mood dependent memory for self generated words...

STUDENT PSYCHOLOGY JOURNAL VOLUME I

35

MOOD DEPENDENT MEMORY FOR SELF-GENERATED

WORDS USING A MUSICAL MOOD INDUCTION

PROCEDURE

Melissa Daly

Graduate 2010, Psychology

[email protected]

ABSTRACT The present study investigated Mood Dependent Memory for self-

generated words using a Musical mood induction procedure. 75

participants (25 males, 50 females) took part in this study. Testing took

place over two sessions, two days apart. During the first session

participants were induced into a positive or negative mood before

generating a list of 16 words in a word-association task. Two days later

participants were induced into either a congruent or incongruent mood

and were given five minutes to freely recall the words. It was predicted

that in the presence of strong, stable moods, participants whose moods at

both sessions (encoding and retrieval) were congruent would remember

more words than participants whose moods were incongruent. Subsequent

analyses of data did not support the MDM hypothesis. However, stronger

mood at encoding predicted a higher rate of recall, and greater discrepancy

between encoding and retrieval moods predicted a lower rate of recall,

providing moderate support for the associative network theory. It is

inferred that in accordance with the associative network theory, strong,

stable moods produce a greater mood dependent effect. In addition, as

mood declined significantly after the free recall task it is suggested that

future research should focus on alternative recall tasks to improve mood

stability.

INTRODUCTION “Mood dependent memory refers to the phenomenon of a person‟s

emotional state serving as part of the context that becomes associated

with ongoing events, so that memory for those events is best obtained

when that emotional context is reinstated” (Bower & Forgas, 2000, p.93).

EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION

36

In other words, if an individual learns information in a particular mood

they should remember this information better at a later date if they are in

the same or a similar mood.

One of the most dominant theories in mood and memory research is

the associative network theory (Bower, 1981) which was proposed to

explain the relationship between mood and memory and, more

specifically, MDM. According to the associative network theory, there are

six basic emotion nodes in memory where moods are represented. When an

emotional event occurs, these nodes are activated above a threshold and

activation spreads throughout the network including the associated

memory structures to which it is linked. Therefore, when an event is

encoded while the emotion nodes are activated, the event and the

individual‟s mood become associated in memory. At a later date,

activation of the same emotion node spreads activation to the event node

enabling the event to be more easily recollected (Bower, 1981). Thus,

associative network theory assumes that people will have a heightened

ability to remember information that they have learned in a particular

mood when this mood is later reinstated.

Despite an abundance of cognitive theories, with the addition of

early promising experimental (e.g. Bower et al., 1978) and clinical research

(e.g. Weingartner, Miller, & Murphy, 1977) to support the reality of a

mood dependent effect on memory, the literature to date fails to present a

clear, consistent picture of whether MDM actually exists (Eich &

Macaulay, 2000). In light of this it could be argued that researchers should

accept that MDM is a non-existent phenomenon and to discontinue in

their pursuit of its demonstration. On the contrary however, it is of vital

importance that the problem of MDM is rectified as it would have

implications for clinical psychology as MDM has been argued to play a

causal role in memory disturbances associated with clinical disorders such

as traumatic amnesia (Schacter & Kihlstrom, 1989), dissociative

experiences (Kanayama, Sato, & Ohira, 2008), borderline personality

disorders (Cauwels, 1992), multiple personality disorders (Bower, 1994)

and bipolar depression (Szostak, Lister, Eckardt & Weingartner, 1994).

Taking into account the huge implications that reaching a consensus

on MDM would have for psychology, rather than concentrating on simply

demonstrating mood state dependency, a number of researchers have

focused on establishing the conditions under which a mood dependent


37

effect is most likely to occur (e.g. Eich, 1995). Three of these conditions:

(a) the nature of the mood induced, (b) the nature of the words to-be-

remembered, and (c) the nature of the recall task are considered below. It

has been argued that in order for a mood dependent effect to be

demonstrated the moods induced must be strong and stable (Eich, 1995).

Bower (1981) maintained that strong moods are a necessary precondition

for MDM. He argued that strong moods result in stronger associations

with the target information so that when mood at retrieval matches mood

at encoding mood serves as a more potent cue to recall the target

information (Bower, 1981, 1992).

One of the problems outlined by Kenealy (1997) with regards to

experimentally demonstrating MDM is that many researchers did not

include a mood manipulation check in their studies with the result that

there was no way to establish whether the mood dependent effect was not

demonstrated due to its nonexistence or due to an inadequate mood

induction procedure (Kenealy, 1997). In the current study, the Positive

and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988)

was used to measure mood before and after mood induction to ensure that

the desired mood was successfully induced.

With regards to stability of moods, de l‟Etoile (2002) argued that if

the mood change fades easily the individual does not have sufficient time

to form a meaningful connection between the learned material and their

mood state and a mood dependent effect is therefore less likely to occur. In

a pilot study, Eich and Metcalfe (1989) found that unstable moods did not

produce a mood dependent effect. Therefore, it could be argued that many

studies which failed to find a mood dependent effect may have induced

moods which were strong in the beginning but faded quickly.

In light of this research, it could be inferred that if mood dependent

memory is to be demonstrated the moods induced must be strong and

must last for the duration of encoding and retrieval tasks. Unlike previous

studies, as well as measuring mood before and after mood induction, the

present study measured mood at the end of encoding and retrieval sessions

using the PANAS to investigate whether mood remained stable.

The nature of the to-be-remembered target items has been argued to

contribute greatly to whether MDM will be demonstrated (Eich, 1995).

For instance, Eich and Metcalfe (1989) suggested that internal items (i.e.

those generated by the participants themselves through the mental


38

processes of thought, reasoning and imagination), may be more likely to

be associated with the participant‟s mood in memory than would external

items (i.e. where the participant is simply presented with a list of

unrelated words to remember). The present study made use of a word

association task adapted from one used by Eich and Metcalfe (1989) so

that the to-be-remembered target items were internally generated and

therefore assumed to be more closely associated with mood in memory.

Eich (1995) posited that a mood dependent effect is more likely to

arise in a free recall task, which is characterised by the absence of external

retrieval cues. This is in accordance with the associative network theory

(Bower, 1981), which argues that in the absence of external retrieval cues,

the participants‟ mood acts as an internal retrieval cue, activating the

memory network where the information is encoded thus enabling the

individual to remember the material once mood at encoding and retrieval

match (Bower, 1981). In support of this Eich and Metcalfe (1989)

demonstrated that although differences in mood at learning and recall

impaired the free recall of generated items, differences in mood did not

impair the recognition of either generated or read items. In other words,

MDM was observed in a free recall task but not in a recognition task.

Although some research has found that recognition tasks support a mood

dependent effect (e.g. Beck & McBee, 1995) there is little consistent

evidence of this nature. Taking this research into consideration, a free

recall task was used in the present study to measure participants‟ memory

for self-generated words.

Kenealy (1997) maintained that a large proportion of MDM studies

failed to measure levels of initial or baseline learning without mood

induction with the result that it was impossible to detach the influence of

mood on learning from the influence of mood on recall. De l‟Etoile (2002)

investigated the effect of mood on learning and found that participants

who took part in musical mood induction prior to encoding and recall

remembered more words than participants who did not take part in any

mood induction. The present study also took this factor into consideration

by using a control group where memory for self-generated words was

measured in the absence of a mood induction procedure. In this way a

base-line measure of learning could be obtained so as the potential effects

of music or mood on learning and recall could be examined.


39

A musical mood induction procedure was used in the present study.

Musical Mood induction has been found to be effective in inducing positive

and negative mood states in MDM studies (e.g. de l‟Etoile, 2002; Kenealy,

1997). In addition, it has been argued to have a high success rate, with 100

percent of participants displaying the critical degree of mood change after

mood induction (Clark, 1983). Compared with other mood induction

procedures, the musical mood induction was found to be less prone to

demand effects (Kenealy, 1997). Demand effects (i.e. where participants

make an effort to respond according to how they believe the experimenter

expects/wishes them to respond) were a key flaw in many previous studies

demonstrating MDM so this was an important factor to take into

consideration when choosing a mood induction procedure.

In the present study, the conditions outlined by previous research

(i.e. (a) mood strength and stability, (b) self-generated target words and

(c) free recall)were taken into account and used as the three main criteria

under which MDM should be demonstrated. It was hypothesised that

under these conditions participants whose mood at encoding and retrieval

matched would remember more words than participants whose mood at

encoding and retrieval did not match. Firstly, it was predicted that the

positive and negative congruent mood groups would remember more

words than the positive and negative incongruent groups and that, in

accordance with de l‟Etoile‟s (2002) findings, all groups would remember

more words than the control group. Secondly, it was predicted that the

more effective the mood induction procedure was in producing strong,

stable moods, the greater the mood dependent effect would be. Finally, it

was predicted that in keeping with the MDM hypothesis, the greater the

difference between mood at encoding and mood at retrieval the less words

that would be remembered.

METHOD

Design

A 2(Mood at encoding: Positive, Negative) x 2(Mood at retrieval: Positive,

Negative) between subjects design was used. In addition, an independent

control group was used that did not receive a mood manipulation.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four mood groups or to


40

the control group. Participants‟ memory for self-generated words was

measured.

Participants

75 undergraduate psychology students and members of the public

participated in this study, of which 50 (67%) were female and 25 (33%)

were male. Participants were between 18 and 45 years of age (mean

age=24.7). 53 (71%) were students and 22 (29%) were non-students.

Materials

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, &

Tellegen, 1988) was used to measure mood. Eight pieces of music rated

positive and negative in a pilot study (see procedure) were used for the

Musical mood induction procedure (see Appendix D)*. Four of the pieces

chosen were classical (two positive, two negative), and the other four

pieces (two positive, two negative) were labelled as „alternative‟ which

included post-rock and soundtrack music.

Participants listened to the 2 minute piece of music using „Windows

Media Player‟ on a PC through AKG headphones in a quiet, well-lit

testing room in the Psychology department of Trinity College Dublin.

A word association task was adapted from a task used by Eich &

Metcalfe (1989) in order for participants to learn and remember internally

generated words (see Appendix E).

A stop-watch was used to ensure that each participant was allocated

exactly five minutes to complete the free recall task in the second testing

session.

Procedure

A pilot study was carried out a number of weeks before the study

commenced in order to choose a set of songs for the musical mood

induction procedure. Six participants listened to a total of 16 pieces of

classical and alternative music and rated them on a Likert scale where

“1”=extremely negative and “10”=extremely positive in terms of affect

(see Appendix F). Eight of the most positively and most negatively rated

songs were chosen for the Musical mood induction procedure.

* See www.tcd.ie/psychology/spj for appendices


41

In the present study, participants were randomly assigned to one of

five mood groups which included an independent control group without

mood induction. Of the four groups where mood was manipulated

participants were either assigned to a positive or negative mood induction

at encoding followed by either a congruent or incongruent mood at

retrieval.

Testing Session 1: Encoding

Participants were first presented with instructions for completing the

PANAS. Participants were then randomly assigned to a piece of positive

or negative, classical or alternative music (see Appendix D). Participants

were not informed as to whether the piece of music was positive or

negative or that it was intended to induce mood, so as to minimise

demand effects. Participants were first given a few seconds to adjust the

volume of the music to their preferred listening level. Music was

terminated at the two minute point in the piece. After listening to the

music, participants were instructed to fill out the PANAS so that the

difference in mood before and after mood induction could be calculated.

Participants were then given instructions for completing the word

association task. Next they were presented with a list of sixteen similar

word associations (see Appendix E). Participants were not informed that

they would later have to remember the words they generated. Although

there was a high likelihood of participants generating the same words, any

unexpected words were recorded by the experimenter for use as correct

responses in the subsequent recall task. After the word association task

participants were instructed to complete the PANAS once more.

Testing Session 2: Retrieval

After a two day retention interval participants returned and the same

procedure was carried out again. Participants initially recorded their

baseline mood on the PANAS. They were then induced into a positive or

negative mood (either congruent or incongruent with their mood in the

first session) via the musical mood induction procedure. They listened to

the same genre of music (i.e. classical or alternative) at each session.

Participants completed a mood manipulation check in the form of the

PANAS. Following this participants were given five minutes timed on a

stop-watch to recall the words they had generated in the word-association


42

task in the first testing session. Participants then filled out the PANAS

again. They were fully debriefed about the nature of the study and what it

aimed to measure in the form of a debriefing sheet (see Appendix J).

Control Group

Participants in the control group did not take part in the musical mood

induction procedure. Similar to participants in the experimental groups

they generated 16 words in the word association task at encoding and

recalled them in a free recall task at retrieval. Participants also filled out

the PANAS before and after testing on each session in order to ensure that

mood remained stable in the absence of mood induction.

RESULTS

Mood dependent Memory

As can be seen in Table 1 below, the mean for words recalled was higher in

the Negative-Negative group (M=4.5, SD=2.9) than in the Negative-

Positive group (M=4.1, SD=2.1), and was lowest in the control group

(M=3.6, SD=1.8). The mean for words recalled in the Positive-Positive

group (M=3.8, SD=2.4) was lower than in the Positive-Negative group

(M=4.3, SD=1.3)†. A one way between subjects ANOVA was carried out

to compare the effect of mood on memory for 16 words across the four

matched and mismatched positive and negative mood groups and the

control condition without mood induction. The assumption of

homogeneity of variance was violated so the Welch F-ratio is reported.

There was not a significant effect of mood on memory at the p<.05 level

for each of the five conditions; F (4, 34)=.468, p>.05.

To investigate whether there was an interaction between positive or

negative mood at encoding and positive or negative mood at retrieval for

words remembered, a 2x2 between subjects factorial ANOVA was carried

out. Important to note is that the assumption of homogeneity of variance

was violated‡. The main effect of mood at encoding was not statistically

† All data was found to be normally distributed. ‡ However, Howell (2007) argued that ANOVA is a robust statistical

procedure and can handle minor violations of parametric assumptions

without any major effects.


43

significant; F (3, 56)=.16, p>.05, η²=.003, the main effect of mood at

retrieval was also not significant; F (3, 56)=.55, p>.05, η²=.010, and there

was no significant interaction between the two variables; F (3, 56)=.03,

p>.05, η²=.001.

Table 1: Mean words remembered in the four mood groups and the control

group.

Effectiveness of Musical Mood Induction

The summed scores for positive and negative affect on the PANAS were

subtracted to get a single mood score for each time the PANAS was

administered. As illustrated in Figure 1 below, mood after mood induction

increased in the positive groups and decreased in the negative groups.

Mood decreased after cognitive tasks at both encoding and retrieval with a

notable drop in mood especially after free recall. A mixed factorial

ANOVA was carried out on the mean mood scores before mood induction,

after mood induction and after cognitive tasks at encoding and retrieval

sessions for each of the four congruent and incongruent mood groups.

There was a significant main effect of mood§; F (3, 181)=9.82, p<.01,

η²=.15, but the main effect of group was not significant; F (3, 56)=.49,

p>.05, η²=.02. There was no significant interaction between the two

variables; F (10, 181)=1.16, p> .05, η²=.07.

Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustments indicated that

the mean score for mood after free recall (M=12.55, SD=11.25) was

significantly lower at the p <.05 level than mood before mood induction at

encoding (M=17.42, SD=7.29), mood after mood induction at encoding

§ The assumption of sphericity was violated so the Greenhouse-Geisser

correction is reported.

Group 1: Mood Mean Words Recalled

Positive-Positive 3.8 (SD=2.4) (n=15)

Positive-Negative 4.3 (SD=1.3) (n=15)

Negative-Negative 4.5 (SD=2.9) (n=15)

Negative-Positive 4.1(SD=2.1) (n=15)

Control 3.6 (SD=1.8) (n=15)


44

(M=19.02, SD=8.08), mood after word generation (M=16.83, SD=9.66)

and mood after mood induction at retrieval (M=17.68, SD=9.66). Mood

after free recall was also lower than mood before mood induction at

retrieval (M=15.90, SD=8.19) and this difference approached statistical

significance (p=.05). All other comparisons were not statistically

significant.

Fig. 1: Mean mood scores on PANAS for participants within each mood

group.

Mood ratings in the control group were considered separately. A

repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the differences in

mean mood ratings on the PANAS before and after cognitive tasks at

encoding and retrieval sessions. A significant main effect of mood was

found; F (2, 25)=3.95, p<.05. Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni

adjustments indicated that mood after word generation (M=12.27,

SD=6.68) was greater than mood after free recall (M=8.87, SD=7.37). This

difference approached statistical significance (p=.07). All other

comparisons did not approach statistical significance.


45

Mood Strength

Scores for mood on the PANAS before and after mood induction at

encoding and retrieval were subtracted to get a difference score for mood

at each session. Correlations were carried out for the difference in mood at

each session and words remembered. It was predicted that words

remembered would be positively correlated with mood change at encoding

and retrieval.

At encoding, a significant positive correlation for words remembered

and mood change was observed; r=+.294, n=60, p<.05, one tailed. At

retrieval, a positive correlation for words remembered and mood change

did not prove to be statistically significant; r=+.002, n=60, p>.05, one

tailed.

Difference between encoding and retrieval moods

Mood after mood induction at encoding and mood after mood induction at

retrieval was subtracted to get a difference score for each participant. It

was predicted that in keeping with the MDM hypothesis, fewer words

would be remembered as the difference between encoding and retrieval

moods increased. A significant negative correlation between words

remembered and the overall mean difference between mood after mood

induction at encoding and mood after mood induction at retrieval was

observed; r=-.218, n=60, p<.05, one tailed.

Reassignment to groups according to PANAS scores

Participants were assigned to new mood groups according to their actual

mood scores on each of the six measures of the PANAS. Participants were

placed in positive, negative or fail groups according to whether their mood

increased, decreased or stayed the same from before to after mood

induction.

As shown in Table 2, the mean words remembered were highest in

the Negative-Negative group (M=5.57, SD=2.51) and the Negative-

Positive group (M=4.36, SD=2.25) and were lowest in the Control group

(M=3.60, SD=1.88). The Fail group (M=3.86, SD=2.86) remembered fewer

words than the other four mood groups but more words than the control

group. In contrast with the initial analysis, the mean words remembered

in the Positive-Positive group (M=3.96, SD=1.9) was greater than in the


46

Positive-Negative group (M=3.86, SD=1.95). A one way between subjects

ANOVA was carried out to compare the mean words remembered by

participants according to their actual mood scores in newly assigned

groups. None of the differences between groups reached statistical

significance; F (5, 69)=.919, p>.05.

Table 2: Mean words remembered in the four reported mood groups, the fail

group and the control group.

To investigate whether there was an interaction between mood at

encoding and mood at retrieval for words remembered a 2x2 between

subjects factorial ANOVA was carried out. The analysis revealed that the

main effect of mood at encoding was not statistically significant; F (1,

46)=2.5, p>.05, η²=.05 and the main effect of mood at retrieval was also

not statistically significant; F (1, 46)=.68, p>.05, η²=.015. In addition, the

interaction between the two variables was not statistically significant; F

(1, 46)=.96, p>.05, η²=.02.

DISCUSSION The primary purpose of the present study was to demonstrate mood state-

dependent memory (MDM). It was predicted that participants would

remember more words when moods at encoding and retrieval were

congruent than when they were incongruent. The present findings do not

support the MDM hypothesis. Results indicate that mood at encoding and

retrieval had no effect on memory for self-generated words and no

Group 2: Mood Mean Words Remembered

Positive-Positive 3.96 (SD=1.90, n=25)

Positive-Negative 3.86 (SD=1.95, n=7)

Negative-Negative 5.57 (SD=2.51, n=7)

Negative-Positive 4.36 (SD=2.25, n=11)

Fail 3.86 (SD=2.86, n=10)

Control 3.60 (SD=1.88, n=15)


47

significant differences were found between the average words recalled in

each group. Furthermore, although recall was found to be higher in the

Negative-Negative group than in the Negative-Positive group and lowest

in the Control group, contrary to what was predicted, recall in the

Positive-Positive group was lower than in the Positive-Negative group.

When participants were assigned to groups according to their

reported mood scores, mood was still found to have no effect on memory.

In contrast to the initial analysis however, the trend for recall complied

with the original prediction and participants in the Positive-Positive

group remembered more words than participants in the Positive-Negative

group. Although the possibility of this trend occurring purely by chance

cannot be ruled out, its consistency with the MDM hypothesis is worth

noting and deserves further speculation.

While the initial findings appear to rule out the existence of a mood

dependent effect on memory, in agreement with the prediction that

stronger moods would show a greater mood dependent effect, a significant

positive correlation was found between words remembered and the

difference in mood before and after mood induction at encoding.

Therefore, as the difference in mood increased, the number of words

remembered increased also. This result supports Bower (1981)‟s claim that

in the context of the associative network theory, stronger moods allow

more meaningful associations to be formed between the mood and the

target material. As no significant correlation was found between words

remembered and the difference in mood before and after mood induction

at retrieval it could be inferred that mood strength is only an important

precondition for mood dependent memory at encoding when the initial

associations are formed between mood and the to-be-remembered

material. This is interesting and deserves further investigation as it shows

that there may be differential effects between mood at learning and mood

at recall.

It was also predicted in line with the mood dependent memory

hypothesis that the greater the discrepancy between mood at encoding

and mood at retrieval the fewer words that would be remembered. In

support of this prediction, a significant negative correlation was found

between words remembered and the difference in mood after mood

induction at encoding and retrieval. That is, as the difference in moods

between encoding and retrieval sessions increased the number of words


48

remembered decreased. This result provides tentative support for the

MDM hypothesis but due to its correlational nature no indication of why

this effect occurs is specified and so further research is called for.

Collectively these findings indicate that if stronger moods were

induced and if the differences between mood induced by positive and

negative music had been greater perhaps a mood dependent effect would

have been observed. It could, therefore, be argued that the mood

induction procedure may not have been capable of producing an adequate

level mood change in participants for a mood dependent effect to be

demonstrated.

Findings indicate that although mean mood scores showed an

increase or decrease after mood induction as expected depending on

whether positive or negative music was played, results were not

statistically significant. This shows that the moods induced were not

strong overall which according to previous research (e.g. Bower, 1981;

Eich 1995) is a necessary precondition for a mood dependent effect to

occur. Moreover, in contrast with Clark and Teasdale (1983)‟s findings

that the musical mood induction procedure was effective in inducing mood

with 100 percent of participants, in the present study 10 participants

failed to produce any mood change whatsoever from before to after mood

induction at encoding and retrieval. Therefore, it cannot be inferred with

absolute certainty from the present study that the mood dependent effect

is unreliable as the conditions outlined by previous research were not

satisfied.

In further support of this argument, significant differences were

found between mood after free recall and mood at each of the other five

instances when mood was measured. This shows that not only did mood

fail to remain stable after mood induction but it actually decreased from

the baseline measure of mood at the start of the experiment. Although

this decline in mood may be partly due to the mood induction‟s failure to

produce a strong and stable mood change, this does not explain why mood

after recall differed significantly from baseline mood. Taking this factor

into account, it could be argued that the sharp decline in mood after free

recall was due to the nature of the memory test. For instance, the

deceptive and unexpected nature of the memory test may have disrupted

participants‟ mood and caused stress when the words did not immediately

spring to mind.


49

In the control group, decreases in mood approaching significance

were also observed between mood after word generation and mood after

free recall. This provides additional evidence that the free recall task may

have caused a decline in mood which eliminated the mood dependent

effect. According to previous research by Eich and Metcalfe (1989), stable

moods were required for MDM to be demonstrated. Taking these results

and the results of the present study into consideration it may be useful to

investigate MDM using less demanding implicit recall tasks such as word-

stem completion or fragment completion tasks (Graf & Mandler, 1984;

Jacoby, Toth & Yonelinas, 1993).

As a whole, the results of the present study do not support the MDM

hypothesis and appear to be in accordance with the null findings which

are highly characteristic of previous MDM research (e.g. Bower & Mayer,

1989; Mueller et al, 1991). This reflects negatively on the associative

network theory (Bower, 1981) which maintains that memory for

information learned in a particular mood should be greater when this

mood is reinstated. In addition, contrary to Eich‟s (1995) claim that

MDM occurs when words are internally generated by participants and

retrieved using free recall, no mood dependent effects were found in the

present study using these same conditions. However, a few interesting

findings were uncovered, leading to the conclusion that had strong, stable

moods been induced with a sufficient difference between positive and

negative moods, a mood dependent effect could have been demonstrated.

Furthermore, the finding that participants‟ mood declined significantly

after the recall task is particularly interesting as it could indicate that

failures to demonstrate MDM in previous research were due to the nature

of the recall task used. Instead of being a necessary precondition for MDM

as maintained by Eich (1995), the free recall task appears to have

decreased the likelihood of MDM occurring.

Although the present study did not demonstrate MDM, the results

provide preliminary evidence that a mood dependent effect exists and that

strong stable moods are a key factor in demonstrating it. Therefore, the

present findings contribute to both cognitive and clinical research in

clarifying some of the assumptions of the associative network theory

(Bower, 1981), outlining that the nature of the mood induced may have

been a key flaw in previous studies, and demonstrating that mood

strength may be more important at encoding than at retrieval. Moreover,


50

these findings provide a new path for future MDM research in striving to

maintain the stability of moods. It is suggested that in light of these

findings future research should focus in particular on achieving mood

strength and stability in MDM investigations and make use of alternative

methods of recall as discussed above.


51

REFERENCES

Beck, R.C., & McBee, W. (1995).

Mood dependent memory for

generated and repeated words:

Replication and extension.

Cognition and Emotion, 9, 289-

307.

Bower, G.H. (1981). Mood and

memory. American Psychologist,

36, 129-148.

Bower, G. H. (1992). How might

emotions affect learning? In S.

A. Christianson (Ed.) The

Handbook of Emotion and

Memory: Research and Theory

(pp. 3-31). Hillsdale, NJ.

Erlbaum.

Bower, G. H. (1994). Temporary

emotional states act like

multiple personalities. In R. M.

Klein & B. K. Doane (Eds.),

Psychological Concepts and

Dissociative Disorders (pp. 207-

234). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bower, G. H., & Forgas, J. P.

(2000). Affect, memory, and

social cognition (Chapter 3.). In

E. Eich, J. F. Kihlstrom, G. H.

Bower, J. P Forgas & P. M.

Niedenthal (Eds.), Cognition and

Emotion. Oxford University

Press.

Bower, G. H., & Mayer, J. D.

(1989). In search of mood-

dependent retrieval. Journal of

Social Behaviour and Personality,

4, 133-168.

Bower, G. H., Monteiro, K. P.,

& Gilligan, S. G. (1978).

Emotional mood as a context for

learning and recall. Journal of

Verbal Learning and Verbal

Behaviour, 17, 573-585.

Clark, D. M. (1983). On the

induction of depressed mood in

the laboratory: Evaluation and

comparison of the Velton and

musical procedures. Advances in

Behaviour Research and Therapy,

5, 27-49.

Cauwels, J. C. (1992). Imbroglio:

Rising to the Challenge of

Borderline Personality Disorder.

New York: Norton.

De l‟Etoile, S. K. (2002). The

effect of a musical mood

induction procedure on mood

state-dependent word retrieval.

The Journal of Music Therapy,

39, 145-160.

Eich, E., & Metcalfe, J. (1989).

Mood dependent memory for

internal versus external events.


52

Journal of Experimental

Psychology: Learning, Memory

and Cognition, 15, 443-455.

Eich. E. (1995). Searching for

mood dependent memory.

Psychological Science, 6, 67-75

Eich, E., Macaulay, D., & Ryan,

L. (1994). Mood dependent

memory for events of the

personal past. Journal of

Experimental Psychology:

General, 123, 201-215.

Eich, E., & Macaulay, D. (2000).

Fundamental factors in mood

dependent memory. In J. P.

Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and

Thinking: The Role of Affect in

Social Cognition (pp. 109-130).

New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Ellis, H. C., & Hunt, R. R.

(1989). Fundamentals of Human

Memory and Cognition (4th ed.).

Dubuque, I A: William C.

Brown.

Ellis, H. C., & Moore, B. A.

(1999). Mood and memory

(Chap. 10). In T. Dalgleish and

M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of

Cognition and Emotion. John

Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Gerrards-Hesse, A., Spies, K., &

Hesse, F. W. (1994).

Experimental inductions of

emotional states and their

effectiveness: A review. British

Journal of Psychology, 85, 55-78.

Graf, P., & Mandler, G. (1984).

Activation makes words more

accessible but not necessarily

more retrievable. Journal of

Verbal Learning and Verbal

Behaviour, 23, 332-568.

Howell, D.C. (2007). Statistical

Methods for Psychology (6th

Ed.). Belmont, CA:Thomson

Wadsworth.

Jacoby, L. L., Toth, J. P., &

Yonelinas, A. P. (1993).

Separating conscious and

unconscious influences of

memory: Measuring recollection.

Journal of Experimental

Psychology: General, 122, 139-

154.

Kanayama, N., Sata, A., &

Ohira, H. (2008). Dissociative

experience and mood dependent

memory. Cognition and Emotion,

22, 881-896.

Kenealy, P. M. (1997). Mood-

state-dependent retrieval: The

effects of induced mood on


53

memory reconsidered. The

Quarterly Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 50,

290-317.

Kihlstrom, J.F. (1989). On what

does mood-dependent memory

depend? Journal of Social

Behavior and Personality, 4, 23-

32.

Leventhal, H., & Tomarken, A.

J. (1986). Emotion: Today's

problems. Annual Review of

Psychology, 32, 565-610.

Mecklenbrauker, S., & Hager,

W. (1984). Effects of mood on

memory: Experimental tests of a

mood state dependent retrieval

hypothesis and a mood-

congruity hypothesis.

Psychological Research, 46, 335-

376.

Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D.,

& Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of

processing versus transfer

appropriate processing. Journal

of Verbal Learning and Verbal

Behaviour, 16, 519-533.

Mueller, J. H., Grove, T. R., &

Thompson, W. B. (1991). Mood-

dependent retrieval and mood

awareness. Cognition and

Emotion, 5, 331-349.

Schacter, D. L., & Kihlstrom, J.

F. (1989). Functional amnesia.

In F. Boller & J. Grafman,

(Eds.), Handbook of

Neuropsychology (pp. 209-231).

Amsterdam: Elsevier

Publications.

Szostak, C, Lister, R., Eckardt,

M., & Weingartner, H. (1994).

Dissociative effects of mood on

memory. In R. M. Klein & B. K.

Doane (Eds.), Psychological

Concepts and Dissociative

Disorders (pp. 187-206).

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of

Episodic Memory. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., &

Tellegen, A. (1988).

Development and validation of

brief measures of positive and

negative affect: The PANAS

scales. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

Weingartner, H., Miller, H. &

Murphy, D. L. (1977). Mood-

state-dependent retrieval of

verbal associations. Journal of

Abnormal Psychology, 86, 276-

284.


54

Westermann, R., Spies, K,

Stahl, G., & Hesse, F. W. (1996).

Relative effectiveness and

validity of mood induction

procedures: a meta-analysis.

European Journal of Social

Psychology, 26, 557-580.

Williams, J. M. G., & Markar,

H. R. (1991). Money hidden and

rediscovered in subsequent

manic phases: A case of action

dependent on mood state?

British Journal of Psychiatry,

159, 579-581.

mood dependent memory for self generated words...

Documents