↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Vocal Emotion on Memory in Younger and Older Adults

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Aging Research, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of Vocal Emotion on Memory in Younger and Older Adults
Published in
Experimental Aging Research, December 2015
DOI 10.1080/0361073x.2016.1108734
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller, Kate Dupuis, Sherri L. Smith

Abstract

Emotional content can enhance memory for visual stimuli, and older adults often perform better if stimuli portray positive emotion. Vocal emotion can enhance the accuracy of word repetition in noise when vocal prosody portrays attention-capturing emotions such as fear and pleasant surprise. In the present study, the authors examined the effect of vocal emotion on the accuracy of repetition and recall in younger and older adults when words are presented in quiet or in a background of competing babble. Younger and older adults (Mage = 20 and 72 years, respectively) participated. Lists of 100 items (carrier phrase plus target word) were presented in recall sets of increasing size. Word repetition accuracy was tested after each item and recall after each trial in each set size. In Experiment 1, one list spoken in a neutral voice and another with emotion (fear, pleasant surprise, sad, neutral) were presented in quiet (n = 24 per group). In Experiment 2, participants (n = 12 per group) were presented the emotional list in noise. In quiet, word repetition accuracy was near perfect for both groups and did not vary systematically with set size for the list spoken in a neutral voice; however, for the emotional list, repetition was less accurate, especially for the older group. Recall in quiet was higher for younger than older adults; collapsed over groups, recall was higher for the neutral than for the emotional list and it decreased with increasing set size. In noise, emotion-specific effects emerged; word repetition for the older group and word recall for both groups (more for younger than older) was best for fear or pleasant surprise and worst for sad. In quiet, vocal emotion reduced the word repetition accuracy of the older group and recall accuracy for both groups. In noise, there were emotion-specific effects on the repetition accuracy of older adults and the recall accuracy of both groups. Both groups, but especially the younger group, performed better for items portraying fear or pleasant surprise and worse for items portraying sadness or neutral emotion. The emotion-specific effects on word repetition cascade to recall, especially in older listeners.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Linguistics 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,574,276
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Aging Research
#171
of 290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,345
of 390,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Aging Research
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them