Age-related positivity effect: Distinct mechanisms for lexical access and episodic memory of emotional words.

Abstract

The age-related positivity effect is the tendency of older adults to preferentially process positive information over negative information when compared to younger adults (e.g., Reed & Carstensen, 2012). The aim of the study was to determine whether common and/or distinct mechanisms underlie the age-related positivity effect in lexical access and episodic memory. Fifty young and 50 older adults successively performed a progressive demasking task incorporating memory instructions, an immediate free recall task, a memory recognition task, and delayed free recalls at 20 min and 7 days. The materials included 60 words that varied in emotional valence (positive, neutral, negative) and arousal (low, high). The results revealed that distinct processes underlie the age-related positivity effect in lexical access and episodic memory. In progressive demasking, this effect emerged for both low-and high-arousal words, suggesting that it depends on automatic processes. In immediate and delayed free recall and recognition, this effect emerged for low-arousal words only, suggesting that it depends on more controlled processes. Moreover, in older adults, positivity scores correlated with well-being scores for episodic memory. These results are discussed in relation to affective aging theories. Public Significance StatementThis study suggests that in older adults compared to younger adults, remembering positive information more than negative information is important for maintaining or improving emotional well-being. This is especially the case when individuals are confronted with information of low emotional intensity. Agerelated differences also exist regarding the identification of emotional information in adults, although the function of this phenomenon is less clear.

Role of arousal, subjective significance and valence of affect in task-switching effectiveness

“…The group taking part in Experiment 1 on the other hand was significantly older than the group from Experiment 2 (around 18 years of difference on average), which leads to limited interpretation of results regarding subjective significance. It also has to be mentioned, that both emotional processing (Kappes et al, 2017;Laulan et al, 2022;Reed et al, 2014) and solving cognitive tasks (Allard & Isaacowitz, 2008;Grady, 2012) change with ageing, which means that also the results of both experiments could be compared only to a limited extent. However, as valence of the stimuli was not manipulated in Experiment 1, the results should be free from one of the most commonly reported changes in emotional processing of stimuli that develops with age, which is positivity effect (Kappes et al, 2017;Laulan et al, 2022;Reed et al, 2014).…”

“…It also has to be mentioned, that both emotional processing (Kappes et al, 2017;Laulan et al, 2022;Reed et al, 2014) and solving cognitive tasks (Allard & Isaacowitz, 2008;Grady, 2012) change with ageing, which means that also the results of both experiments could be compared only to a limited extent. However, as valence of the stimuli was not manipulated in Experiment 1, the results should be free from one of the most commonly reported changes in emotional processing of stimuli that develops with age, which is positivity effect (Kappes et al, 2017;Laulan et al, 2022;Reed et al, 2014). Nevertheless, the group taking part in Experiment 2 (students and young adults) is more in line with the specificity of participants taking part in other studies (Demanet et al, 2011;Imbir, 2016aImbir, , 2016bTae et al, 2021); thus, the results of this experiment could be concerned as comparable with previous research.…”