A retrospective study of negative and positive post-event processing following stressful and pleasant social interactions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Negative post-event processing (PEP) is a key maintenance factor of social anxiety, but little is known about the role positive PEP, particularly in relation to situations that are not perceived as stressful. The objective was to examine negative and positive PEP following stressful and pleasant social interactions. We were also interested in how participants remembered and described the interactions. METHODS: Young adults (n = 411) recalled a recent pleasant or stressful social interaction and indicated how much negative and positive PEP they engaged in since the interaction. They also completed questionnaires measuring social anxiety and the memory's phenomenological qualities and wrote a description of the interaction. RESULTS: Higher social anxiety was linked with more negative and less positive PEP, regardless of whether the interaction was perceived as stressful or pleasant. Participants reporting more negative PEP used more negative words in describing the interaction and their memory was more negative and emotionally intense. Those reporting more positive PEP used more positive and less negative words in their descriptions. For stressful interactions, positive PEP was related to a more positive memory; for pleasant ones, it was related to increased emotional intensity. LIMITATIONS: Limitations included the sample type (restricted age range, non-clinical) and the retrospective, cross-sectional nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide insight into PEP following stressful and pleasant social interactions. We also found preliminary evidence that positive PEP may be helpful and protective. Future studies may benefit from longitudinal and mixed methods designs.

Verbal manipulations of learning expectancy do not enhance reconsolidation.

OBJECTIVES: Pharmacological studies using propranolol suggest that if reactivation signals that new information will be learned (i.e., there is an expectation for learning) reconsolidation can be enhanced. We examined if the verbal instructions to expect new learning will enhance reconsolidation of fear memories using the post-retrieval extinction paradigm. METHODS: On day one, participants (n = 48) underwent differential fear conditioning to two images (CS+ and CS-). On day two, participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups; groups one and two had their memory for the CS+ reactivated (i.e., a single presentation of the CS+) 10 minutes prior to extinction, whereas group three did not have their memory reactivated but went right to extinction (no reactivation group). One reactivation group was told that they would learn something new about the images (expectation for learning group), and the other group was told that they would not learn anything new (no expectation for learning group). On day three, return of fear was measured following reinstatement (i.e., four shocks). Fear potentiated startle (FPS) and skin conductance response (SCR) were measured throughout. RESULTS: There was evidence of fear acquisition for participants for SCR but not FPS. With regards to reconsolidation, SCR increased for the CS+ and CS-in all groups from the end of extinction to the beginning of re-extinction (i.e., return of fear). For FPS, post-hoc tests conducted on the sub-group of participants showing fear learning showed that FPS remained stable in the two reactivation groups, but increased to the CS+, but not the CS- in the no reactivation group. IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest that a verbal manipulation of the expectation for learning may not be salient enough to enhance reconsolidation. Results are discussed in relation to theories on differences in between SCR, as a measure of cognitive awareness, and FPS, as a measure of fear.