S4SP1 - Experimental studies on memory and imagery rescripting
Tracks
Track 7
Science & Research
| Saturday, June 1, 2024 |
| 3:45 PM - 5:15 PM |
Overview
Symposium
Details
If the presenter suggests breaking into groups then you should access the Breakout Foyer HERE
Imagery rescripting (ImRs) is an effective therapeutic technique aimed at reducing trauma-related emotions and memories. In this symposium, we will present several experimental studies that each explore different aspects underlying ImRs. The first speaker, Marleen Rijkeboer will present a study on generalization of ImRs to related memories. Next, Pauline Dibbets and Maarten Peters will elaborate on the effects of misinformation during rescripting on false memory recollections. During the third presentation, Nicole Geschwind will present a study on the value of added positive emotion in ImRs on trauma-related symptoms. The final presenter, Julie Krans, will compare the generalization of safety after reevaluation of the aversive event (ImRs) or after expectancy violation (extinction). The novel work presented in this symposium tries to unravel fundamental aspects of ImRs and to bring these insights to the clinical field.
1. Do the effects of ImRs on the target memory generalize to related memories in the emotional memory network?
Marleen Rijkeboer
Abstract
ImRs is an effective technique for processing traumatic memories. These episodic memories are linked to other memories through certain characteristics (e.g., emotion; encapsulated belief), thus forming a network of related memories. When a memory in a network is activated, related memories are also activated to a certain extent, depending on the strength of the relationship between them. But what happens when characteristics of one of these memories are changed due to ImRs? Does the target memory lose its connection to other memories in the network? Or do related memories in the network change as well, this change being moderated by the strength of the relationship with the target memory? To address these questions the Emotional Memory Network Assessment interview was administered to 150 participants (18-60 yrs) with aversive memories of social situations. The target memory and up to 3 related memories were identified, and of each memory a) emotionality, b) believability of the encapsulated belief, and c) perceived strength of its relationship to the target memory. Next, participants were randomly allocated to a session of ImRs or a control session (browsing a magazine on birds). After the session characteristics of each memory were assessed again. Data were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis. The results indicated that ImRs significantly reduced the emotionality and believability of the target memory, but its relation to the network remained intact. In the ImRs condition characteristics of related memories were also affected, which was moderated by the perceived relationship of each memory with the target memory. No such effects were found in the control condition. To conclude, the effects of ImRs on the target memory potentially generalize to other memories in the network, but the extent of this spreading effect depends on the strength of the association between memories. Clinical implications are discussed during the presentation.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
2. Does misinformation during ImR increase false memories?
Pauline Dibbets & Maarten J.V. Peters
Abstract
Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) is a trauma-focused treatment technique aimed at alleviating trauma-related symptoms by modifying the content of the traumatic memory using imagery. This modification is regularly done by the therapist and could be viewed as incorporating new details in memory, also termed misinformation in memory research. However, not much is known about the effect of providing misinformation during ImRs on subsequent memory recollections for the traumatic event. We used a single- (Experiment 1: part 1 presentation) and three-day (Experiment 2: part 2 presentation) experimental design with an aversive movie compilation as an analogue to a traumatic event. After the movie, participants either imagined the scenes with rescripting (ImRs), without rescripting (imaginal exposure, IE), or carried out a filler task (control). In both imagery conditions an experimenter guided the imagery, but only the ImRs instruction contained misinformation about the trauma movie details. Memory for the original movie compilation was tested with a memory recognition task on the same day (Experiment 1) or after three days post aversive movie (Experiment 2), during which participants indicated whether the item was present in the movie (true items) or not (false items). Results of the one-day study showed that ImRs participants more often reported the misinformation to be present in the movie clip than IE and control participants did. The IE condition more often indicated that false items were present compared to the control condition. The collection of the three-day experiment is still in progress; the (preliminary) results of Experiment 2 will be presented and compared to the one-day experiment during the conference. Finally, clinical and forensic implications will be discussed.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
3. Let’s have fun together! Experimental research on the value of an added positive emotion component in Imagery Rescripting
Nicole Geschwind
Abstract
Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) aims to reduce trauma-related negative emotions and intrusions. According to the Broaden-and Build Theory and the Undoing Hypothesis, positive emotions help individuals to cope with the consequences of trauma. However, ImRs protocols vary in the extent to which they explicitly target positive emotions. We used a multiple-day design with a trauma film paradigm to investigate whether adding an explicit positive emotion component to ImRs improved treatment effects in a non-clinical sample. Participants (n=105) watched a trauma film (an excerpt from the film “Salo”, in which children were tortured and abused) on day 1. Then, participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a standard ImRs condition (rescripting the scene so it was safe for the children and non-distressing for the participant), an ImRs condition with an added explicit positive emotion component (ImRs+; imagining doing something joyful together with the children after making the situation safe/non-distressing), or a no-intervention control (NIC) condition. Participants received the condition-specific intervention on day 2, and completed additional post-assessments of positive and negative affect on day 3. In addition, participants recorded intrusions from the trauma film from day 1 until day 3. Results showed that, compared to the standard ImRs and NIC conditions, ImRs+ significantly and reliably increased positive emotions. In line with the instructions to imagine doing something joyful, increases were only seen for positive emotions of medium and high but not low arousal. Unfortunately, floor effects for intrusions limited the ability investigate the beneficial effects of improved positive affect on intrusion-related outcomes, and we found no significant between-group differences for these outcomes. In conclusion, adding a positive emotion component to ImRs reliably improved positive affect. More research is needed to determine whether adding a positive emotion component improves the efficacy of ImRs with regard to intrusion-related measures.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
4.The generalisation of safety in imagery rescripting versus extinction
Julie Krans
Abstract
Exposure therapy is effective for many patients suffering from anxiety. However, its long-term efficacy depends on successful generalization to other situations and stimuli beyond those directly targeted during treatment. Achieving this safety generalization poses a challenge as return of fear is common after exposure. Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) holds potential for greater success in this regard, as it purportedly changes the meaning of distressing memories, contrasting with exposure, which primarily focuses on fearful expectations. We sought to test the mechanisms of ImRs and extinction (reevaluation and expectancy learning) and evaluate their efficacy in promoting generalization of safety that transcends specific contexts. We employed a 1-day fear conditioning paradigm involving a cohort of healthy participants (N = 113), randomly assigned to one of three conditions: ImRs-only, extinction-only, and a combined condition of ImRs and extinction. Participants were shown a distressing film clip as the unconditional stimulus (US). Fear acquisition involved exposure to two conditioned film-related stimuli (CS+s) followed by a fragment of the distressing film, with only one CS+ undergoing extinction during a designated phase. Participants in the ImRs group were guided to imagine a more positive outcome of the film clip but did not see the CS+s again. We assessed safety generalization by responses to both CS+s. The results demonstrated a more pronounced reevaluation of the US the ImRs and extinction combined group. Conversely, US expectancy was reduced more substantially in the two groups involving extinction. Notably, safety generalization was observed across all three experimental conditions. These findings validate the distinctive mechanisms at play in ImRs and exposure, but do not support the idea that ImRs enhanced safety generalization. We advocate for a tailored treatment approach that considers individual needs (i.e., managing fearful expectations vs reevaluating the meaning of the negative event).
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
Imagery rescripting (ImRs) is an effective therapeutic technique aimed at reducing trauma-related emotions and memories. In this symposium, we will present several experimental studies that each explore different aspects underlying ImRs. The first speaker, Marleen Rijkeboer will present a study on generalization of ImRs to related memories. Next, Pauline Dibbets and Maarten Peters will elaborate on the effects of misinformation during rescripting on false memory recollections. During the third presentation, Nicole Geschwind will present a study on the value of added positive emotion in ImRs on trauma-related symptoms. The final presenter, Julie Krans, will compare the generalization of safety after reevaluation of the aversive event (ImRs) or after expectancy violation (extinction). The novel work presented in this symposium tries to unravel fundamental aspects of ImRs and to bring these insights to the clinical field.
1. Do the effects of ImRs on the target memory generalize to related memories in the emotional memory network?
Marleen Rijkeboer
Abstract
ImRs is an effective technique for processing traumatic memories. These episodic memories are linked to other memories through certain characteristics (e.g., emotion; encapsulated belief), thus forming a network of related memories. When a memory in a network is activated, related memories are also activated to a certain extent, depending on the strength of the relationship between them. But what happens when characteristics of one of these memories are changed due to ImRs? Does the target memory lose its connection to other memories in the network? Or do related memories in the network change as well, this change being moderated by the strength of the relationship with the target memory? To address these questions the Emotional Memory Network Assessment interview was administered to 150 participants (18-60 yrs) with aversive memories of social situations. The target memory and up to 3 related memories were identified, and of each memory a) emotionality, b) believability of the encapsulated belief, and c) perceived strength of its relationship to the target memory. Next, participants were randomly allocated to a session of ImRs or a control session (browsing a magazine on birds). After the session characteristics of each memory were assessed again. Data were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis. The results indicated that ImRs significantly reduced the emotionality and believability of the target memory, but its relation to the network remained intact. In the ImRs condition characteristics of related memories were also affected, which was moderated by the perceived relationship of each memory with the target memory. No such effects were found in the control condition. To conclude, the effects of ImRs on the target memory potentially generalize to other memories in the network, but the extent of this spreading effect depends on the strength of the association between memories. Clinical implications are discussed during the presentation.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
2. Does misinformation during ImR increase false memories?
Pauline Dibbets & Maarten J.V. Peters
Abstract
Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) is a trauma-focused treatment technique aimed at alleviating trauma-related symptoms by modifying the content of the traumatic memory using imagery. This modification is regularly done by the therapist and could be viewed as incorporating new details in memory, also termed misinformation in memory research. However, not much is known about the effect of providing misinformation during ImRs on subsequent memory recollections for the traumatic event. We used a single- (Experiment 1: part 1 presentation) and three-day (Experiment 2: part 2 presentation) experimental design with an aversive movie compilation as an analogue to a traumatic event. After the movie, participants either imagined the scenes with rescripting (ImRs), without rescripting (imaginal exposure, IE), or carried out a filler task (control). In both imagery conditions an experimenter guided the imagery, but only the ImRs instruction contained misinformation about the trauma movie details. Memory for the original movie compilation was tested with a memory recognition task on the same day (Experiment 1) or after three days post aversive movie (Experiment 2), during which participants indicated whether the item was present in the movie (true items) or not (false items). Results of the one-day study showed that ImRs participants more often reported the misinformation to be present in the movie clip than IE and control participants did. The IE condition more often indicated that false items were present compared to the control condition. The collection of the three-day experiment is still in progress; the (preliminary) results of Experiment 2 will be presented and compared to the one-day experiment during the conference. Finally, clinical and forensic implications will be discussed.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
3. Let’s have fun together! Experimental research on the value of an added positive emotion component in Imagery Rescripting
Nicole Geschwind
Abstract
Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) aims to reduce trauma-related negative emotions and intrusions. According to the Broaden-and Build Theory and the Undoing Hypothesis, positive emotions help individuals to cope with the consequences of trauma. However, ImRs protocols vary in the extent to which they explicitly target positive emotions. We used a multiple-day design with a trauma film paradigm to investigate whether adding an explicit positive emotion component to ImRs improved treatment effects in a non-clinical sample. Participants (n=105) watched a trauma film (an excerpt from the film “Salo”, in which children were tortured and abused) on day 1. Then, participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a standard ImRs condition (rescripting the scene so it was safe for the children and non-distressing for the participant), an ImRs condition with an added explicit positive emotion component (ImRs+; imagining doing something joyful together with the children after making the situation safe/non-distressing), or a no-intervention control (NIC) condition. Participants received the condition-specific intervention on day 2, and completed additional post-assessments of positive and negative affect on day 3. In addition, participants recorded intrusions from the trauma film from day 1 until day 3. Results showed that, compared to the standard ImRs and NIC conditions, ImRs+ significantly and reliably increased positive emotions. In line with the instructions to imagine doing something joyful, increases were only seen for positive emotions of medium and high but not low arousal. Unfortunately, floor effects for intrusions limited the ability investigate the beneficial effects of improved positive affect on intrusion-related outcomes, and we found no significant between-group differences for these outcomes. In conclusion, adding a positive emotion component to ImRs reliably improved positive affect. More research is needed to determine whether adding a positive emotion component improves the efficacy of ImRs with regard to intrusion-related measures.
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
4.The generalisation of safety in imagery rescripting versus extinction
Julie Krans
Abstract
Exposure therapy is effective for many patients suffering from anxiety. However, its long-term efficacy depends on successful generalization to other situations and stimuli beyond those directly targeted during treatment. Achieving this safety generalization poses a challenge as return of fear is common after exposure. Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) holds potential for greater success in this regard, as it purportedly changes the meaning of distressing memories, contrasting with exposure, which primarily focuses on fearful expectations. We sought to test the mechanisms of ImRs and extinction (reevaluation and expectancy learning) and evaluate their efficacy in promoting generalization of safety that transcends specific contexts. We employed a 1-day fear conditioning paradigm involving a cohort of healthy participants (N = 113), randomly assigned to one of three conditions: ImRs-only, extinction-only, and a combined condition of ImRs and extinction. Participants were shown a distressing film clip as the unconditional stimulus (US). Fear acquisition involved exposure to two conditioned film-related stimuli (CS+s) followed by a fragment of the distressing film, with only one CS+ undergoing extinction during a designated phase. Participants in the ImRs group were guided to imagine a more positive outcome of the film clip but did not see the CS+s again. We assessed safety generalization by responses to both CS+s. The results demonstrated a more pronounced reevaluation of the US the ImRs and extinction combined group. Conversely, US expectancy was reduced more substantially in the two groups involving extinction. Notably, safety generalization was observed across all three experimental conditions. These findings validate the distinctive mechanisms at play in ImRs and exposure, but do not support the idea that ImRs enhanced safety generalization. We advocate for a tailored treatment approach that considers individual needs (i.e., managing fearful expectations vs reevaluating the meaning of the negative event).
Target Audience
Beginners, intermediate, and advanced-level participants
Speaker
Dr. Pauline Dibbets
Associate Professor
Maastricht University
Does misinformation during ImR increase false memories?
Biography
Dr. Pauline Dibbets is an Associate Professor at the Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University. Her research focuses the acquisition, diminishment, and relapse of fear. She is interested in the translation of therapeutical intervention techniques to experimental research and vice versa.
Marleen Rijkeboer
Professor of Clinical Psychology
Maastricht University.
Do the effects of ImRs on the target memory generalize to related memories in the emotional memory network?
Biography
Marleen Rijkeboer is full professor of clinical psychology at Maastricht University. For 25 years her research is focused on schema therapy. Examples are the international study into the Reformulated Theory underlying Schema Therapy, which she leads together with prof. dr. Arnoud Arntz, and the trials into schema therapy for dissociative identity disorder, which she runs together with prof. dr. Rafaele Huntjens and dr. Nathan Bachrach. She has been board member of the ISST, and president of the Dutch Association of Schema Therapy, and she was granted a life-time honorary membership of both associations.
Level of ISST membership
Life-time Honorary Member
ISST Certification Level
Certified Trainer, Supervisor & Advanced Therapist
Dr. Maarten Peters
Associate Professor at the Department of Clinical Psychological Science
Maastricht University
Does misinformation during ImR increase false memories?
Biography
Dr. Maarten J.V. Peters is an Associate Professor at the Department of Clinical Psychological Science, of Maastricht University. As scientist-practitioner, his research focuses on bridging the gap between fundamental memory research and clinical and forensic practice. This with a focus on understanding memory mechanisms of specific therapeutic techniques such as Imagery Rescripting in both clinical and experimental studies. He also works as a certified Junior Schematherapist (Vereniging Schematherapie VSt, The Netherlands).
Dr. Nicole Geschwind
Assistant Professor
Maastricht University
Let’s have fun together! Experimental research on the value of an added positive emotion component in Imagery Rescripting
Biography
Dr. Nicole Geschwind is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University. Her research focuses on the role of positive emotions in mental health. She is particularly interested in finding and evaluating ways to recruit positive emotions more efficiently in psychological therapies. Bridging the gap between science and clinical practice, she has co-authored a treatment manual on CBT with a focus on positive emotions (positive CBT). Her research includes both clinical and experimental studies.
Dr Julie Krans
Assistant Professor
Radboud University & Pro Persona
The generalisation of safety in imagery rescripting versus extinction
Biography
Dr. Julie Krans is an assistant professor and associate director at the Behavioural Science Institute at the Radboud University, and a senior researcher at the Pro Persona Overwaal centre for anxiety, OCD, and
PTSD. Her research focuses on schema therapy and imagery rescripting, mainly in chronic anxiety, OCD, and PTSD, and includes both more fundamental experimental studies as well as clinical effectiveness
studies. She is also a trained CBT therapist, and passionate about connecting the worlds of science and
practice.
