Abstract

Suppressing unwanted memories can impair their later recall. Recent work shows that this forgetting is achieved by at least two mechanisms supported by distinct neural systems: thought substitution and direct suppression (Benoit & Anderson, 2012). Here, we examined whether direct suppression, thought to be achieved by down-regulation of hippocampal activity, can disrupt memory of aversive scenes, and, if so, whether this disruption is linked to people’s perception of their ability to control intrusive thoughts. We presented participants with strong naturalistic reminders to aversive scenes and asked them to either covertly retrieve or directly suppress the associated scenes. Later, participants were cued with the reminders and asked to recall the scenes in detail. Direct suppression reduced recall probability of the scenes and also reduced the number of details recalled, even when scenes were remembered. Deficits in recall arose for minor details but also for details central to each scene’s gist. Participants with higher self-perceived control abilities over intrusive thoughts showed greater forgetting than did those reporting lower levels of control. These findings suggest that inhibitory processes underlying direct suppression can disrupt retention of aversive visual memories and link those processes to individual differences in control over intrusive thoughts in everyday life. These findings reinforce the possibility that inhibition may be less efficient in people likely to acquire posttraumatic stress disorder in the wake of a traumatic experience.

Highlights

  • Suppressing unwanted memories can impair their later recall

  • It is possible that inhibitory control reduces traumatic intrusions (e.g., Aupperle, Melrose, Stein, & Paulus, 2012; Levy & Anderson, 2008; Wessel, Overwijk, Verwoerd, & de Vrieze, 2008), the case for whether the mechanisms engaged by direct suppression instructions impair complex, aversive memories is unclear

  • No study showing suppression-induced forgetting for emotional material, such as autobiographical memories (Noreen & MacLeod, 2013), aversive scenes (Depue, Banich, & Curran, 2006; Depue et al, 2007), or negative word pairs (Hertel & McDaniel, 2010; Joormann, Hertel, Brozovich, & Gotlib, 2005; Joormann, Hertel, Lemoult, & Gotlib, 2009), has used direct suppression instructions, making it unclear how much forgetting was caused by thought substitution

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Suppressing unwanted memories can impair their later recall. Recent work shows that this forgetting is achieved by at least two mechanisms supported by distinct neural systems: thought substitution and direct suppression (Benoit & Anderson, 2012). No study showing suppression-induced forgetting for emotional material, such as autobiographical memories (Noreen & MacLeod, 2013), aversive scenes (Depue, Banich, & Curran, 2006; Depue et al, 2007), or negative word pairs (Hertel & McDaniel, 2010; Joormann, Hertel, Brozovich, & Gotlib, 2005; Joormann, Hertel, Lemoult, & Gotlib, 2009), has used direct suppression instructions, making it unclear how much forgetting was caused by thought substitution It remains unclear whether the inhibition process measured with direct suppression is engaged in naturally arising cases of memory control in everyday life

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call