-method directed forgetting paradigm is a common laboratory task used to measure memory control. While impaired memory control may contribute to the development and/or maintenance of a variety of psychological disorders, comparisons between clinical and nonclinical groups using this paradigm have been inconsistent-even within the same disorder. A systematic search for related articles utilizing clinical populations was conducted revealing 823 articles of which 36 met inclusion criteria. Raw mean differences were calculated and aggregated using Bayesian multilevel random-effects models. These models revealed a significant difference in the magnitude of directed forgetting between clinical and control populations, such that clinical populations (collapsing across all disorders or combining only the critical anxiety and depression clusters) exhibited a reduced directed forgetting effect. This difference tended to be larger in clinical (as opposed to clinical-analog) populations and in older samples. These results support the notion that item-method directed forgetting provides a suitable measure of memory control sensitive to real-world control deficits and further implies that memory control deficits may contribute to mental illness (although causality remains to be determined). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":51529,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-Revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale","volume":" ","pages":"271-283"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Item-method directed forgetting is (usually) impaired in clinical populations: A meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Noah W Pevie, Maddison M Baldwin, Emily J Fawcett, Chelsea A Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/cep0000316\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The item-method directed forgetting paradigm is a common laboratory task used to measure memory control. While impaired memory control may contribute to the development and/or maintenance of a variety of psychological disorders, comparisons between clinical and nonclinical groups using this paradigm have been inconsistent-even within the same disorder. A systematic search for related articles utilizing clinical populations was conducted revealing 823 articles of which 36 met inclusion criteria. Raw mean differences were calculated and aggregated using Bayesian multilevel random-effects models. These models revealed a significant difference in the magnitude of directed forgetting between clinical and control populations, such that clinical populations (collapsing across all disorders or combining only the critical anxiety and depression clusters) exhibited a reduced directed forgetting effect. This difference tended to be larger in clinical (as opposed to clinical-analog) populations and in older samples. These results support the notion that item-method directed forgetting provides a suitable measure of memory control sensitive to real-world control deficits and further implies that memory control deficits may contribute to mental illness (although causality remains to be determined). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-Revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"271-283\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-Revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000316\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-Revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000316","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

项目法定向遗忘范式是一种常用的用于测量记忆控制的实验任务。虽然受损的记忆控制可能导致各种心理障碍的发展和/或维持,但使用这种范式的临床和非临床组之间的比较是不一致的——即使在同一种疾病中也是如此。系统检索利用临床人群的相关文献,发现823篇,其中36篇符合纳入标准。使用贝叶斯多水平随机效应模型计算和汇总原始平均差异。这些模型揭示了临床人群和对照人群在定向遗忘程度上的显著差异,例如临床人群(在所有疾病中崩溃或仅结合关键焦虑和抑郁集群)表现出减少的定向遗忘效应。这种差异在临床(相对于临床模拟)人群和老年样本中往往更大。这些结果支持了一种观点,即项目法定向遗忘提供了一种对现实世界控制缺陷敏感的记忆控制的合适测量方法,并进一步暗示记忆控制缺陷可能导致精神疾病(尽管因果关系仍有待确定)。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Item-method directed forgetting is (usually) impaired in clinical populations: A meta-analysis.

The item-method directed forgetting paradigm is a common laboratory task used to measure memory control. While impaired memory control may contribute to the development and/or maintenance of a variety of psychological disorders, comparisons between clinical and nonclinical groups using this paradigm have been inconsistent-even within the same disorder. A systematic search for related articles utilizing clinical populations was conducted revealing 823 articles of which 36 met inclusion criteria. Raw mean differences were calculated and aggregated using Bayesian multilevel random-effects models. These models revealed a significant difference in the magnitude of directed forgetting between clinical and control populations, such that clinical populations (collapsing across all disorders or combining only the critical anxiety and depression clusters) exhibited a reduced directed forgetting effect. This difference tended to be larger in clinical (as opposed to clinical-analog) populations and in older samples. These results support the notion that item-method directed forgetting provides a suitable measure of memory control sensitive to real-world control deficits and further implies that memory control deficits may contribute to mental illness (although causality remains to be determined). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology publishes original research papers that advance understanding of the field of experimental psychology, broadly considered. This includes, but is not restricted to, cognition, perception, motor performance, attention, memory, learning, language, decision making, development, comparative psychology, and neuroscience. The journal publishes - papers reporting empirical results that advance knowledge in a particular research area; - papers describing theoretical, methodological, or conceptual advances that are relevant to the interpretation of empirical evidence in the field; - brief reports (less than 2,500 words for the main text) that describe new results or analyses with clear theoretical or methodological import.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信