LAUSR

ABSTRACT Item- and list-method directed forgetting paradigms have been used to study forgetting of emotionally toned items in clinical and control group populations for several decades. Meta-analysis of item-method studies found that clinical populations retained more remember- than forget-cued items of each valence. These effects were comparable to that shown by control populations for positive and negative items, but less than that shown by controls on neutral items. Encoding deficits may underlie clinical populations’ item-method directed forgetting since those populations retained fewer remember-cued items of each valence compared to control populations. Moderator analysis indicated larger effect size variability for some clinical populations (e.g., anxiety disorders) than other populations (e.g., PTSD, schizophrenia). Meta-analysis of list-method directed forgetting among clinical populations revealed only List 1 forgetting or costs for neutral items; i.e., better memory for to-be-remembered than forgotten List 1 neutral items, but no List 2 enhancements or benefits; i.e., better memory for List 2 items among those told to forget than remember List 1 items, for any item valence. Control populations showed costs and benefits for all item valences. Results from both paradigms are discussed in terms of clinical-control population differences in executive processes. Limitations of the meta-analyses and suggestions for future research are presented.