↓ Skip to main content

The Effect of Emotion and Reward Contingencies on Relational Memory in Major Depression: An Eye-Movement Study with Follow-Up

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effect of Emotion and Reward Contingencies on Relational Memory in Major Depression: An Eye-Movement Study with Follow-Up
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01849
Pubmed ID
Authors

Viola L. Nemeth, Gergo Csete, Gergely Drotos, Nora Greminger, Zoltan Janka, Laszlo Vecsei, Anita Must

Abstract

Background: Episodic memory disturbances were found to constitute a potential trait marker for major depression (MD). The recall of positive or rewarding information in a relational context is specifically impaired. Eye-movement recording constitutes a novel, direct approach to examine implicit memory performance. Here we aimed to assess the effect of emotional context and implicit virtual monetary reward or loss on viewing patterns in association with relational memory in a 6-months follow-up study in MD. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with MD and 30 healthy participants were trained to associate a face (happy/sad/neutral) with a background scene. After each pair a virtual monetary reward or loss appeared briefly. During testing, scenes were presented as a cue and then overlaid with three previously studied faces. Participants were asked to recall the matching face if present (Match trials), with eye-movements and subsequent forced-choice recognition being recorded. Results: Explicit recognition of the matching face was impaired in the MD group as compared to controls. In correlation with this, viewing of the matching face was significantly reduced in the MD group. We found a significant interaction of group (MD vs HC) with the relational memory condition (Match and Non-match), facial emotion and monetary reward and loss. MD patients attended longer to previously rewarded stimuli, but significantly less to sad faces in the Match condition. The relational memory impairment persisted at follow-up and correlated with symptom severity both at baseline and follow-up. Viewing patterns associated with previous virtual reward were associated with clinical symptoms at follow-up. Conclusion: Our current results provide novel evidence for a specific relational memory impairment in MD as supported by abnormal eye-movement behavior and a deficit in explicit recognition. MD patients showed an attentional bias to rewarded stimuli and decreased viewing of sad faces when relational memory information was present.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Professor 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 36%
Neuroscience 7 10%
Engineering 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,353,667
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,259
of 30,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#348,885
of 415,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#359
of 420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 420 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.