Emotional and temporal order effects – a comparison between word-cued and important autobiographical memories recall orders

Figures & data

Table 1. Sample characteristics.

	M (SD)	Range
Age	69.34 (6.54)	59–90
Extraversion	2.20 (0.58)	1.00–3.45
Openness	2.59 (2.59)	1.42–3.92
Neuroticism	1.36 (0.68)	0.17–3.33
	n	%
Gender (female)	62	59.6
Marital status
Married	60	57.7
Divorced	20	19.2
Widowed	16	15.4
Single	8	7.7
Children^a	87	83.7
Living conditions
With partner or family member	58	63.5
Alone	37	35.6
Residential care home	1	1
Educational background
University	40	38.5
High School	16	15.4
Realschule^b	32	30.8
Volks-/Hauptschule^c	16	15.4

^a Reflects the number and percentage of participants answering “yes” to this question.

^b corresponds to 10 years of formal education.

^c corresponds to 9 years of formal education.

Figure 1. Model with random intercept (ξ) and random first-order autoregressive (ρ) effects. Note that the observed indicators (Y₁ to Y_n) are centred around the latent group mean (i.e., the random intercept).

Table 2. Parameter estimates of mixed-effects autoregressive models.

	Word-cued AMs (N = 1749)			Important AMs (N = 1383)
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
Emotionality of AMs as DV
Fixed effects
Intercept (${\mu }_{\xi }$)	4.682*	4.676*	4.674*	4.540*	4.541*	4.543*
AR-effect (${\mu }_{\rho }$)	0.161*	0.159*	0.155*	0.031	0.030	0.030
Age^b		−0.023*	−0.022*		0.008	0.005
Sex^b		−0.087	−0.081		−0.322*	−0.248^†
Extraversion^b			0.229*			−0.009
Extraversion → Slope^b			−0.030			0.011
Neuroticism^b			−0.150*			−0.284*
Neuroticism → Slope^b			0.095*			0.081*
Openness^b			0.099			0.057
Openness → Slope^b			−0.047			−0.032
Random Effects
Intercept variance $\left({\sigma }_{\xi }^2\right)$	0.154*	0.148*	0.144*	0.234*	0.225*	0.212*
Slope variance $\left({\sigma }_{\rho }^2\right)$	0.021*	0.020*	0.019*	0.024*	0.021^†	0.020^†
$\mathrm{co}{r}_{\eta \left(\rho \tilde{y}\right)}$	−0.101	−0.117	−0.129	0.143	0.154	0.166
Error variance $\left({\sigma }_{ϵ}^2\right)$	4.225*	4.216*	4.212*	5.423*	5.422*	5.417*
Model fit
−2LL	7543	7536	7509	6330	6324	6301
AIC	7555	7552	7537	6342	6340	6329
Age at Event as DV
Fixed effects
Intercept (${\mu }_{\xi }$)	31.001*	31.077*	31.059*	34.607*	34.611*	34.442*
AR-effect (${\rho }_{\tilde{x}}$)	0.047^†	0.048^†	0.050^†	0.624*	0.624*	0.618*
Age^b		0.167	0.229		0.001	−0.019
Sex^b		1.272	0.354		−0.045	0.424
Extraversion^b			0.536			−0.136
Extraversion → Slope^b			−0.075^†			0.070^†
Neuroticism^b			2.845*			−1.980*
Neuroticism → Slope^b			0.019			−0.028
Openness^b			1.588			0.492
Openness → Slope^b			−0.091^†			0.002
Random effects
Intercept variance $\left({\sigma }_{\xi }^2\right)$	87.319*	86.012*	82.608*	51.525*	51.217*	41.442*
Slope variance $\left({\sigma }_{\rho \tilde{x}}^2\right)$	0.005	0.006	0.001	0.071*	0.070*	0.061*
$\mathrm{co}{r}_{\xi \left(\rho \tilde{x}\right)}$	−0.128	−0.229	−0.352	0.852*	0.871*	0.890*
Error variance $\left({\sigma }_{\delta }^2\right)$	383.273*	383.287*	383.432*	194.877*	194.862*	192.643*
Model fit
−2LL	15532	15530	15503	11313	11313	11292
AIC	15544	15546	15531	11325	11329	11320

Note: DV = dependent variable; b = variable was centred across persons (grand-mean centred); sex was dummy-coded with 0 (female) and 1 (male); −2LL = −2 × Log-Likelihood (smaller is better); AIC = Akaike’s Information Criterion (smaller is better).

*p < .05; ^†p < .10.

Figure 2. Illustration of the AR-effect of emotionality across output positions for word-cued and important autobiographical memories.

Note: The dotted line depicts the predicted emotionality of word-cued AMs; the solid line depicts the predicted emotionality of important AMs. Horizontal lines depict intercept estimates.

Figure 3. Illustration of the AR-effect of age-at-event across output positions for word-cued and important autobiographical memories.

Note: The dotted line depicts the predicted age-at-event of word-cued AMs; the solid line depicts the predicted age-at-event of important AMs. Horizontal lines depict intercept estimates.

Table A1. List of cue words (translation in parentheses) and their ratings according to emotional valence and imageability as taken from the Berlin Affective Word List (Võ et al., 2009).

Word (noun)	Valence		Imageability
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Bank (bank)	−0.24	1.16	6.35	1.16
Boot (boat)	1.05	1.43	6.05	1.29
Brief (letter)	1.50	0.90	6.42	0.86
Fernsehen (television)	0.21	1.43	6.42	0.90
Fliege (fly)	−0.95	1.10	6.14	1.17
Frosch (frog)	−0.09	1.54	6.05	1.13
Kaffee (coffee)	1.40	0.97	6.78	0.44
Kastanie (chestnut)	0.91	1.23	6.05	1.21
Keller (basement)	0.00	0.82	6.33	0.71
Lineal (ruler)	0.30	0.48	6.44	1.13
Loch (hole)	−0.90	0.74	6.11	1.05
Löffel (spoon)	0.59	0.96	6.14	1.28
Lupe (magnifier)	0.00	0.00	6.56	0.53
Markt (market)	0.80	0.79	6.22	0.67
Regen (rain)	0.32	1.77	6.77	0.71
Stern (star)	1.00	0.94	6.67	0.50
Straße (street)	0.18	0.83	6.46	0.99
Wald (forest)	1.50	0.85	6.56	0.73
Zeitung (newspaper)	0.60	1.07	6.11	1.05
Zitrone (lemon)	0.80	0.79	6.78	0.44

Note: emotional valence was rated on a 7-point scale ranging from −3 (very negative) through 0 (neutral) to +3 (very positive). The 7-point imageability scale ranged from 1 (low imageability) to 7 (high imageability).

Võ, M. L.-H., Conrad, M., Kuchinke, L., Urton, K., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). The Berlin affective word list reloaded (BAWL-R). Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 534–538. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.534

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar