Enhanced Memory for both Threat and Neutral Information Under Conditions of Intergroup Threat

Abstract

Few studies have examined the effect of intergroup threat on cognitive outcomes such as memory. Different theoretical perspectives can inform how intergroup threat should affect memory for threat-relevant and neutral information, such as the mood-congruency approach, Yerkes–Dodson law, Easterbrook’s theory, and also evolutionary perspectives. To test among these, we conducted two experiments to examine how exposure to intergroup threats affected memory compared to control conditions. In study 1, we manipulated symbolic threat and examined participants’ memory for threat and neutral words. In study 2, memory performance was assessed following the induction of realistic threat. Across the studies, in the control condition participants showed better memory for threat-related than neutral information. However, participants under threat remembered neutral information as well as threat-related information. In addition, participants in the threat condition remembered threat-related information as well as participants in the control condition. The findings are discussed in terms of automatic vigilance processes but also the effects of threat on arousal and its effect on information processing. This latter perspective, suggests paradoxically, that under some circumstances involving an outgroup threat, non-threatening information about outgroups can be extensively processed.

Mood-congruent memory revisited.

“…Hence, these manipulations were perhaps not strong enough to facilitate postencoding biases, nor were they specifically matched to the encoded stimulus set (i.e., the stimuli were not normed to be amusing to match with the comedic clips). A similar concern is evident with the two experiments from Zhu et al (2015), who attempted to induce mood by having participants read brief news articles that represented intergroup threats, which entailed having participants with low socioeconomic status reading condescending quotes from high socioeconomic individuals. It is not mentioned how long participants spent on these inductions, but both experiments in the study were reported as taking only 10 min to fully complete.…”

Spontaneous microstates related to effects of low socioeconomic status on neuroticism

“…Objective socioeconomic status. Based on previous studies [48][49][50] , the family income for each month, education and occupation for mother and father were used to measure OSES. The 7-piont scale was used to rate the income: 0-600, 601-1800, 1801-3000, 3001-6000, 6001-9000 and 9001-12,000 where the unit of each number was "yuan" for RMB.…”

“…Socioeconomic status (SES) is a measurement of individual’s social and economic status relative to other people in their social hierarchy, which can be divided into objective SES (OSES) and subjective SES (SSES) 19 , 20 . The OSES was the traditional indicators of SES through the evaluation of income, education, and occupation of individuals’ family 21 , 22 , while SSES is used to evaluate “a person’s belief about his location in a status order” 23 and can be seen as perceived social position or subjective social status 24 , 25 . Considering that SSES is the cognitive average of various factors of SES, SSES is more precise evaluation of SES 20 , 26 .…”

“…Thus, we thought that the MS3 could be used to investigate the neural basis of the SES's effects on neuroticism. In the present study, MacArthur Ladder 24 , scale of OSES [48][49][50] , and Neuroticism scale of the Big Five Inventory (NS-BFI) were used to measure SSES, OSES and neuroticism respectively. Based on the mean ± 1sd, the subjects were divided into low SSES, low OSES, high SSES and high OSES four groups and the RS-EEG data of them were acquired.…”

Molecular profiling of reticular gigantocellularis neurons indicates that eNOS modulates environmentally dependent levels of arousal

“…Disorders of GA are involved in a variety of nervous system problems, including melancholic depression, bipolar disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, sleep problems, and disorders of consciousness (10). In addition, proper modulation of GA is essential for function in multiple cognitive tasks as described by the classical Yerkes-Dodson law (12)(13)(14)(15).…”