(2010), we found a strong correlation between past and future int

(2010), we found a strong correlation between past and future internal details (r = .63, p < .01) and past and future external details (r = .73, p < .001). In contrast, past internal and external details were uncorrelated (r = .30, p = .23) as were future internal and external details (r = .06, p = .82). The positive correlations between internal and external

details for past and future events AZD4547 nmr have been accounted for as evidence for the close overlap between the specificity of past and future events (Addis et al., 2008). However, it should be kept in mind that these correlations are boosted by the large differences between the TBI and control group, and therefore should be interpreted with caution. To take into account the fact that patients produced fewer details overall and to examine the effect of temporal distance to the remembered/imagined event together with the other factors, we looked at the ratio of internal-to-total details. The ratios were

analysed by means of a 2 (Group: TBI vs. controls) × 2 (Temporal Direction: past vs. future) × 3 (Temporal Distance: 1 month, 5 years, or 10 years) mixed-factor analyses of variance (ANOVA) with Group as a between-subject factor, and Temporal Direction and Temporal Distance as within-subjects factors. As illustrated by Figure 2, a significant main effect of Group was found, F(1, 16) = 58.18, η2p = .78, p < .0001, together with a significant Epacadostat effect of Temporal Direction, F(1, 16) = 15.34, η2p = .49, p < .001, and Temporal Distance F(1, 16) = 12.18, η2p = .43, p < .0001.

The main effect of Group reflected, that the TBI participants proportionally reported fewer episodic event-specific details for both past and future events compared with healthy controls across all time periods. The main effect of Temporal Direction indicated that proportionally more episodic event-specific details were produced for past events than for future events. The main effect of Temporal Distance reflected that events closer in time contained a greater proportion of episodic event-specific details than distant events. Importantly, the Temporal Distance × Group interaction was significant. The results of a repeated measures ANOVA performed on each group separately showed that the Temporal Distance effect was significant only for the TBI participants, F(2, 16) = 10.66, η2p = .57, find more p < .001, but not for the controls F(2, 16) = 2.00, p = .17, reflecting that TBI patients produced proportionally fewer episodic, event-specific details for past and future events the further the events were located away from the present. In sum, this series of analyses showed that TBI patients’ representations contained relatively fewer episodic, event-specific details than the ones of the controls, even when controlling for the total number of details. Moreover, while the TBI patients reported proportionally fewer internal details than did the healthy controls, this trend was not symmetrical.

This entry was posted in Antibody. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>