Intrusive Memories of Trauma in the Laboratory: Methodological Developments and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Intrusive memories are those that spring to mind unbidden, e.g. sensory recollections of stressful/traumatic events. We review recent methods to monitor intrusions of a stressor (a trauma film) within the laboratory. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies suggest three main methodologies after viewing a trauma film by which to monitor intrusions in the laboratory: during post-film rest periods, after exposure to trigger cues, and while performing an ongoing task. These approaches allow factors to be tested (e.g. psychological or pharmacological) that may influence the frequency of occurrence of intrusions. SUMMARY: We raise methodological considerations to guide trauma film studies using intrusion monitoring in the laboratory to complement monitoring approaches in daily life (e.g. diaries). Intrusion monitoring in the laboratory also confers greater experimental control and may open novel research avenues, to advance intervention development to mitigate problematic intrusive memory symptoms.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".