Everyday Memory: An Expanded View Of Autobiographical Memory Functions

The current study investigated an expanded set of everyday autobiographical memory (AM) functions as proposed by developers of the 7-function Child-Caregiver Reminiscence Scale (CRS) (Kulkofsky & Koh, 2009). The current study adapted the theoretical CRS for use with diverse, adult samples. Participants (N = 1841) from a large, urban university completed the CRS-A online over the course or two academic semesters. Validation analyses included EFA using principal axis factoring, CFA, MGCFA invariance testing, and MTMM tests of construct validity (convergent and discriminant) and method effects. Results yielded evidence for a 6- function (Conversation, Perspective-Taking, Relationship Maintenance, Behavioral Control/Teaching/Problem-Solving, Emotion Regulation, and Self) model that demonstrated invariance across time, gender, and ethnicity/race. Provisional evidence showed that the Conversation and Behavioral Control/Teaching/Problem-Solving functions were used differentially across Caucasian and African-American/Black groups. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed

The Role Of Autobiographical Memory In Interpersonal And Intrapersonal Simulation: A Theoretical And Empirical Exploration

Recent research seeking an expanded view of everyday autobiographical memory functions found evidence for a new function: perspective taking (Ranson & Fitzgerald, in preparation)—which is the inferring of others’ mental states (Batson, Early, & Salvarani, 1997; Ickes, 2003). Because no other study has implicated the social behavior of perspective taking as a purpose for which autobiographical memory is used, Chapter 1 of the current paper proposes a conceptual cognitive process model developed to provide a theoretical explanation. The resultant Expanded Simulation Model was adapted for use in the current paper from the cognitive process model detailed in simulation theory (Goldman, 2006; Shanton & Goldman, 2010). The Expanded Simulation Model illustrates how, through the mechanism of mental simulation, autobiographical memory specifically, rather than long-term memory generally, can be used to inform perspective taking—thus theoretically substantiating perspective taking as a function of autobiographical memory. Chapter 1 of the current paper details the “unpacking” of the simulation theory process model’s superficially defined long-term memory component to show how autobiographical memory content is activated, retrieved, and incorporated in simulation for perspective taking. Also aligned with a recent extension to simulation theory by Shanton and Goldman (2010), the Expanded Simulation Model can be used to explain how autobiographical memory specifically informs mental time travel—the mental traveling of oneself through conceptual time (Schacter & Addis, 2007). As such, the Expanded Simulation Model, in keeping with Shanton and Goldman’s revised model, can account for the two ensuing forms of simulation: interpersonal and intrapersonal. That is, because perspective taking is other-directed, it is underlain by autobiographical memory-informed interpersonal simulation, whereas self-directed nature of mental time travel is underlain by autobiographical memory-informed intrapersonal simulation. Two empirical studies were designed to test the claims of Chapter 1. Study 1 (Chapter 2) validated a newly developed instrument for measuring the frequency with which individuals use autobiographical memory for perspective taking and two mental time travel functions: prospection (imagining future scenarios) (Schacter & Addis, 2007) and counterfactual thinking (reconstructing the past to imagine an details or an outcome that did not actually occur) (Roese & Olson, 1995). Results of exploratory principal axis factoring for ordinal data, as well as confirmatory factor analysis using a structural equation model approach, yielded evidence that the 10-item Autobiographical Memory Functions of Simulation (AMFS) scale reliably measured the functions of perspective taking, prospection, and counterfactual thinking. Study 2 (Chapter 3) used the validated AMFS scale to evaluate the functions of perspective taking, prospection, and counterfactual thinking in the presence of, and in comparison to, other known autobiographical memory functions to glean a better understanding of their viability as independent functions. Results supported the independence of the AMFS functions. Further, evidence recommended the characterization of the AMFS function of Perspective Taking as “simulation-based,” whereas the AMFJR Perspective Taking function instead reflected rated frequency of functional use of autobiographical memory for socially situated Perspective Taking. Also discussed were mapping of the AMFS and AMFJR functions onto the broad functions of the TALE (Bluck & Alea, 2011), as well as personality, age, gender, and culture effects

If I Take Your Perspective, Will I Understand You Better?

Additional contributors: Maryhope Howland; Jeffry A. Simpson (faculty mentor).The Davis multidimensional empathy model features two empathy components: affective (emotional concern, sympathy, caring, compassion) and cognitive (inferring the mental states of others). The cognitive-empathy (CE) capacity to conceptualize and understand another’s point of view - to be "in another’s shoes" - is called perspective-taking (PT). The proficiency with which one infers another’s thoughts and feelings is known as empathic accuracy. One’s capacity for CE/PT should therefore predict EA; however, studies have shown this not to be the case. EA and PT researchers have yet to define the controversial relation between EA and CE/PT. Whereas previous studies have defined PT as a capacity based on measures of dispositional CE self-report scales — and failed to reveal a PT-EA link — this study instead defined PT as a tendency to make spontaneous, literal first-person inferences, and measured this tendency based on one’s actual use of such inferences during an EA task.This project was supported by the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP)

Validating Multidimensional Outcome Assessment Using the TBI Common Data Elements: An Analysis of the TRACK-TBI Pilot Sample.

The Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) is often the primary outcome measure in clinical trials for traumatic brain injury (TBI). Although the GOSE's capture of global function outcome has several strengths, concerns have been raised about its limited ability to identify mild disability and failure to capture the full scope of problems patients exhibit after TBI. This analysis examined the convergence of disability ratings across a multidimensional set of outcome domains in the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) Pilot study. The study collected measures recommended by the TBI Common Data Elements (CDE) Workgroup. Patients presenting to 3 emergency departments with a TBI of any severity enrolled in TRACK-TBI prospectively after injury; outcome measures were collected at 3 and six months postinjury. Analyses examined frequency of impairment and overlap between impairment status across the CDE outcome domains of Global Level of Functioning (GOSE), Neuropsychological (cognitive) Impairment, Psychological Status, TBI Symptoms, and Quality of Life. GOSE score correlated in the expected direction with other outcomes (M Spearman's rho = .21 and .49 with neurocognitive and self-report outcomes, respectively). The subsample in the Upper Good Recovery (GOSE 8) category appeared quite healthy across most other outcomes, although 19.0% had impaired executive functioning (Trail Making Test Part B). A significant minority of participants in the Lower Good Recovery subgroup (GOSE 7) met criteria for impairment across numerous other outcome measures. The findings highlight the multidimensional nature of TBI recovery and the limitations of applying only a single outcome measure

Diagnosing the GOSE : structural and psychometric properties using item response theory, a TRACK-TBI pilot study

The Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) was designed to assess global outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Since its introduction, several empirically founded criticisms of the GOSE have been raised, including poor reliability; an insensitivity to small, but potentially meaningful, changes; a tendency to produce ceiling effects; inconsistent associations with neurocognitive, psychological, and quality-of-life measures; and an inability to assess the multi-dimensional nature of TBI outcome. The current project took a diagnostic approach to identifying the underlying causes of reported limitations by exploring the internal construct validity of the GOSE at 3 and 6 months post-injury using item response theory (IRT) techniques. Data were from the TRACK-TBI Pilot Study, a large (N = 586), prospective, multi-site project that included TBI cases of all injury severity levels. To assess the level of latent functional "impairment" captured by GOSE items independent of the assigned outcome category or GOSE total score, items were modified so that higher scores reflected greater impairment. Results showed that although the GOSE's items capture varying levels of impairment across a broad disability spectrum at 3 and 6 months, there was also evidence at each time point of item redundancy (multiple items capturing similar levels of impairment), item deficiency (lack of items capturing lower levels of impairment), and item inefficiency (items only capturing minimal impairment information). The findings illustrate the value of IRT to illuminate strengths and weaknesses of clinical outcome assessment measures and provide a framework for future measure refinement