CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 81Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMemory Processes and Influences

Interference resolution in major depression

Open access
Joormann, J., Nee, D. E., Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., Gotlib, I. H.·2010·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
DOI 10.3758/cabn.10.1.21PMC PMC2845922
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In two experiments, we investigated individual differences in the ability to resolve interference in participants diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD). Participants were administered the "Ignore/Suppress" task, a short-term memory task composed of two steps. In Step 1 ("ignore"), participants were instructed to memorize a set of stimuli while ignoring simultaneously presented irrelevant material. In Step 2 ("suppress"), participants were instructed to forget a subset of the previously memorized material. The ability to resolve interference was indexed by response latencies on two recognition tasks in which participants decided whether a probe was a member of the target set. In Step 1, we compared response latencies to probes from the to-be-ignored list with response latencies to nonrecently presented items. In Step 2, we compared response latencies to probes from the to-be-suppressed list with response latencies to nonrecently presented items. The results indicate that, compared with control participants, depressed participants exhibited increased interference in the "suppress" but not in the "ignore" step of the task, when the stimuli were negative words. No group differences were obtained when we presented letters instead of emotional words. These findings indicate that depression is associated with difficulty in removing irrelevant negative material from short-term memory.

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 · 10.3758/cabn.10.1.21

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Rumination is associated with decreases in the likelihood of new reward-based learning, weakens instrumental action, and reduces engagement of potentially rewarding social networks.

    “rumination is associated with decreases in the likelihood of new reward-based learning, weakens instrumental action, and engagement of potentially rewarding social networks41–43 [contextual learning consequences].”

    From AN OPEN TRIAL OF EMOTION REGULATION THERAPY FOR GENERALIZED ANXIETY DISORDER AND COOCCURRING DEPRESSION. (2015) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Study 2 Discussion links rumination to difficulty removing irrelevant negative material from short-term memory. Searches for reward-based learning, instrumental action, and rewarding social engagement found no passage in our copy addressing those claimed consequences. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. Jonides J Lewis RL Nee DE Lustig CA Berman MG Sledge Moore K The mind and brain of short-term memory Annual Review of Psychology 2008 59 1 32 PMC3971378 17854286

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Joormann, J., Nee, D. E., Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Gotlib, I. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Joormann, J.
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-03-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
21-33
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
DOI
10.3758/cabn.10.1.21
PMC
PMC2845922
OpenAlex
W2168900050
Cited by
81
References
62
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
FWCI
5.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH-60655, MH59259, R01MH060655, R01MH059259)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
major depressive disorder, interference resolution, short-term memory, suppression, forgetting, emotional words, negative words, individual differences, memory interference, recognition memory
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Decision Making, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Individuality, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reaction Time, Repression, Psychology, 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