Cited by 26Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchMemory Processes and InfluencesMemory, History, Trauma, Identity

Contextual representations increase analogue traumatic intrusions: Evidence against a dual-representation account of peri-traumatic processing

Pearson, David G.·2012·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

Background and objectives Information processing accounts of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) state that intrusive memories emerge due to a lack of integration between perceptual and contextual trauma representations in autobiographical memory. This hypothesis was tested experimentally using an analogue trauma paradigm in which participants viewed an aversive film designed to elicit involuntary recollections. Method Participants viewed scenes from the film either paired with contextual information or with the contextual information omitted. After viewing the film participants were asked to record for one week any involuntary intrusions for the film using a provided intrusions diary. Results The results revealed a significant increase in analogue intrusions for the film when viewed with contextual information in comparison to when the film was viewed with the contextual information omitted. In contrast there was no effect of contextual information on valence ratings or voluntary memory for the film, or on the reported vividness and emotionality of the intrusions. Limitations The analogue trauma paradigm may have failed to reproduce the effect of extreme stress on encoding that is postulated to occur during PTSD. Conclusions The findings have potential implications for trauma intervention as they suggest that the contextual understanding of a scene during encoding can be integral to the subsequent occurrence of traumatic intrusions. The pattern of results found in the stud…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbtep.2012.04.002

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pearson, D. G.
Affiliations
University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
Pearson, David G.
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-12
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
1026-1031
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077249271
Cited by
26
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Memory, History, Trauma, Identity
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, intrusive memories, context representation, autobiographical memory, encoding, trauma intervention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Stress, Psychological, Visual Perception

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