The Effectiveness of Dual-task Interventions for Modulating Emotional Memories in the Laboratory: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Persistent emotional memories and intrusive mental images can be weakened by executing a demanding dual-task during recollection of those images and memories. According to working memory (WM) theories, such dual-task interventions are effective because they limit the amount of cognitive resources available for the processing of emotional memories. However, there is still ongoing debate about the extent to which and under what conditions dual-task interventions are effective to interfere with emotional memories. In the current meta-analysis, we assessed k = 44 laboratory experiments investigating the effects of dual-task interventions on negative and positive memories. The effect was measured with the raw mean reduction in vividness and emotionality self-report ratings of emotional memories before compared to after the intervention on 100-point rating scales. Results showed that the dual-task interventions made both negative and positive memories less vivid (mean reduction negative images = 10.83, 95% CI = [8.15, 13.52]; mean reduction positive images = 12.48, 95% CI = [6.73, 15.39]) and less emotional (mean reduction negative images = 11.34, 95% CI = [7.38, 15.30]; mean reduction positive images = 5.35, 95% CI = [2.15, 8.54]). Several moderators were tested and are discussed in the light of WM theories.

Tell me all about it: Narrated memories are less emotional than imagined memories

“…The immediate effect of recall mode on emotion is consistent with Vrana et al's (1986) finding that imagining experimenter-provided scenarios increases physiological responses more than silently reading them. It is also consistent with the many Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR)-related laboratory studies showing that concurrent tasks such as side-to-side eye movements that reduce the vividness of autobiographical memories also reduce their emotionality (e.g., Barrowcliff et al, 2004;Mertens et al, 2021;Smeets et al, 2012, for metaanalytic evidence on the efficacy of EMDR, see Lewis et al, 2020 andWagner, 2006; for evidence supporting the contribution of eye movements to EMDR effects, see Lee & Cuijpers, 2013).…”

Investigating the frequency of intrusive memories after 24 hours using a visuospatial interference intervention: a follow-up and extension

“…The underlying assumption is that concurrent interference can occur when performing two tasks simultaneously that involves competition for working memory resources, thus less capacity is available to process the troubling memory, which consequently will become less vivid and less emotional. In line with this, a recent meta-analysis by Mertens, Lund, and Engelhard ( 2020 ) demonstrated that emotional memories are indeed reduced in intensity if one recalls them while simultaneously performing an unrelated yet demanding task.…”

Intrusive memories following disaster: Relationship with peritraumatic responses and later affect.

“…First, individuals who are likely to be exposed to trauma, such as firefighters or disaster first responders, might receive training in the management of their own peritraumatic reactions prior to exposure (Wild et al, 2018). Second, interventions might be devised to reduce certain peritraumatic reactions in survivors immediately after trauma exposure (Iyadurai et al, 2018), such as using dual-task interventions (Mertens et al, 2020) like Tetris to reduce excessive sensory-based processing of the traumatic memory (Horsch et al, 2017). Third, simple screening instruments measuring particularly harmful peritraumatic phenomena might be administered to trauma survivors soon after exposure as a tool to identify individuals at increased risk of developing PTSD.…”