MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305898380 · doi:10.1080/09658211.2015.1122809

A misleading feeling of happiness: metamemory for positive emotional and neutral pictures

2015· article· en· W2305898380 on OpenAlex
Kathleen L. Hourihan, Elliott Bursey

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMemory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMetamemoryPsychologyHappinessFeelingCognitive psychologyContent (measure theory)MetacognitionSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional information is often remembered better than neutral information, but the emotional benefit for positive information is less consistently observed than the benefit for negative information. The current study examined whether positive emotional pictures are recognised better than neutral pictures, and further examined whether participants can predict how emotion affects picture recognition. In two experiments, participants studied a mixed list of positive and neutral pictures, and made immediate judgements of learning (JOLs). JOLs for positive pictures were consistently higher than for neutral pictures. However, recognition performance displayed an inconsistent pattern. In Experiment 1, neutral pictures were more discriminable than positive pictures, but Experiment 2 found no difference in recognition based on emotional content. Despite participants' beliefs, positive emotional content does not appear to consistently benefit picture memory.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it