Cited by 295Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesIdentity, Memory, and Therapy

Coping with emotions past: the neural bases of regulating affect associated with negative autobiographical memories

Open access
Kross, Ethan, Davidson, Matthew, Weber, Jochen, Ochsner, Kevin·2009·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Although the ability to adaptively reflect on negative autobiographical experiences without ruminating is critical to mental health, to our knowledge no research has directly examined the neural systems underlying this process.Methods Sixteen participants were scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they focused on negative autobiographical memories using cognitive strategies designed to facilitate (feel strategy) versus undermine (analyze and accept strategies) rumination.Results Two key findings were obtained. First, consistent with prior emotion regulation research using image-based stimuli, left prefrontal activity was observed during the implementation of all three strategies. Second, activity in a network of regions involved in self-referential processing and emotion, including subgenual anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, was highest in response to the feel strategy and lowest for the accept strategy. This pattern of activation mirrored participants' self-reports of negative affect when engaging in each strategy.Conclusions These findings shed light on the brain regions that distinguish adaptive versus maladaptive forms of reflecting on negative autobiographical memories and offer a novel, ecologically valid route to exploring the neural bases of emotion regulation using fMRI.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.10.019

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased activity in areas associated with perspective taking predicted lower negative affect when decentering relative to a comparison condition, including the superior parietal lobule, caudate and medial frontal gyrus.

    “Also, increased activity in areas associated with perspective taking predicted lower negative affect when decentering relative to the comparison condition – this included the superior parietal lobule, caudate and medial frontal gyrus.”

    From Decentering as a core component in the psychological treatment and prevention of youth anxiety and depression: a narrative review and insight report (2021) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Results report that decreases in negative affect on accept versus feel trials correlated with activity in the caudate, superior parietal lobule, and medial frontal gyrus. The paper describes the accept strategy as psychologically distancing oneself from feelings, but the cited passage characterizes those regions as involved in affect downregulation, not specifically as areas associated with perspective taking. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • When adults decenter from negative memories relative to a comparison condition, there is lower activity in areas associated with cognitive conflict and affective processing, including the medial and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and subgenual anterior cingulate.

    “Findings suggest lower activity in areas associated with (intrapersonal) cognitive conflict and affective processing when decentering from negative memories relative to a comparison condition in which no attempt was made to alter ones experiences – brain regions included the medial and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex as well as the subgenual anterior cingulate45.”
  • Acceptance may facilitate self-distancing and reappraisal of negative autobiographical memories, corresponding with decreased subgenual ACC and medial PFC activity.

    “there is some suggestion that acceptance may facilitate self-distancing and reappraisal of negative autobiographical memories, corresponding with comparative decreases in subgenual ACC and medial PFC activity (Kross, Davidson, Weber, & Ochsner, 2009).”

    From Mechanisms of mindfulness training: Monitor and Acceptance Theory (MAT (2017) · cites this paper as Kross, Davidson, Weber, & Ochsner, 2009

  • Subgenual cortex activity positively correlates with negative affect in healthy subjects.

    “activity within the subgenual cortex positively correlates with negative affect in healthy subjects (56–58)”
  • Participants provided cue phrases before the day of fMRI scanning using a procedure developed in prior research.

    “Participants provided these cue phrases before the day of fMRI scanning using a procedure developed in prior research64”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [29]Siegle GJ Carter CS Thase ME 2006 Use of fMRI to predict recovery from unipolar depression with cognitive behavior therapy Am J Psychiatry 163 735 738 16585452
  2. [41]Ochsner KN Gross JJ 2007 Cognitive emotion regulation: Insights from social cognitive and affective neuroscience Curr Dir Psychol Sci 17 153 158 PMC4241349 25425765

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kross, E., Davidson, M., Weber, J., & Ochsner, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Kross, Ethan
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-03
Volume
65
Issue
5
Pages
361-366
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158177648
Cited by
295
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 17
FWCI
5.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH076137, MH076137)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
Keywords
emotion regulation, rumination, self-referential processing, subgenual anterior cingulate cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, left prefrontal cortex, negative affect, cognitive strategies
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Affect, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Emotions, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Prefrontal Cortex, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review