MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411078078 · doi:10.1177/00332941251346700

Between Body and Soul: The Role of Need Satisfaction and Physiological Reactivity in the Recall of Anxious Memories on Subjective Emotional Experience

2025· article· en· W4411078078 on OpenAlexafffund
Christine Richard, Valérie Lapointe, Frédérick L. Philippe

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyRecallAnxietyReactivity (psychology)ArousalCognitionExperiential learningDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study examined the experiential components of anxiety-related memories, that is, what is experienced during the event of the memory, and how these experiences can shape subjective emotional responses. A total of 76 participants were asked to recall a personal memory of an event that elicited fear or anxiety. Two key experiential components were evaluated: the level of need satisfaction associated with the memory and the physiological reactivity upon memory recall, as indexed by heart rate. Additionally, networked memories were assessed, referring to other memories associated with the anxiety-related memory, along with the need satisfaction component of each. Results highlighted the role of networked memories and the interaction between need satisfaction and physiological reactivity in predicting self-reported subjective experience. Specifically, participants who exhibited a low increase in heart rate during the recall of their anxiety-related memory found that need satisfaction in networked memories predicted self-reported anxiety and negative emotions. However, this relationship was not observed in participants who experienced a high increase in heart rate. These findings suggest that high physiological arousal linked to a memory may limit access to other memory-related cognitions, thereby influencing the formation of subjective emotional experiences.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207