Intrusive memories of a traumatic event can be reduced by a subsequent interference procedure, seemingly sparing voluntary memory for that event. This selective-interference effect has potential therapeutic benefits (e.g., for emotional disorders) and legal importance (e.g., for witness testimony). However, the measurements of intrusive memory and voluntary memory typically differ in the role of associations between a cue and the emotional memory “hotspots.” To test this, we asked participants to watch a traumatic film followed by either an interference procedure (reminder plus Tetris) or control procedure (reminder only). Measurement of intrusions (using a laboratory task) and voluntary memory (recognition for film stills) were crossed with the presence or absence of associative cues. The reminder-plus-Tetris group exhibited fewer intrusions despite comparable recognition memory, replicating the results of prior studies. Note that this selective interference did not appear to depend on associative cues. This involuntary versus voluntary memory dissociation for emotional material further supports separate-trace memory theories and has applied advantages.

通过随后的干扰程序可以减少对创伤事件的侵入性记忆，似乎可以保留对该事件的自愿记忆。这种选择性干扰效应具有潜在的治疗益处（例如，对于情绪障碍）和法律重要性（例如，对于证人证词）。然而，侵入性记忆和自愿记忆的测量通常在提示与情绪记忆“热点”之间的关联作用上有所不同。为了测试这一点，我们要求参与者观看一部创伤电影，然后进行干扰程序（提醒加俄罗斯方块）或控制程序（仅提醒）。入侵的测量（使用实验室任务）和自愿记忆（电影剧照的识别）与联想线索的存在或不存在相交叉。尽管识别记忆相当，但提醒加俄罗斯方块组表现出较少的入侵，复制了先前研究的结果。请注意，这种选择性干扰似乎并不依赖于联想线索。这种情感材料的非自愿与自愿记忆分离进一步支持了分离痕迹记忆理论，并具有应用优势。