↓ Skip to main content

The reality of the past versus the ideality of the future: emotional valence and functional differences between past and future mental time travel

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
178 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The reality of the past versus the ideality of the future: emotional valence and functional differences between past and future mental time travel
Published in
Memory & Cognition, October 2012
DOI 10.3758/s13421-012-0260-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne S. Rasmussen, Dorthe Berntsen

Abstract

Mental time travel (MTT) is the ability to mentally project oneself backward or forward in time in order to remember an event from one's personal past or to imagine a possible event in one's personal future. Past and future MTT share many similarities, and there is evidence to suggest that the two temporal directions rely on a shared neural network and similar cognitive structures. At the same time, one major difference between past and future MTT is that future as compared to past events generally are more emotionally positive and idyllic, suggesting that the two types of event representations may also serve different functions for emotion, self, and behavioral regulation. Here, we asked 158 participants to remember one positive and one negative event from their personal past as well as to imagine one positive and one negative event from their potential personal future and to rate the events on phenomenological characteristics. We replicated previous work regarding similarities between past and future MTT. We also found that positive events were more phenomenologically vivid than negative events. However, across most variables, we consistently found an increased effect of emotional valence for future as compared to past MTT, showing that the differences between positive and negative events were larger for future than for past events. Our findings support the idea that future MTT is biased by uncorrected positive illusions, whereas past MTT is constrained by the reality of things that have actually happened.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 166 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 22%
Student > Master 25 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 13%
Researcher 19 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 30 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 102 57%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 38 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 23 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,398,281
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#91
of 1,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,159
of 172,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#3
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 172,530 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.