Psychophysiological evidence for the role of emotion in adaptive memory.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies demonstrating a mnemonic benefit for encoding words in a survival scenario have revived interest in how human memory is shaped by evolutionary pressures. Prior work on the survival-processing advantage has largely examined cognitive factors as potential proximate mechanisms. The current study, by contrast, focused on the role of perceived threat. Guided by the idea that a survival scenario implies threat, we combined measures of heart rate (HR) with affective ratings to probe the potential presence of fear bradycardia as a marker of freezing--a parasympathetically dominated HR deceleration that reflects the initial stage of the defensive engagement. We replicated the mnemonic advantage in behavior and found that the survival scenario was rated higher in perceived negative arousal than a commonly used control scenario. Critically, words encountered in the survival scenario were associated with more extensive HR deceleration, and this effect was directly related to subsequent recall performance. Our findings point to a role for the involvement of neurobiological fear responses in producing the survival processing advantage, as well as potential links between autonomic changes and cognitive processing in adaptive 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it