Remembering as an observer: How is autobiographical memory retrieval vantage perspective linked to depression?

Abstract

It has long been noted that the emotional impact of an autobiographical memory is associated with the vantage perspective from which it is recalled (Freud, 1950). Memories recalled from a first-person “field” perspective are phenomenologically rich, while third-person “observer” perspective memories contain more descriptive but less affective detail (Nigro & Neisser, 1983). Although there is some evidence that depressed individuals retrieve more observer memories than non-depressed individuals (e.g., Kuyken & Howell, 2006), little is known of the cognitive mechanisms associated with observer memories in depression. At pre- and post-treatment, 123 patients with a history of recurrent depression completed self-report measures and the autobiographical memory task (AMT). Participants also indicated the vantage perspective of the memories recalled on the AMT. Observer memories were less vivid, older, and more frequently rehearsed. The tendency to retrieve observer perspective memories was associated with greater negative self-evaluation, lower dispositional mindfulness, and greater use of avoidance. Furthermore, participants who recalled more field perspective memories at pre-treatment had lower levels of post-treatment depression, controlling for pre-treatment levels of depression and trait rumination. We apply contemporary accounts from social and cognitive psychology, and propose potential mechanisms that link the tendency to retrieve observer perspective memories to depression.

Keywords:

• Depression
• Memory
• Vantage
• Avoidance
• Self-evaluation
• Mindfulness

Acknowledgements

The authors are listed in alphabetical order and contributed equally to the preparation of this paper. The Exeter MBCT Trial comprised: Willem Kuyken (principal investigator); Sarah Byford, Rod S Taylor, and Ed Watkins (co-investigators); Emily Holden and Kat White (research staff), Barbara Barrett, Richard Byng, Alison Evans, Eugene Mullan, and John D. Teasdale (collaborators). We are grateful to the patients who participated in the trial, the physicians, and other healthcare staff who enabled the trial. This trial was registered (ISRCTN12720810) and was funded by the UK Medical Research Council (TP 72167).

Notes

¹Due to a violation of assumption of homogeneity of variances (Levene's Test), equal variances were not assumed, hence adjusted df.