Part 2:Individual Differences in Autobiographical Memory: The Autobiographical Recollection Test Predicts Ratings Of Specific Memories Across Cueing Conditions

Contact: Audrey Hu audrey.hu@wecistanche.com

Results

Descriptive statistics of the ART and Brief ART are reported in Table 2, and means of the characteristics of the positive and negative memories are reported in Table 5 (and Supplemental Material). Because the ART and Brief ART were highly correlated (r = .958, p < .001) we only report correlations between memory characteristics and the full ART.

Manipulation Check

Inspection of the mean valence, specificity, and written descriptions of the memories indicated that participants retrieved specific and highly positive and negative autobiographical memories as requested, and the two sets of memories differed significantly on subjective valence. A series of paired- samples t-tests demonstrated that in line with findings from previous studies comparing positive and negative autobiographical memories (e.g., D’Argembeau et al., 2003; Schaefer & Philippot, 2005; Talarico et al., 2004), the positive memories were more vivid and involved more reliving, rehearsal, visual imagery, and belief in occurrence than the negative memories (Table 5).

Correlations With Characteristics of Individual Memories

The ART correlated positively with characteristics of the negative and positive autobiographical memories corresponding to the seven components of the ART: vividness, coherence, reliving, rehearsal, scene, visual imagery, and life story relevance. All correlations were statistically significant, except for ratings of life story relevance for negative memories retrieved after a delay. Ratings of emotional intensity and belief in the occurrence of the positive and negative memories were also positively correlated with the ART (Table 4).

The ART correlated more highly with ratings of memories retrieved in the same session as the ART than with memories retrieved after a delay (see Table 4). However, these differences were significant only with ratings of vividness (positive memories only), rehearsal, scene (positive memories only), and life story relevance (p range: .002 to .049) of memories retrieved in the same session as the ART compared to ratings of memories retrieved after a delay.

We had no hypotheses about differences in correlations between negative and positive memories. The ART correlated more highly with ratings for positive than negative memories, except for ratings of vividness (see Table 4). However, when statistically comparing these differences, only ratings of coherence and rehearsal showed a significant difference (ps = .021 and .024) between positive and negative memories.

Cistanche can help improve memory

Summary and Discussion

(for a review, see Walker et al., 2003), and the ART measures individuals’ general experience of their autobiographical memory; therefore, it might be more closely associated with recollective qualities of positive as opposed to negative memories. However, the ART correlated significantly higher with ratings of positive compared to negative memories for only two of seven memory qualities. The pattern of correlations was stable across the delay, although the effect sizes tended to be larger when the ART and the memory task were answered in the same session rather than separated by a delay.

Overall, we replicate the findings from Study 1 by demonstrating a consistent relationship between an individual’s general experience of their autobiographical memory as measured by the ART and recollective qualities of specific autobiographical memories. Similar patterns of results were observed for negative and positive memories, although the results for positive memories most closely matched the findings from Study 1.

Study 3: Memories and Future Thoughts

In Studies 1 and 2, we have compared scores on the ART against a broad range of autobiographical memories. However, the neurocognitive components that contribute to the construction of memories for past events also play a key role in generating representations of possible events in the personal future (for reviews, see D’Argembeau, 2012; Szpunar, 2010). In Study 3, we, therefore, compare how the ART correlates with characteristics of episodic future thoughts and autobiographical memories. We expected the ART to correlate positively with ratings of both autobiographical memories and future thoughts but to correlate more highly with ratings of memories than with the corresponding variables for future thoughts, consistent with the first being more strongly associated with recollective experience (e.g., Berntsen & Bohn, 2010; D’Argembeau & Van der Linden, 2004).

Method

Participants

Participants recruited from MTurk using Cloud Research (Litman et al., 2017) were paid 2.00 USD for completing the study (2.25 USD with a delay). Participants had to indicate their informed consent, be native English speakers, and pass two attention checks (equivalent to those of Studies 1 and 2, but with response options adapted to Study 3) to complete the study. The sample was subject to the same criteria for exclusion as Study 1 (for exclusion of participants, see Table 1). The final sample consisted of 494 participants (260 female, 1 other; mean age = 40.36, SD = 13.54, range: 18 to 77; mean years of education = 15.93, SD = 2.66, range: 4 to 30), of which 236 participants completed the study in one session, and 258 participants first answered the ART and then retrieved autobiographical memories and imagined future events after a 1-week delay.

Effects of cistanche: enhance memory

Materials

The ART (Berntsen et al., 2019) and single AMQ items (Rubin et al., 2003) were identical to Study 12. For episodic

future thoughts, the wording of the AMQ items was adjusted to indicate the future. See Table 2 for internal consistencies of

the ART and Brief ART.

Procedure

The procedure was identical to Study 1 except for the memory task, in which participants retrieved four autobiographical memories and imagined four episodic future thoughts cued by different timeframes. Participants were instructed to “Please think of an autobiographical memory that occurred” (1) “within the last week, but not today,” (2) “between a week and a month ago,” (3) “between a month and a year ago,” and (4) “more than one year ago.” The future events were cued by using the phrase “Please think of an event that might occur” followed by the same timeframes as the memories adjusted to indicate the future (procedure identical to Rubin et al., 2019). Participants were randomly assigned to retrieve either autobiographical memories or future thoughts first and were instructed that the retrieved memories and future thoughts had to be specific (i.e., have happened / will happen at a particular place and point in time). Participants provided one sentence describing each autobiographical memory and future thought. Approximately half of the participants had a 1-week delay between answering the ART and retrieving autobiographical memories and imagining future events.

Data Analysis

We created aggregate scores across the timeframes for auto-biographical memories and episodic future thoughts separately. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., 2019). All other aspects of data analysis were identical to Study 2.

Results

For descriptive statistics of the ART and Brief ART, see Table 2. Because they were highly correlated (r = .951, p < .001), again we only report correlations between the full ART and ratings of individual events. Means for characteristics of the autobiographical memories and future thoughts are reported in Table 5 (and Supplemental Material).

Manipulation Check

The mean rating of specificity and the written descriptions indicated that participants did retrieve specific autobiographical memories and imagined specific future events as requested. Paired-samples t-tests demonstrated that, in line with previous studies comparing memories and future thoughts (e.g.,

Berntsen & Bohn, 2010; D’Argembeau & Van der Linden, 2004; for reviews, see D’Argembeau, 2012; Szpunar, 2010), the autobiographical memories were more vivid and involved more visual imagery, reliving, sensory details, and sense of scene than future thoughts, and future thoughts were more emotionally positive than memories (Table 5).

Correlations Within Characteristics of Individual Memories and Future Thoughts

The ART correlated positively and significantly with characteristics of autobiographical memories and future thoughts concerning vividness, coherence, reliving, rehear-sal, scene, visual imagery, and life story relevance. Ratings of emotional intensity and belief in occurrence were also positively correlated with the ART, but only the correlations with emotional intensity were consistently significant (Table 4).

The ART correlated more highly with ratings for memories and future thoughts retrieved and rated in the same session as the ART than those retrieved and rated after a delay, except for ratings of visual imagery for future thoughts (see Table 4). However, when statistically comparing these numerical differences, the ART correlated more highly with ratings of vividness and rehearsal (ps = .012 and .042)of memories retrieved in the same session as the ART compared to ratings of memories retrieved after a delay. There were no statistically significant differences in correlations for future thoughts.

As expected, the ART tended to correlate more strongly with ratings of memories compared to future thoughts, except for ratings of vividness(Table 4). When statistically comparing these numerical differences, the ART correlated more strongly with ratings of rehearsal (p =.035)and life story relevance (p < 001) of memories compared to future thoughts.

Effects of cistanche: enhance memory

Summary and Discussion

Characteristics of both memories and future thoughts correlated positively with the ART in line with our hypotheses. Few significant differences were observed for correlations between the ART and memories retrieved with and without delay. No such differences were found for future thoughts generated with versus without delay. This demonstrates that the delay had a negligible impact on the correlations. Likewise, only a few significant differences were found for correlations between the ART and memories compared to future thoughts, indicating that temporal direction had little impact on the pattern of results.

Overall, Study 3 replicated the findings from Studies 1 and 2 by demonstrating a consistent relationship between an individual's general experience of their autobiographical memory and ratings of specific autobiographical memories and further extends these findings by demonstrating a consistent relationship between the ART and ratings of episodic future thoughts.

Analyses of Combined Data From Studies 1,2, and 3

Studies l to 3 demonstrated that the ART correlated positively with subjective ratings of memory characteristics cued with a different method(see Table 4). Analyses of the combined data from the three studies were performed to examine whether these correlations are at the same level as the correlations between ratings of individual memory items. If so, this would provide further evidence of a trait-like measure of autobiographical memory characteristics predicting ratings of individual memories.

Method

We calculated Pearson's r for each memory characteristic correlated with itself using the same categories as in Table 4; for example, ratings of vividness correlated across the four positive memories retrieved in the same session as the ART in Study 2(i.e., six correlations). For each category of events, a mean correlation was calculated using a Fisher Z-transformation before averaging. This mean was compared to the corresponding correlation in Table 4(e.g., mean correlation for vividness × vividness compared to ART x vividness). All calculations were performed in online calculators(Lenhard &Lenhard. 2014). A positive value of Fisher Z indicates that the memory characteristic correlates more highly with the ART than with itself, and a negative value indicates that the memory characteristic correlates more highly with itself than with the ART(Table 6). For the sake of consistency, we limited these comparisons to autobiographical events retrieved and rated during the same session as the ART. This was to make sure that we compared correlations between variables assessed at the same time, as situational influences present at the time of measurement affect ratings of tests and questionnaires(Steyer et al.,1999). Results

The correlations between the ART and the memory characteristics corresponding to the seven components of the ART were generally comparable to how highly each memory characteristic correlated with itself. The vast majority of the comparisons(85.7%)reflected either that the correlations with the ART did not differ from how highly the memory characteristics correlated with themselves or that the memory characteristics correlated more highly with the ART than with themselves (Table 6). This indicates that the ART did correlate highly with ratings of these memory characteristics.

General Discussion

In a series of studies, we tested the construct validity of the recently introduced Autobiographical Recollection Test(ART: Berntsen et al.2019), which measures individual differences in the recollective experience of autobiographical memory along the dimensions of vividness, coherence. reliving, rehearsal, scene, visual imagery. and life story relevance. We examined correlations between the ART and ratings of specific autobiographical memories cued by words(Study 1), positive and negative emotional valence (Study 2). and past and future temporal direction(Study 3), that were retrieved either in the same session as the ART or after a 1-week delay.

all positive, only one was non-significant, only five had rs < .20 and ps > .001, and they were relatively equal across different categories of events and different recollective qualities; thus, the findings were remarkably consistent. A 1-week delay and different cueing methods did not change the pattern of results, and additional analyses of the combined data con- firmed that the correlations can be considered strong. More than 1400 participants in total took part in this series of studies, and the number of participants retrieving memories with and without delay in each study, respectively, matches the approximate sample size needed for finding reasonably stable estimates for correlations (Schönbrodt & Perugini, 2013), adding to the reliability of the findings.

In addition to measuring characteristics of individual memories and future thoughts corresponding to the ART dimensions, we also measured and made hypotheses about two dimensions not in the ART: emotional intensity and belief in the occurrence of the events. As hypothesized, correlations between the ART and emotional intensity of individual memories and future thoughts were consistently positive and statistically significant, thus following the same pattern as the memory characteristics corresponding to the seven components of the ART.

As hypothesized, we also found evidence of a positive association between the ART and ratings of belief in occurrence for individual autobiographical memories and episodic future thoughts. Although belief in occurrence is a meta-cognitive judgment, like the feeling of reliving the event (e.g., Rubin et al., 2003; Rubin & Siegler, 2004; Scoboria et al., 2014), it is better predicted by different variables (e.g., depression, personality traits) than other recollective qualities (e.g., Rubin et al., 2003; Rubin & Siegler, 2004). In the present study, correlations between belief in occurrence and the recollective qualities of specific memories and future thoughts were lower and more varied across studies (rs ranging from -.16 to .51) than how the seven recollective qualities correlated with each other (rs ranging from .27 to .87). However, belief in occurrence was generally more strongly associated with the recollective qualities of specific memories and future thoughts than

with the ART.

We did not formulate specific hypotheses regarding the association between (positive) emotional valence and the ART but found some evidence of a positive association. This means that participants who scored higher on the ART also tended to rate their memories as more positive (or less negative). The fact that the relationship between the ART and emotional intensity was consistent, while the relationship between the ART and emotional valence was more inconsistent across studies are in line with previous research indicating that emotional intensity is more strongly associated with other recollective qualities of personal past events than emotional valence (e.g., Rubin et al., 2011; Talarico et al., 2004; for a review, see Holland & Kensinger, 2010).

In addition to their many strengths, the present studies have some limitations. Participants were recruited online, which might be viewed as a limitation. However, MTurk workers are shown to produce reliable results, not differing from student samples (e.g., Briones & Benham, 2017; Casler et al., 2013). Moreover, several measures were taken to ensure data quality, such as enforcing attention checks and excluding participants according to preregistered criteria. A further advantage is that MTurk gives access to more socio-economically and racially

diverse study populations than student samples (e.g., Buhrmester et al., 2011; Casler et al., 2013), making the results more generalizable. Furthermore, we chose to limit the number of recollective qualities measured for each memory and future thought to avoid participants becoming tired or bored, as they had to retrieve, describe, and rate eight events. The chosen items are theoretically motivated, cover a broad range of qualities, and are similar to what is typically measured in studies on the recollective experience of autobiographical memories (e.g., Berntsen & Bohn, 2010; Ford et al., 2012; Talarico et al., 2004).

Having supported the reliability and construct validity of the ART, we recommend it as a tool for future lines of research on autobiographical memory features and processes. Two lines will be considered. First, the focus of the ART is the recollective experience, not the accuracy, of autobiographical memory (Berntsen et al., 2019). Future studies should therefore examine the relationship between the ART, how accurately people believe they remember past events (subjective accuracy), and how accurately they remember past events (objective accuracy). Second, as it is often not possible to check the objective accuracy of past events, ratings of memory confi- dence are often used as a way of evaluating the credibility of witnesses in legal settings. As demonstrated by the ART, there are individual differences in the recollective experience of autobiographical memory, and findings suggest that also ratings of memory confidence are somewhat stable across conditions, indicative of a trait-like characteristic (e.g., Saraiva et al., 2020). Future studies should examine how scores on the ART are related to ratings of memory confidence. Answering these questions could have important implications and potential applications, for example, in legal settings.

Conclusions

Findings from three studies demonstrate that people’s general experience of their autobiographical memory, measured by the ART (Berntsen et al., 2019), is reliably related to how specific autobiographical memories are recollected and future events imagined. Correlations with the ART were quite consistent across memories and future thoughts, different recollective qualities, memories cued in various ways, and events retrieved with and without delay. The findings lend support to the construct validity of the ART. Demonstrating the ART as a reliable indicator of how individuals experience their autobiographical memory could help integrate autobiographical memory into research fields generally concerned with individual differences.

Author Contributions

D.B. acquired funding and conceived the original idea, with contributions from D.C.R. and R.H.H., D.B., T.B.G., and N.P.

N. designed the studies. T.B.G. and N.P.N. collected the data. T.B.G. analyzed the data, and T.B.G., N.P.N., and D.B. inter- pretend the data. T.B.G. wrote the first draft for the manuscript, with contributions from N.P.N. and D.B. All authors commented on the manuscript and approved the final version.

Financial Support

This research was supported in part by grants from the Independent Research Fund, Denmark [9037-00015B9] and the Danish National Research Foundation [DNRF89]. The funding sources had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Author Note

The authors thank Daniel Munkholm Møller for input regarding the online data collection. Data and study materials are available upon request to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Online Supplement

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2021.07.004.

Effects of cistanche: IMPROVE IMMUNITY

References

Berntsen, D., & Bohn, A. (2010). Remembering and forecasting: The relation between autobiographical memory and episodic future thinking. Memory & Cognition, 38(3), 265–278. https://doi.org/ 10.3758/MC.38.3.265.

Berntsen, D. B., & Hall, N. M. (2004). The episodic nature of involuntary autobiographical memories. Memory & Cognition, 32 (5), 789–803. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195869.

Berntsen, D. B., Hoyle, R. H., & Rubin, D. C. (2019). The Autobiographical Recollection Test (ART): A measure of individual differences in autobiographical memory. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8(3), 305–318. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.06.005.

Brewer, W.(1986).Whatisautobiographicalmemory?Ind.Rubin(Ed.). Autobiographical memory,(pp. 25–49). Cambridge University Press.

Briones, E. M., & Benham, G. (2017). An examination of the equivalency of self-report measures obtained from crowdsourced versus undergraduate student samples. Behavior Research, 49(1), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0710-8.

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. https://doi. org/10.1177/1745691610393980.

Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon's MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2156–2160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. chb.2013.05.009.

Congleton, A. R., & Berntsen, D. (2018). The assessment of autobiographical memory: An overview of behavioral methods. In H. Otani & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in memory (pp. 267–283). Routledge.

Crovitz, H. F., & Schiffman, H. (1974). Frequency of episodic memories as a function of their age. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4(5B), 517–518. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334277.

D’Argembeau, A. (2012). Autobiographical memory and future thinking. In D. Berntsen & D.C.Rubin (Eds.), Understanding autobiographical memory: Theories and approaches (pp. 311– 330). Cambridge University Press.

D’Argembeau, A., Comblain, C., & Van der Linden, M. (2003). Phenomenal characteristics of autobiographical memories for positive, negative, and neutral events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(2), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.856.

D’Argembeau, A., & Van der Linden, M. (2004). Phenomenal characteristics associated with projecting oneself back into the past and forward into the future: Influences of valence and temporal distances. Consciousness and Cognition, 13(4), 844–858. HTTPS:// doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2004.07.007.

Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2015). Color: A comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correlations. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0121945. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121945.

Finnbogadóttir, H., & Berntsen, D. (2014). Looking at life from different angles: Observer perspective during remembering and imagining distinct emotional events. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(4), 387–406. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/cns0000029.

Ford, J. H., Addis, D. R., & Giovanello, K. S. (2012). Differential effects of arousal in positive and negative autobiographical memories. Memory, 20(7), 771–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09658211.2012.704049.

Gehrt, T. B., Berntsen, D., Hoyle, R. H., & Rubin, D. C. (2018). Psychological and clinical correlates of the centrality of event scale: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 65, 57– 80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2018.07.006.

Greenberg, D. L., & Knowlton, B. J. (2014). The role of visual imagery in autobiographical memory. Memory & Cognition, 42(6), 922–934. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0402-5.

IBM Corp. (2019). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

IBM Corp. (2020). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 27.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

Holland, A. C., & Kensinger, E. A. (2010). Emotion and autobiographical memory. Physics of Life Reviews, 7(1), 88– 131. HTTPS:// doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2010.01.006.

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2013.00863.

Lenhard, W., & Lenhard, A. (2014). Hypothesis tests for comparing correlations, Psychometric, Bibergau (Germany) https://www. psychometrica.de/correlation.html https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2. 1.2954.1367.

Litman, L., Robinson, J., & Abberbock, T. (2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 433–442. HTTPS:// doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z.

Marchewka, A., Z_urawski, Ł., Jednoróg, K., & Grabowska, A. (2014). The Nencki Affective Picture System (NAPS): Introduction to a novel, standardized, wide-range, high-quality, realistic picture database. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 596–610. https://doi. org/10.3758/s13428-013-0379-1.

Rasmussen, A. S., & Berntsen, D. (2013). The reality of the past versus the ideality of the future: Emotional valence and functional differences between past and future mental time travel. Memory &Cognition, 41(2), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012- 0260-y.

Rubin, D. C. (1980). 51 properties of 125 Words: A unit analysis of verbal behavior. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(6), 736–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90415-6.

Rubin, D. C. (2005). A basic-systems approach to autobiographical memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00339.x.

Rubin, D. C. (2006). The basic-systems model of episodic memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(4), 277–311. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00017.x.

Rubin, D. C. (2020a). The ability to recall scenes is a stable individual difference: Evidence from autobiographical remembering. Cognition, 197, 104164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019. 104164.

Rubin, D. C. (2020b). Self-concept focus: A tendency to perceive autobiographical events as central to identity. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 576–586. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.001.

Rubin, D. C. (2021). Commonly measured properties of autobiographical memories are reliable and stable individual differences. Cognition, 210, 104583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021. 104583.

Rubin, D. C., Berntsen, D., Deffler, S. A., & Brodar, K. (2019). Self-narrative focus in autobiographical events: The effect of time, emotion, and individual differences. Memory & Cognition, 47(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0850-4.

Rubin, D. C., Dennis, M. F., & Beckham, J. C. (2011). Autobio- graphical memory for stressful events: The role of autobiographical memory in posttraumatic stress disorder. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(3), 840–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2011. 03.015.

Rubin, D. C., & Friendly, M. (1986). Predicting which words get recalled: Measures of free recall, availability, goodness, emotionality, and producibility for 925 nouns. Memory & Cognition, 14 (1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209231.

Rubin, D. C., Schrauf, R. W., & Greenberg, D. L. (2003). Belief and recollection of autobiographical memories. Memory & Cognition, 31(6), 887–901. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196443.

Rubin, D. C., Schrauf, R. W., & Greenberg, D. L. (2004). Stability in autobiographical memories. Memory, 12(6), 715–721. https://doi. org/10.1080/09658210344000512.

Rubin, D. C., & Schulkind, M. D. (1997). Distribution of important and word-cued autobiographical memories in 20-, 35-, and 70- year-old adults. Psychology and Aging, 12(3), 524–535. https://doi. org/10.1037/0882-7974.12.3.524.

Rubin, D. C., & Siegler, I. C. (2004). Facets of personality and the phenomenology of autobiographical memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18(7), 913–930. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1038.

Saraiva, R. B., Hope, L., Horselenberg, R., Ost, J., Sauer, J. D., & van Koppen, P. J. (2020). Using metamemory measures and memory tests to estimate eyewitness-free recall performance. Memory, 28 (1), 94– 106. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1688835.

Schaefer, A., & Philippot, P. (2005). Selective effects of emotion on the phenomenal characteristics of autobiographical memories. Memory, 13(2), 148– 160. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210344000648.

Schönbrodt, F. D., & Perugini, M. (2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize? Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 609–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009.

Scoboria, A., Jackson, D. L., Talarico, J., Hanczakowski, M., Wysman, L., & Mazzoni, G. (2014). The role of belief in occurrence within autobiographical memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1242– 1258. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/a0034110.

Szpunar, K. K. (2010). Episodic future thought: An emerging concept. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(2), 142– 162. https://doi. org/10.1177/1745691610362350.

Talarico, J. M., LaBar, K. S., & Rubin, D. C. (2004). Emotional intensity predicts autobiographical memory experience. Memory & Cognition, 32(7), 1118– 1132. https://doi.org/10.3758/ BF03196886.

Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. psych.53.100901.135114.

Walker, W. R., Skowronski, J. J., & Thompsen, C. P. (2003). Life is pleasant – and memory helps to keep it that way! Review of General Psychology, 7(2), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089- 2680.7.2.203.

Walker, W. R., & Skowronski, J. J. (2009). The fading affect bias: But what the hell is it for? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(8), 1122– 1136.

Received March 8, 2021, received in revised form July 5, 2021, accepted July 5, 2021