Indirect assessment of memory for music during anesthesia

Winograd, Eugene; Sebel, Peter S.; Goldman, William P.; Clifton, Charles; Lowdon, Jane D.

doi:10.1016/0952-8180(91)90219-d

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…20 Caseley-Rondi, Merikle, & Bowers (1994) .23 74 McClintock, Aitken, Downie, & Kenny (1990) .29 60 Steinberg, Hord, Reed, & Sebel (1993) .20 60 Van der Laan, Van Leeuwen, Sebel, Winograd, Bauman, & Bonke (1996) Ϫ.04 40 Charlton, Wang, & Russell (1993) .15 44 Cork, Kihlstrom, & Schacter (1992) Ϫ.14 25 De Roode, Jelicic, Bonke, & Bovill (1995) Ϫ.08 83 Donker, Phaf, Porcelijn, & Bonke (in press) .09 58 Jelicic, Bonke, Wolters, & Phaf (1992) .29 50 Jelicic, De Roode, Bovill, & Bonke (1992) .48 43 Khilstrom, Schacter, Cork, Hurt, & Behr (1990) .31 25 Roorda-Hrdlickova, Wolters, Bonke, & Phaf (1990) .59 81 Villemure, Plourde, Lussier, & Normandin (1993) .54 10 Westmoreland, Sebel, Winograd, & Goldman (1993) .08 48 Direct measures Bonebakker, Bonke, Klein, Wolters, Stijnen, Passchier, & Merikle (1996) .24 160 Block, Ghoneim, Sum Ping, & Ali (1991b) .06 72 Dwyer, Bennett, Eger, & Peterson (1992) .00 45 Humphreys, Asbury, & Millar (1990) Ϫ.13 20 Jelicic, Asbury, .04 41 Stolzy, Couture, & Edmonds (1987) Ϫ.04 32 Van der Laan, Van Leeuwen, Sebel, Winograd, Bauman, & Bonke (1996) .07 60 Direct measures Block, Ghoneim, Sum Ping, & Ali (1991b) .03 48 Bonebakker, Bonke, Klein, Wolters, Stijnen, Passchier, & Merikle (1996) .21 153 Dubovsky & Trustman (1976) Ϫ.09 36 Millar & Watkinson (1983) . 40 Eich, Reeves, & Katz (1985) .02 24 Jackson, Brown, & Best (1994) Ϫ.10 20 Schwender, Madler, Klasing, Peter, & Poppel (1994) a .30 45 Stolzy, Couture, & Edmonds (1986) .46 40 Westmoreland, Sebel, Winograd, & Goldman (1993) Ϫ.01 48 Winograd, Sebel, Goldman, Clifton, & Lowden (1991)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Memory for Unconsciously Perceived Events: Evidence from Anesthetized Patients

Merikle

Daneman

1996

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Memory for Unconsciously Perceived Events: Evidence from Anesthetized Patients

Merikle

Daneman

1996

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Experiments in which the number ofpresentations was manipulated did not yield a clear picture. Winograd, Sebel, Goldman, and Clifton (1990) and Bonebakker et al (1993) varied the number of stimulus presentations but failed to find any memory effects. Block et al (1991) found that nonsense words that had been presented frequently (at maximum 16 times) were preferred more on a postoperative preference task than were words presented less frequently, but this was not replicated in additional control tests.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information processing during general anesthesia: Evidence for unconscious memory

Bonebakker¹,

Bonke

Klein

et al. 1996

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Memory for words presented during general anesthesia was studied in two experiments. In Experiment 1,surgical patients (n = 80) undergoing elective procedures under general anesthesia were presented shortly before and during surgery with words via headphones. At the earliest convenient time after surgery (within 5 h) and 24 h later, memory was tested by asking patients to complete auditorily presented word stems with the first word that came to mind and to leave out words they remembered having heard earlier (exclusion task). Moreover, patients were requested to perform a "yes/no" forcedchoice recognition task to assess recognition memory for both the pre-and intraoperative words. Memory for the material presented during anesthesia was demonstrated immediately after surgery and 24 h later by means of both tasks. In a second similar experiment (n = 80), the results were replicated. These findings show that anesthetized patients can process information that was presented intraoperatively.Over the past few years, perception and memory during general anesthesia have become major scientific topics. Both anesthesiologists and psychologists attempt to find out whether patients can perceive information presented during general anesthesia, and, ifso, what the preconditions for such nonconscious cognition are. Some

show abstract

“…Block et al (1991) found that nonsense words that had been presented frequently (at maximum 16 times) were preferred more on a postoperative preference task than words that had been played less frequently during anesthesia, but this was not replicated in additional control tests. Winograd, Sebel, Goldman, and Clifton (1990) varied the number of presentations of fragments of ethnic music. Their patients were exposed 0, 3, or 12 times to musical stimuli during general anesthesia.…”

Section: Intraoperative Stimulus Presentationmentioning

confidence: 99%