Three recent studies ( Pearson, 2012; Pearson, Ross, & Webster, 2012) purported to test the revised dual representation theory of posttraumatic stress disorder ( Brewin, Gregory, Lipton, & Burgess, 2010) by manipulating the amount of additional information accompanying traumatic stimulus materials and assessing the effect on subsequent intrusive memories. Here we point out that these studies involve a misunderstanding of the meaning of “contextual” within the theory, such that the manipulation would be unlikely to have had the intended effect and the results are ambiguous with respect to the theory. Past and future experimental tests of the theory are discussed.
See how this article has been cited at scite.ai
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.