Journal of Experimental Psychology: Copyright 1992 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

Learning, Memory, and Cognition 0278-7393/92/S3.00

1992, Vol. 18, No. 2, 379-390

Remembering Pictures: Pleasure and Arousal in Memory

Margaret M. Bradley, Mark K. Greenwald, Margaret C. Petry, and Peter J. Lang
University of Florida

Incidental memory performance for pictures that varied along the affective dimensions of
pleasantness and arousal was assessed. For both an immediate and delayed (1 year later) free-
recall task, only the arousal dimension had a stable effect on memory performance: Pictures
rated as highly arousing were remembered better than low-arousal stimuli. This effect was
corroborated in a speeded recognition test, in which high-arousal materials encoded earlier in
the experiment produced faster reaction times than their low-arousal counterparts. Pleasantness
affected reaction time decisions only for pictures not encoded earlier. These results suggest that
whereas both the dimensions of pleasantness and arousal are processed at initial encoding, long-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

term memory performance is mainly affected by arousal.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

It has been demonstrated numerous times that emotional
stimuli vary along two primary dimensions of affective val-
ence and arousal (e.g., Russell, 1980; Tellegen, 1985; Lang,
Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1990). Using the semantic differential,
Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum (1957) showed that the bi-
polar factors of pleasantness and intensity accounted for most
of the variability in judgments of affective text. These dimen-
sions of emotional language map easily onto the behavioral
dimensions of direction (approach or avoidance) and vigor
(i.e., mobilization) advocated by a biphasic organization of
emotional responses (Hebb, 1949; Konorski, 1967; Lang et
al., 1990). Dimensional views of emotion are parsimonious
in that, rather than assuming independent, specific emotional
states (e.g., fear, anger, and joy), two primary dimensions
define the spectrum of emotional behavior.
The questions addressed in the current article exploit this
organization of emotion to determine the contribution of the
valence dimension, the arousal dimension, and their interac-
tion to memory performance. Past research has tended to
focus on memory for a particular type of emotional event
(e.g., sad, happy, traumatic) rather than using a dimensional
analysis. In assessing recall of traumatic events, for example,
Christianson and Loftus (1987) found a memory advantage
for the occurrence of a traumatic situation, compared to a
neutral one. The purported clarity and stability in memory
for traumatic events has led some researchers (Brown & Kulik,
1977; Bohannon, 1988) to posit a special "flashbulb memory"
mechanism that veridically records moments of trauma. Al-
though receiving somewhat less attention, research on mem-
ory for happy events also produces evidence of increased
memorability, relative to neutral. The "Pollyanna" effect,
This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health
(NIMH) Grants MH37757, MH41950, and MH43975 to Peter J.
Lang.
We would like to thank Alfons Hamm for his assistance in data
collection and interpretation in Experiment 2 and Sven-Ake Chris-
tianson and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Margaret M. Bradley, Box 100165, Health Science Center, University
of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32610.
indicating better memory for pleasant materials, is at the heart
of a series of experiments that corroborate this phenomenon
with verbal stimuli (Matlin & Stang, 1978).
Running parallel to reports of improved memory for trau-
matic or happy stimuli are a number of experiments that have
explicitly focused on the arousal dimension (see Craik &
Blankstein, 1975, and Eysenck, 1976, for reviews). In these
studies, arousal has been variously operationalized as the rated
arousal of the stimulus materials, the magnitude of a physio-
logical index of the subject's arousal level (e.g., electrodermal
responses), or by the presence of a constant stimulus back-
ground (e.g., white noise). The general finding is that verbal
items associated with higher arousal at encoding result in
better memory performance on a later (especially long-term)
memory test. Thus, whereas affective memory has been stud-
ied at either extreme of the valence dimension (i.e., pleasant
or unpleasant), or along an arousal continuum, a systematic
exploration of the contribution of each dimension to memory
performance is lacking.
A necessary component of such experimentation is the
presence of emotionally evocative stimuli that are distributed
in the two-dimensional affective space defined by pleasantness
and arousal. In the current study, the emotional materials are
color photographic slides, drawn from the International Af-
fective Picture System (IAPS; Lang, Ohman, & Vaitl, 1988).
This standardized collection of pictures, gathered from a
variety of sources, samples contents across a wide range of
emotional and semantic categories. Contents include animals,
nature scenes, erotica, household objects, expressive human
faces, weapons, mutilated bodies, and others. Affective val-
ence and arousal ratings for each slide have been obtained in
previous rating studies, allowing precise placement of these
stimuli in a two-dimensional affective space, which Figure 1
illustrates (see Bradley, Greenwald, & Hamm, in press; Green-
wald, Cook, & Lang, 1989; Lang, Greenwald, Bradley, &
Hamm, in press).
In addition to assessing judgments of affective experience,
a number of studies have convincingly demonstrated that
emotional responses to these materials—measured by psycho-
physiological and behavioral reactions—reliably covary with
the dimensions of valence and arousal (Bradley et al., in press;
Greenwald et al., 1989; Lang et al., in press). Facial electro-
 380 BRADLEY, GREENWALD, PETRY, AND LANG

Pleasant

5 10 15 20 25

Pleasantness Rating
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Unpleasant

Arousal rating

Figure 1. The left panel illustrates the distribution of 240 rated slides (currently composing the
International Affective Picture System; Lang et al., 1988) in the two-dimensional space formed by mean
ratings of pleasantness and arousal; the right top panel illustrates facial corrugator electromyographic
responses (defined as the average change over a 6-s slide-viewing interval from a 1 -s baseline immediately
preceding slide onset) to slides ranked by pleasantness, whereas the right bottom panel depicts mean
skin conductance responses to slides ranked by rated arousal (Greenwald et al., 1989).

myographic responses, particularly the corrugator ("frown";
see Figure 1) and zygomatic ("smile") muscles, reliably vary
with changes in pleasantness ratings. As the pleasantness of
the slide decreases, corrugator activity increases and zygo-
matic activity decreases, indexing the affective valence dimen-
sion. The size of the reflexive eyeblink to a startle probe (e.g.,
a loud noise burst) presented during viewing of these slide
materials is also sensitive to the affective valence dimension:
The magnitude of the reflexive eyeblink increases as the
unpleasantness of the slide foreground material increases
(Langetal., 1990).
Whereas these somatic responses are specifically tied to
differences in the rated pleasantness of the slides, skin con-
ductance responses reliably covary with changes in rated
arousal. As judgments of arousal increase, the magnitude of
the skin conductance response to the slide increases as well,
as Figure 1 convincingly demonstrates. The arousal dimen-
sion also appears to be related to differences in interest or
attention, because factor analysis (Lang et al., in press) has
indicated that interest ratings and the duration of time a
subject chooses to view the slide relate to the same factor as
the magnitude of electrodermal reactivity.
Importantly, these studies validate the dimensional relation
in affective picture processing using a range of dependent
measures. In addition, the same patterns in physiological
response have been replicated using different subsets of IAPS
materials, which implies freedom in sampling from this stim-
ulus collection (Greenwald et al., 1989; Bradley, Cuthbert, &
Lang, 1990; Hamm, Stark, & Vaitl, 1990; Lang et al., in
press). In the experiments reported here, memory perform-
ance for these pictorial materials is assessed using an imme-
diate free-recall task, a delayed free-recall task, or a speeded-
recognition task. Incidental memory performance is always
assessed after an initial encoding phase in which the subject
rates each slide on the dimensions of pleasantness and arousal.
Predictions for memory performance are motivated by past
research and are relatively straightforward. To the extent that
the affective valence dimension differentially affects memory
performance, a main effect for the pleasantness of the pictorial
stimulus should be obtained. If memory processes favor neg-
ative events, as some data indicate, free recall as well as
recognition speed should be facilitated for these materials. On
the other hand, if the Pollyanna hypothesis is correct, better
memory performance should be obtained for pleasant stimuli
than for unpleasant materials.
Because the arousal dimension has been associated with
improved memory performance in the past, an effect of
arousal is predicted such that increases in arousal will be
associated with increased free-recall performance for these
materials and faster recognition speed. To the extent that
arousal is the only salient dimension underlying memory
performance, this effect should occur for both pleasant and
unpleasant materials.
If, as some data seem to suggest, traumatic (i.e., unpleasant
and highly arousing) events are different from all others, an
interaction of valence and arousal is expected in both free
 PLEASURE AND AROUSAL IN MEMORY
recall and recognition. In this case, negative, highly arousing
events should produce superior recall and faster recognition
speed than slides in any other quadrant of the two-dimen-
sional emotional space.
Experiment 1
In Experiment 1, a free-recall task was used to assess
memory performance. After rating a series of 60 slides on the
dimensions of valence and arousal, an incidental free-recall
test was conducted both immediately and 1 year after the
rating session. This experiment allows an assessment of the
effects of valence and arousal on both short-term and long-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
term memory performance.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Method
Subjects. Eighty-nine University of Florida undergraduates (48
women, 41 men) participated voluntarily to fulfill a course require-
ment. Each subject viewed one of four randomized slide orders. The
data from 2 male subjects who did not provide clear descriptions of
recalled slides in the immediate memory test were excluded from
analysis (final n = 87).
In the delayed free-recall portion of the experiment, 59 (30 women,
29 men) of the 87 subjects were successfully contacted by phone 1
year later. Two subjects (1 woman and 1 man) remembered partici-
pating in the experiment but could not recall any of the slides viewed.
The data from an additional 3 males were not used because specific
descriptions of slides could not be provided. This filtering resulted in
a total of 54 subjects for use in the long-term memory analyses.
Materials. Sixty color, photographic slides depicting various con-
tents were selected to sample a wide range in emotional space. Five
additional slides were selected to serve as practice slides. All slides
-•
—
_J
Figure 2. Paper-and-pencil version of the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM; Lang, 1980) used to rate
affective valence (top row) and arousal (bottom row) of the slide stimuli for Experiment 1.
381
were selected from IAPS (Lang et al., 1988). The Appendix contains
a complete listing of the pictorial stimuli used in this study, indexed
by the IAPS number and accompanied by a brief semantic descrip-
tion.
Each slide was rated on the dimensions of valence, arousal, and
dominance using a pencil-and-paper version of the Self-Assessment
Manikin (SAM) rating system (Lang, 1980; Hodes, Cook, & Lang,
1985). SAM is designed to represent the range of the subject's emo-
tional response to a stimulus, and as Figure 2 illustrates, the valence
and arousal dimensions were ordinally scaled withfivefiguresrepre-
senting each dimension. Ratings were made by placing an X on or
between any of the figures, producing a scale that ranged from 1 to
9. The valence dimension depicted a figure that ranged from happy
to unhappy. The corresponding SAM figures ranged from smiling
with raised eyebrows to frowning with knitted eyebrows. The arousal
dimension ranged from excited to calm. The corresponding SAM
figures ranged from having an active body and eyes wide open to
having an inactive body and closed eyes. A third SAM panel (not
pictured in Figure 2) required the subjects to rate their feelings of
dominance in reaction to the slide, with the SAMfigureranging from
small in size (controlled) to large (in control); this dimension is highly
correlated with pleasantness for static pictorial stimuli and is not
central to the questions addressed here.
Each of the three dimensions was displayed on each page in the
ratings booklet; the order of the SAM dimensions on each sheet was
'randomized, whereas the booklets were identical for all subjects. Each
slide was rated on all three dimensions. Because relatively fewer
ratings occurred at the nongraphic indices of the rating scale (i.e.,
between the figures), the 9-point scale was transformed postexperi-
mentally into a 5-point scale by using 5 as the neutral rating and
collapsing ratings 1 and 2 into a single rating, and similarly, 3 and 4,
6 and 7, and 8 and 9.
Rating procedure. The study was conducted in groups that ranged
in size from 7 to 14 subjects, roughly balanced for sex. On arrival,
subjects were seated approximately 2.2 m to 3.6 m from the projection
screen; the size of the slide image projected onto the projection screen
n - - - - -
1 —i —1
 382 BRADLEY, GREENWALD, PETRY, AND LANG

was approximately 1.2 m x 1.8 m. After obtaining informed consent,
the instructions for the experiment were read.
Each trial consisted of a sequence of 3 projected slides. First, the
subject viewed a preparation slide for 5 s. This slide was used to
instruct the subject to turn to the correct page in the ratings booklet
and then to focus attention on the projection screen (actual slide
instruction: "Rate the next slide on page "). The second slide
in the sequence was the to-be-rated slide and was projected for 6 s.
The subject was instructed to view the slide for the entire time that it
was on the projection screen. After the offset of this slide, a third slide
in this sequence was projected for 15 s, which instructed the subject
to "Please rate the slide on all three dimensions." During this rating
period, each subject was instructed to rate his or her actual emotional
reaction during viewing of the to-be-rated slide. Projection times were
electronically controlled by a prerecorded synchronization tape
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
(i.e., a black snake) and one of a white and gray snake, and (b) two
pictures of guns, one aimed at the viewer, one aimed obliquely. To
the extent that the subject recalled both members of the category,
there was no problem in assigning a correct recall for both candidates.
If only one was remembered (e.g., snake), recall was assigned to the
stimulus most frequently mentioned by this sample of subjects. This
occurred rarely; in any case, both members of these categories tended
to be rated similarly in valence and arousal level, which is the main
focus of this investigation.
Results
Rating information. The Appendix lists mean affective
valence and arousal ratings for each slide in this study; the
nature of the resulting affective space is highly similar to that

played on a Singer Caramate carousal slide projector. After these

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

instructions, 5 practice slides were presented; then, the 60 experimen-
tal slides were presented and rated. No mention of a subsequent
memory test was given at this time.
Immediate-recall procedure. Following the rating procedure, each
subject was given an incidental free-recall test, in which he or she was
instructed to write down, in any order, a word or phrase describing
each experimental slide that could be remembered (e.g., cow, baby,
or couple kissing). The subject was told to provide a clear description
so that the recalled slide could be identified; the free-recall period was
5 min. At the conclusion of this recall period, the subject was
debriefed, paid (with course credit), and thanked.
Delayed-recall procedure. Approximately 1 year after participat
ing in the slide rating and immediate-recall experiment, each subject
who could be contacted by telephone was given an incidental free -
recall test, in which he or she was instructed to again recall, in any
order, a word or phrase describing each slide that could be remem-
bered from the slide-viewing procedure the year before. The subject
was instructed to continue recalling slides for a 3-min period. At the
conclusion of this recall period, the subject was debriefed and thanked
again.
Scoring. The recall sheets were scored on the basis of the subject's
description of the slide; the same criteria applied to scoring immedi-
ate- and free-recall data, and the same person scored both sets of
data. Correct recall was scored if the description of a particular slide
was able to be clearly linked to a slide that had been shown. In almost
all instances, the descriptions were completely clear. The main stimuli
subject to confusion were (a) two pictures of snakes, one of a cobra
obtained in previous studies (see Figure 1). Table 1 lists the
mean proportion of slides rates at each of the five positions
along the valence and arousal dimensions. To adjust for
differences in recall that are produced by the number of slides
rated at each position on the scale, the number of slides
recalled at each level of valence (or arousal) was divided by
the number of slides rated at that level for each subject. These
data were subjected to an analysis of variance in which gender
(male or female) of the subject was a between-subjects vari-
able, rating level was a within-subject variable, and the pro-
portion of slides recalled at each of the five positions along
the scale (i.e., valence or arousal) was the dependent measure.
Unless otherwise noted, a significance level of .05 was used.
Immediate memory. Memory performance was first as-
sessed as a function of the rated arousal of the slide materials
(see Table 1). Level of arousal had a significant effect on
immediate-recall performance, F(4, 340) = 20.39, MSe =
.036. Newman-Keuls post hoc comparisons indicated that
slides rated as highly arousing were remembered better than
slides rated in all lower categories. In addition, slides rated as
moderately arousing were remembered more often than those
in the neutral category.
A second analysis showed that the pleasantness of the slide
also had a significant effect on the slides recalled, F(4, 340) =
14.39, MSe = .033. A significant quadratic trend indicated

Table 1
Proportion of Slides Rated and Recalled at Each of the Five Levels of Valence
or Arousal Ratings
Arousal dimension
Highly Moderately Moderately Highly
unarousing unarousing Neutral arousing arousing
Proportion rated .18 .18 .25 .27 .12
Immediate recall .46 .45 .41 .49 .65
Delayed recall .07 .07 .07 .09 .20

Valence dimension
Highly Moderately Moderately Highly
unpleasant unpleasant Neutral pleasant pleasant
Proportion rated .15 .18 .29 .21 .17
Immediate recall .56 .41 .42 .46 .55
Delayed recail .13 .06 .06 .06 .10
Mean arousal rating 6.22 5.01 3.51 4.77 6.04
(1-9 scale)
 PLEASURE AND AROUSAL IN MEMORY
that memory for both pleasant and unpleasant slides was
greater than that for neutral slides, F(l, 85) = 52.61, MSe =
.03 (see Table 1). Newman-Keuls comparisons corroborated
this, showing that slides rated as highly pleasant and highly
unpleasant were remembered better than those in the middle
categories. However, there was no specific advantage in recall
for either highly pleasant or highly unpleasant materials, as
these did not differ significantly from each other.
Table 1 lists the mean arousal ratings for slides in each of
the five valence categories. From these data it is clear that the
level of rated arousal differs as a function of pleasantness,
^(4, 344) = 62.69, MSC = 1.65, and may be mediating the
effect of valence on memory. This hypothesis is supported by
a significant quadratic trend for these ratings across levels of
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
affective valence, F(l, 86) = 234, MSt = 1.58, demonstrating
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
that both highly pleasant and highly unpleasant slides pro-
duced high-arousal ratings (as well as better memory perform-
ance).
To determine whether there was any contribution of pleas-
antness to memory performance, while controlling for inten-
sity, the following data set was constructed. First, the 60 slides
were rank ordered by valence ratings for each subject. The
ranks for slides given identical valence ratings were decided
on the basis of the group valence means. The top 30 slides
were assigned to the pleasant category; the bottom 30 slides
were assigned to the unpleasant category. Within each valence
category, slides were then ranked by their arousal ratings. Ties
in this ranking were decided on the basis of the group arousal
means. The top 15 slides in each of the two valence categories
were designated high-arousal slides; the bottom 15 were des-
ignated low-arousal slides. This procedure produced, for each
subject, a mean recall score for four categories of slides,
defined by the combination of valence (pleasant or unpleas-
ant) and arousal (high or low), with 15 slides in each category.
The mean arousal ratings for slides assigned to these four
categories were first analyzed to determine if this procedure
was successful in controlling arousal across valence categories.
As expected, although there was a large difference in mean
arousal ratings for slides in the low- and high-arousal cate-
gories, F(l, 86) = 539.59, MSe = .72, pleasant and unpleasant
slides were not generally different in mean level of arousal (F
< 1). A significant interaction between slide pleasantness and
arousal level, F(\, 86) = 22.20, MSC = .38, however, indicated
that although pleasant and unpleasant slides in the high-
arousal category were not significantly different in rated
arousal (M = 5.83 and 6.06, respectively), slides composing
the low-arousal category showed a small but significant effect
of valence, F{\, 86) = 9.19, MS* = .71. Pleasant slides,
however, were rated as only slightly more arousing (M = 4.01)
than unpleasant slides (M = 3.6).
The mean proportions of slides recalled as a function of
these valence and arousal groupings are depicted in Figure 3
(top panel). The arousal level of the slide significantly affected
recall, with memory for high-arousal slides better than mem-
ory for low-arousal slides, F(l, 85) = 31.97, MSe = .014.
There was a marginally significant effect of valence, indicating
that pleasant slides were remembered slightly better than
unpleasant slides, F(l, 85) = 3.87, p = .053, MSt = .019,
which is somewhat consistent with the slight difference in
383
.55 1
Immediate Recall
O
1 .50
• PLEASANT
.45
• UNPLEASANT
.40
Delayed recall
.15
10
05
Low High
Arousal
Figure 3. Mean proportion of slides recalled at immediate (top
panel) and delayed (bottom panel) recall as a function of the rated
pleasantness and arousal category of the slide stimuli.
arousal ratings for these materials. The interaction of valence
and arousal was clearly not significant, and no main effects
or interaction with the subject's gender approached signifi-
cance.
Long-term memory. The proportion of slides recalled in
the long-term memory test are presented in Table 1. The
pattern of recall 1 year later is remarkably similar to the effects
obtained on the immediate memory test. In the dimensional
analyses, the main effect of arousal was again significant, F(4,
208) = 11.69, MSC = 016. Newman-Keuls comparisons
indicated that slides rated as highly arousing were still remem-
bered better than slides given lower arousal ratings 1 year
later. Similarly, the effect of affective valence was again sig-
nificant, F(4, 208) = 5.52, MSe = .012, as was the quadratic
trend for this dimension, F(l,52) = 14.55, MSC = .015.
Once again, to assess any influence of pleasantness without
the contributing effect of arousal, a within-subject recall score
for the 2 x 2 factorial combination was derived as described
above. These data can be seen in Figure 3 (bottom panel).
The significant main effect of arousal indicates that highly
arousing slides were recalled better than low-arousal slides,
even after a retention interval of 1 year, F( 1,52) = 7.44, MSt
= .005. The main effect of valence and the interaction of
valence and arousal were not close to significance (both Fs <
1), indicating that the slight advantage in memory for pleasant
material obtained on an immediate test was lost 1 year later.
Memory for specific contents. Slides were grouped, post
hoc, into nine semantic categories, and immediate free recall
as a function of semantic category was investigated. The
categories and the number of slides occurring in each category
were as follows: attractive females (« = 3), attractive males (n
 384 BRADLEY, GREENWALD, PETRY, AND LANG

= 3), mutilated bodies (n = 4), weapons (n = 5), household
objects (n = 5), food (n = 4), animals (n = 7), nature scenes
(« = 9), and sports activities (n = 5).
Table 2 lists the mean proportion of slides recalled in each
category for each gender. Not surprisingly, the mean propor-
tion of slides recalled differed as a function of semantic
category. For both males and females, attractive members of
the opposite sex (i.e., female nudes and male nudes) and
mutilated bodies composed the top three categories recalled.
More interestingly, it appeared that some categories recalled
were related to the subject's gender rather than strictly related
to the arousal level of the category.
For males, mean recall averaged across the categories of
weapons, mutilated bodies, and attractive women was higher
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
and delayed recall. Superior memory performance was con-
sistently obtained for slides rated as highly arousing in com-
parison with slides that received lower arousal ratings. These
data suggest that high arousal facilitates memory perform-
ance, at least when memory for the event's occurrence is
probed. In Experiment 2, a speeded-recognition task was used
to assess memory for these affective materials. To the extent
that the arousal effect obtained in Experiment 1 reflects the
operation of a general memory mechanism, and not one
specific to the free-recall process, similar effects should be
obtained in Experiment 2. Based on the facilitatory effects of
arousal on free recall performance in Experiment 1, the
prediction is that high arousal should aid recognition perform-
ance: As rated arousal of the material increases, recognition

than recall of these materials by women, F(l, 85) = 7.98, MSC speed should decrease, indicating faster recognition decisions.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

= .057, even though mutilations were rated significantly In Experiment 1, the affective valence of the slide had a
higher in arousal by women (M = 7.08) than men (M =6.13), small, marginally significant effect at immediate recall, but
F{\, 85) = 6.19, MS, = 3.13. On the other hand, the mean no effect on delayed recall. To the extent that the 15-min
arousal ratings for weapons were similar for both males (M = retention interval used in Experiment 2 is considered a long-
5.83) and females (M = 5.96). Whereas these differences in term memory test, no effects of affective valence should be
memory cannot be attributed to rated arousal, better recall of seen in the recognition reaction time for slides encoded earlier.
attractive females is consistent with the significantly higher The magnitude of the skin conductance response at encod-
arousal ratings assigned to these materials by men (M =6.91) ing indexes affective responses, especially arousal, during
in relation to women (M = 3.60), F(l, 85) = 80.21, MSe = processing of these pictorial materials. Measurement of these
2.92. sympathetically mediated responses at encoding allows an
For women, mean recall averaged across the categories of additional assessment of emotional engagement during slide
household objects, food items, and attractive men was higher processing (i.e., in addition to verbal ratings), and in Experi-
than for men, F(\, 85) = 4.61, MSe = .092. The memory bias ment 2, these responses were measured during the initial
for household objects and foods was not due to differences in encoding phase.
rated arousal, as both men and women produced practically
identical arousal ratings for these categories. Again, however, Method
the mean arousal rating for attractive males was higher for
women (M = 5.62) than for men (M = 2.99), which satisfac- Subjects. Sixty-six (33 women and 33 men) University of Florida
introductory psychology students participated as part of a class re-
torily accounts for the pattern of recall in this category, F{ 1, quirement. Subjects were randomly assigned to view one of the two
85) = 60.57, MS, = 2.45. slide series (described below). Gender was balanced across slide series.
Across the remaining categories of sports, nature scenes, One female lacking complete data was omitted from thefinalanalyses
and animals, males and females showed no differences in (final n = 65).
either proportion recalled or in mean ratings of arousal. Stimulus materials. Two sets of 21 colored photographic slides
were chosen from the IAPS (Lang et al., 1988) on the basis of affective
(valence and arousal) ratings obtained from independent subject
Experiment 2 samples. The two stimulus sets were matched for valence and arousal
ratings and (as closely as possible) semantic content. Contents of both
In Experiment 1, the rated arousal level of a slide was sets were broadly distributed in the two-dimensional emotional space.
clearly related to memory performance at both immediate One set of 21 slides served as the encoding stimuli for each subject
and therefore were the "repeated" slides (correct response = yes) in
the recognition phase. The remaining set of 21 slides then served as
Table 2 "new" foils (correct response = no) in the recognition task. The
Mean Proportion of Slides Recalled in Each of Nine particular set of slides serving as encoding stimuli was counterbal-
Semantic Categories for Men, Women, anced across subjects.
and All Subjects Apparatus and response measurement. Presentation of stimuli
Slide category Men Women All subjects and collection of data were controlled by a Digital Equipment Cor-
poration model 11/23 and an Apple He microcomputer. Slides were
Mutilated bodies .76 .68 .71 projected through a sound-attenuating port into the subject room
Weapons .51 .38 .44
.72 with a Kodak Ektagraphic HI projector. Slide duration (6 s) was
Female nudes .75 .69
controlled using an electronic shutter (rise/fall time < 5 ms). Valence
Household objects .35 .43 .40 and arousal ratings were obtained using a computerized version of
Food .29 .41 .36 SAM (Lang, 1980). The SAM display was presented on a video screen
Male nudes .58 .63 .61 located 1.6 m in front of the subject's eyes. Subjects adjusted each of
three sequential displays (representing the valence, arousal, and dom-
Animals .52 .53 .52 inance dimensions, respectively) along a 0-29 scale using a poten-
Sports events .35 .35 .35 tiometer. The order in which the ratings were displayed was randomly
Nature scenes .34 .38 .36 determined on each trial for each subject.
 PLEASURE AND AROUSAL IN MEMORY
Skin conductance was sampled during the encoding phase of the
experiment. Skin conductance electrodes were placed adjacently on
the hypothenar eminence of the left palmar surface, using Beckman
Ag-AgCl standard electrodes filled with K-Y lubricating jelly. The
signal was calibrated prior to each session to detect activity in the
range from 0 to 40 pS. Electrodermal activity was sampled at 10 Hz
for 2 s prior to slide onset, throughout the 6-s slide exposure, and for
2 s following slide offset. A skin conductance response (SCR) was
defined as the largest response occurring between 0.9 and 4 s after
slide onset; a log transformation of logCX^ + 1) was performed to
normalize the data. Detailed description of additional indices of
physiological response collected in this experiment are reported in
Lang et al. (in press).
Encoding procedure. The subject sat in a recliner in a small,
sound-attenuated, dimly lit room. The slide image was projected
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
about 1.9 m from the subject's eyes and subtended 20° of visual angle.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
The subject was told he or she would view a series of slides differing
in emotional content. The subject was asked to attend to the slide for
the entire exposure time (6 s), to perform SAM ratings after each
trial, and to relax during varying interslide intervals (i.e., 25-35 s).
Each subject viewed the slide series in one of three varied orders.
After instructing the subject to rest quietly, the experimenter exited
the subject room, and the slide sequence was presented. No mention
of a memory test was given at this time.
Recognition phase. After a 15-min retention interval (during
which the subject completed several unrelated questionnaires), in-
structions for the incidental recognition phase were given. Two game
paddles were affixed (using Velcro) on the armrests of the subject's
chair, and the subject was instructed that another series of slides
would be viewed and memory for each slide assessed.
For each recognition trial, a slide was presented on the screen, and
the subject was told to decide as quickly as possible whether the slide
had been seen earlier in the experiment. If the slide had been seen
before (repeated slide), the subject pressed the button associated with
the dominant hand. If the subject had not seen the slide previously
(new slide), the button associated with the nondominant hand was
pressed. Both speed and accuracy were emphasized in the instructions.
After making the recognition decision, the subject was allowed to
view the slide as long as desired. A simultaneous press on both game
paddles terminated the slide presentation. The subject then made an
interest rating and an emotion rating (a forced choice selection of one
of seven emotions) for each slide (for discussion of these ratings, see
Lang et al., in press).
Data reduction. Four slides were used in which two identical faces
occurred with different facial expressions (e.g., angry face/neutral
face). Subsequently, it was determined that these slides were difficult
to categorize as new or repeated and resulted in extremely long
reaction time responses. These items were therefore excluded from
further analyses.
Individual subject ratings for affective valence and arousal were
obtained for slides seen in the encoding phase only (i.e., repeated
slides). To compare new and repeated slides, as well as to compare
these data directly to the recall data from Experiment 1, the recog-
nition data were assigned to a 2 x 2 category breakdown formed by
factorially combining valence (pleasant or unpleasant) and arousal
level (high or low) on the basis of group means. The slides were first
rank ordered by the group valence means; the top 9 and bottom 10
slides were designated pleasant and unpleasant slides, respectively.
Within each valence category, the slides were ranked by the group
arousal means and then divided into high- and low-arousal categories.
Results
Rating information. The mean arousal ratings for slides
assigned to the four affective categories were analyzed to assess
385
the level of arousal across the two valence categories. Because
slides were assigned to the low- and high-arousal categories
on the basis of these ratings, the significant difference in mean
arousal ratings for slides in these categories is expected, F(l,
62) = 315.6, MSt = 15.68. More important, there were no
significant effects involving affective valence in the analysis
of arousal ratings, indicating that neither pleasant and un-
pleasant slides in the low-arousal (M = 11.6 and 10.8, respec-
tively) nor the pleasant and unpleasant high-arousal (M =
20.2 and 19.9, respectively) categories were judged differen-
tially arousing.
Reaction time. Only correct trials were used in the analysis
of reaction time data. In an overall analysis of variance of
these data, gender (male or female) was a between-subjects
variable, and slide status (repeated or new), slide affective
valence (pleasant or unpleasant), and slide arousal (high or
low) were repeated measures. There were no significant effects
involving gender in any of these analyses. Figure 4 illustrates
the mean reaction time (RT) data for new and repeated slides
as a function of the affective valence and arousal level of the
slide category.
For the RT data, there was a marginally significant main
effect of slide status, F(l, 58) = 3.83, p = .06, MS, = 596,132,
indicating the mean RT for repeated slides (yes responses)
was slightly faster than for new slides (no responses). This
effect could arise because these responses were executed with
the subject's dominant hand or, more probably, due to savings
in encoding time (i.e., these slides were repeated).
More important, significant interaction effects indicated
that the valence and arousal level of the slide had different
effects on RT, depending on whether the slide was repeated
or new. A significant interaction between slide status and
arousal level, F(l, 58) = 31.03, MSe = 64,958, indicated that
slide arousal had opposing effects on recognition speed: For
slides that were seen before, RT was facilitated by high arousal,
F(l, 58) = 9.72, MSC = 58,215, whereas for new slides, RT
was delayed by high arousal, F(\, 58) = 22.01, MSe = 71,625.
Similarly, a significant main effect for slide valence, F(\,
58) = 6.01, MSt = 95,550, was modified by a significant
Repeated Slides New Slides
"yes' response no' responses
• Unpleasant
• Pleasant
AROUSAL AROUSAL
Figure 4. Mean reaction times for recognizing repeated slides (left
panel) or new slides (right panel) as a function of slide pleasantness
and arousal in a speeded-recognition task.
 386 BRADLEY, GREENWALD, PETRY, AND LANG
interaction wiih slide status, F(\, 58) = 4.00, MSe = 116,158.
Unpleasant slides resulted in longer RT than pleasant slides,
but only when the slide was new, F(\, 58) = 6.90, MSe =
150,122. If the slide had been previously presented in the
experiment (during the encoding phase), the valence of the
slide had no effect on retrieval speed, F(l, 58) < 1.
Accuracy. The overall error rate in this experiment was
low (.04). However, in an analysis of the mean errors made
for each of the slide categories, a main effect for gender, F( 1,
58) = 4.08, MSC = .01, indicated that women were slightly
more error-prone than men (mean error rates of .05 and .03,
respectively). A significant main effect of arousal, F{\, 58) =
5.81, MS; = .009, indicated that slightly, but significantly,
more errors were made on slides categorized as low-arousal
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
(M = .05) in relation to high-arousal slides (.03). The arousal
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
variable did not interact with slide status, F(l, 58) < 1, which
indicates that high arousal was associated with fewer recog-
nition errors, regardless of slide status. Because high arousal
had differential effects on reaction time as a function of
whether a slide was new or repeated, the lack of an interaction
in error rate suggests that a trade-off of speed with accuracy
is unlikely for the effects of arousal obtained here.
Encoding and skin conductance responses. Skin conduct-
ance responses were measured during the initial presentation
of each slide in the encoding phase of the experiment. Figure
5 illustrates the mean skin conductance responses at encoding
as a function of the breakdown of the slides into valence and
arousal categories. As found in the past, high-arousal slides
led to significantly greater magnitude skin conductance re-
sponses than did low-arousal slides, F( 1,64) = 80.37, AfSe =
.02. In addition, unpleasant slides prompted slightly greater
skin conductance responses at encoding than did pleasant
slides, F(l, 64) = 3.5, MS, = .02, p = .06. As Figure 5
illustrates, there was no interaction between these variables.
Therefore, skin conductance responses at encoding tended to
show the same pattern as was obtained for reaction times of
new, encoded slides (in the context of the recognition task):
Both the affective valence and arousal of the slide were
apparent in responses during encoding.
General Discussion
If emotional events are considered to be organized by the
dimensions of affective valence (pleasantness) and arousal,
the data obtained here demonstrate that memory retrieval is
most sensitive to differences in the arousal level of previously
encoded emotional stimuli. In both immediate and delayed
free recall, high-arousal materials led to better memory per-
formance than materials rated lower in arousal (Experiment
1). In a recognition task, high arousal facilitated recognition
decisions for slides encoded earlier in the experiment (Exper-
iment 2). Thus, although many factors affect memory per-
formance, the dimension of arousal (as indexed by verbal
ratings and electrodermal responses) accounts here for sub-
stantial variability in remembering emotional stimuli.
Arousal and Memory
Paradigms using verbal items as the to-be-remembered
material have also demonstrated facilitator/ effects of stimu-
Skin conductance at encoding
o.i
Figure 5. Mean skin conductance responses during encoding for
slides categorized by pleasantness and arousal level.
lus arousal on memory performance (Craik & Blankstein,
1975). For instance, Maltzman, Kantor, and Langdon (1966)
found greater recall for high-arousal words, in comparison
with low-arousal words, on both an immediate memory test
and a delayed test administered 30 min later. Importantly,
the retention interval in their study was a between-subjects
variable, indicating better long-term memory performance for
high-arousal items, in the absence of an earlier memory test.
Of the studies reviewed by Craik and Blankstein (1975),
however, none covary pleasantness and arousal as in the
present set of experiments, and none assess memory for
affective pictures. The data obtained here suggest their con-
clusions extend to these materials and, furthermore, that
affective valence is not a controlling factor.
A number of studies in the past have only found a positive
effect of high arousal on long-term memory tests; on imme-
diate tests, poorer memory performance was obtained (Craik
& Blankstein, 1975). In those experiments, arousal level has
often been defined by the magnitude of the subject's electro-
dermal response at encoding, rather than by stimulus arousal.
Walker's (1958) action decrement theory accounted for this
pattern by suggesting that highly arousing events lead to a
longer consolidation process in memory, which, in turn,
promotes better long-term memory. However, during consol-
idation, retrieval is inhibited, which produces poor short-term
memory results. In an additional analysis here, we assessed
the reaction time data in Experiment 2 as a function of the
magnitude of electrodermal reactivity during slide encoding.
The same conclusion was supported: High levels of arousal,
as measured by skin conductance responses, speeded later
recognition decisions. These data support Walker's account,
if one characterizes the 15-min retention interval used here
as long-term. On the other hand, there is no evidence in any
of our data that high arousal impairs memory performance,
even on memory tests that occur relatively soon after the
encoding episode.
More recent studies have also concluded that high arousal
can impair, rather than facilitate, memory. The differences
are primarily paradigmatic, and a close look suggests past
research is not inconsistent with the present data. For instance,
Christianson and his associates (Christianson & Nilsson, 1984;
Christianson, 1986; Christianson, Nilsson, Mjorndal, Penis,
& Tjellden, 1986) utilize a methodology in which slides
depicting traumatic or erotic events are accompanied by
 PLEASURE AND AROUSAL IN MEMORY
verbal information related to the pictured event. Memory
performance for this peripheral verbal information is typically
poorer when the visual context is highly arousing than when
it is neutral. Similarly, Loftus and Burns (1982) presented,
via a series of slides, a situation designed to be traumatic (i.e.,
a small boy gets shot) or nontraumatic (i.e., the boy crosses a
parking lot unharmed). Recognition memory for a peripheral
visual detail (a number on the boy's jersey) produced poorer
performance in the traumatic version. Similar data were
obtained by Clifford and Hollin (1981) in a test of detailed
identification of the perpetrator of a violent crime. Detterman
(1975) and his colleagues (Detterman & Ellis, 1972) found
poor memory performance for unrelated words that followed
or preceded presentation of a single arousing stimulus (e.g., a
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
loud shout or a photograph of a nude).' Across all of these
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
studies, memory for specific and mainly peripheral detail was
assessed, and it is in this situation that high arousal produced
poor memory performance.
When probing memory for the occurrence of the primary
event itself, however, Christianson and Loftus (1987) dem-
onstrated that traumatic events are recalled better than neutral
ones. In one experiment, subjects were shown a film of a bank
robbery in which the ending was violent (i.e., two men were
shot) or nonviolent. Six months later, subjects shown the
traumatic version were more likely to remember the thematic
content of the film. These data are consistent with those
presented here, although the effects of an event opposite in
affective valence (e.g., pleasant) were not explored in that
study. The current finding that pleasantness of the event does
not strongly affect memory performance leads us to suggest
that the memory advantage found for traumatic events may
be primarily due to the high-arousal level, rather than the
unpleasantness, of the traumatic episode.
More important, one implication from our data is that the
better memory found for information central to an arousing
event may be related to the physiological reaction engendered
during encoding of these types of stimuli. Components of the
event that are associated with an emotional reaction (as
indexed by skin conductance responses or other measures of
responsivity) may be better remembered than features lacking
this reactive property. This hypothesis can be tested by meas-
uring physiological and behavioral responses to component
elements of the slide stimuli used here. Whatever the outcome
of such an investigation, the focus is clearly directed toward
intense affective stimuli, regardless of their affective valence.
Pleasantness and Memory
Interestingly, folklore encourages the view that there is a
strong relation between affective valence and memory per-
formance. For instance, the adage that one "views the past
through rose-colored glasses" attributes a central role to pleas-
antness by proposing that memory favors pleasant events.
Similarly (although the emphasis was reversed), Sigmund
Freud's views regarding repression were singularly tied to
degraded memory for events that were negative in affect.
Conversely, the lore underlying flashbulb memory pinpoints
traumatic events as those that are remembered very precisely
and for a long period of time.
387
In the experimental literature, paradigms have tended to
assess memory either for traumatic events (e.g., Christianson
& Loftus, 1987; Christianson & Nilsson, 1984; Brown &
Kulik, 1977; Bohannon, 1988) or for pleasant events (e.g.,
Christianson, 1986)—often compared to neutral—but seldom
for both types of materials in the same experimental context.
This is unfortunate, because differences in memory perform-
ance are difficult to interpret when the neutral comparison
stimulus differs on both the valence and arousal dimensions.
In the present study, the level of arousal was controlled
across different levels of affective valence. In this case, the
only effect of pleasantness on memory retrieval was at im-
mediate free recall, and this effect was only marginally signif-
icant. Pleasantness of the stimuli had no impact either on
delayed free recall or in recognizing items encoded earlier in
the experiment. A similar null effect of pleasantness on mem-
ory performance was recently obtained by Thompson (1985),
who found no effect of pleasantness when assessing memory
for naturally occurring personal events. In addition, Bradley
and Baddeley (1990) found no difference between pleasant
and unpleasant words, equated for concreteness and fre-
quency, at immediate or delayed recall. Finally, there was no
indication in our data that negative, highly arousing events
were remembered differently (i.e., better) than other types of
events, as flashbulb theories might predict.
For slides never seen before, affective valence did have a
significant impact on reaction time: Unpleasant slides resulted
in significantly longer decision times than pleasant slides.
Similar effects of valence and arousal were obtained for the
skin conductance data: Both high-arousal slides and unpleas-
ant slides prompted greater reactions at encoding. However,
affective judgments of arousal did not differ for pleasant and
unpleasant materials.
There are two interesting ramifications of these data. First,
they indicate that the dimensions of valence and arousal are
both salient at encoding. This is consistent with earlier data
indicating dimensional discrimination in reactivity to these
slide materials (Greenwald et al, 1989). Second, they suggest
that the judged level of arousal is probably not solely deter-
mined by electrodermal reactivity at initial encoding. As
mentioned earlier, both the amount of free viewing time and
ratings of interest also relate to the arousal factor, attesting to
other influences underlying this affective dimension. It is
likely that judgments of arousal act as a summary statistic,
incorporating elements in addition to that engendered by the
discrete sympathetic response (measured as skin conductance
change) at encoding. The arousal-related effects on memory
' This raises a question concerning the effect of one slide on what
followed or preceded it in the current study. The design of this
experiment was not intended to specifically assess this issue; in fact,
different slide orders were used to counterbalance effects due to slide
sequence. To the extent this issue could be assessed in post hoc
analyses, however, no additional mnemonic effects due to sequencing
were obtained. Concerning physiological responses, other studies (e.g.,
Greenwald et al., 1989; Lang et al., in press) have demonstrated full
recovery within the 10- to 20-s interslide interval used here; in the
current study, such recovery is even more likely, given the presence
of the postslide SAM rating period.
 388 BRADLEY, GREENWALD, PETRY, AND LANG
performance in our data appear to reflect this broader concept
of arousal.
Arousal, Pleasantness, and Memory: Some Theoretical
Comments
As Lang et al. (1990) emphasized, the verbal dimensions of
affective valence and arousal can be directly related to the
behavioral dimensions of direction and vigor. In this scheme,
pleasant events are defined as those that primarily engage
approach or appetitive behaviors, whereas unpleasant events
are those prompting withdrawal, avoidance, or defensive ac-
tions. The arousal dimension is related to the vigor of the
behavioral disposition that is currently active and can range
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
from a level of extreme emergency to that of calm expediency.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
According to this analysis, high intensity signals a motivation-
ally relevant event that can involve either an appetitive or
aversive environmental transaction.
The data obtained in this experiment (and others as well)
suggest that arousal is a complex concept. There have been
several attempts to detail, for instance, distinctions between
cerebral, behavioral, and sympathetically mediated compo-
nents (e.g., Lacey, 1967). One can also distinguish between
stimulus arousal (as manipulated here) and nonstimulus-
related subject arousal (e.g., by using an injection of adrenalin;
Christianson et al., 1986). As discussed above, variables relat-
ing to attention, interest, or effort may also be involved.
Regardless of its underlying multiplicity, factor analyses con-
sistently confirm the existence of such an organizing dimen-
sion in emotion. Furthermore, this dimension seems to be
readily apprehended by subjects, who can easily assess the
intensity of their affective experience, independent of its
valence. The data obtained here clarify its mnemonic effects:
Memory for the occurrence of an emotional stimulus associ-
ated with high arousal is better than for a stimulus rated low
in arousal, regardless of its pleasantness.
A memory system sensitive to the arousal level of an event
is a broadly functional survival tool. Behaviors that demand
high mobilization of resources, regardless of whether these are
directed toward approaching a desired object (e.g., a food
source when hungry) or fleeing from a feared one (e.g., a
predator in one's environment), are good candidates for mem-
ory storage. Such intense actions are probably strongly related
to survival, in terms of both preservative behaviors (such as
eating, drinking, procreating, etc.) and protective ones, and
may prove useful in future interactions with the environment.
On the other hand, events low in arousal may often be
unimportant or redundant with respect to successful environ-
mental maneuvers, resulting in low priority for memory stor-
age.
The underlying mechanisms relating arousal to memory
are potentially multiple. Neurophysiological factors undoubt-
edly play a role in facilitating memory performance. For
instance, Kety (1972) has proposed that processes associated
with encoding emotional stimuli affect the circulation of
neurochemical substances that increase the efficiency of mne-
monic processes. Gold and McGaugh (1975) and their asso-
ciates (McGaugh et al.. 1979) have explicitly tested the hy-
pothesis that increasing an animal's arousal level by electrical
or chemical intervention after training facilitates perform-
ance. Enhancement in retention has been obtained both for
aversive and appetitive training tasks (Steinberg, Isaacs, Gold,
& McGaugh, 1985), supporting the idea that memory is
facilitated similarly by arousal, regardless of affective valence.
On the basis of such data, Gold and McGaugh (1975) pro-
posed a memory system in which motivationally relevant
events (i.e., those that are highly arousing) produce endoge-
nous physiological consequences that can facilitate later mem-
ory performance.
From a cognitive viewpoint, elaboration may be a sufficient
explanatory device. Slides rated as highly arousing (i.e., in-
tensely emotional) produce large skin conductance responses,
appropriate facial electromyographic responses, increased car-
diovascular activity, and ratings of heightened interest and
attention, in relation to low-arousal slides (Greenwald et al.,
1989; Bradley et al., 1990). If one attributes a similar infor-
mational role to physiological response information as is
typically attributed to other types of information (Lang, 1979,
1984), the episodic network encoding of an arousing picture
can be considered more elaborate than one representing a
nonarousing slide. Assuming this type of network elaboration
increases the probability of accessing a stored representation,
both the higher free recall and faster recognition performance
obtained here could result.
If elaboration (involving active responses) is responsible for
the advantage found in memory for highly arousing materials,
one prediction is that neutral materials exposed to such proc-
essing (e.g., by inducing physiological or behavioral respond-
ing) could be equated, in terms of memory strength, to
emotional stimuli. On the other hand, high emotional arousal
engendered by sympathetic activation (aversive or appetitive
in orientation) may be singularly different from response
elaboration of nonaffective materials. If this were the case,
neutral stimuli should tend to be consistently inferior in terms
of memory performance. Clearly, these alternative hypotheses
can be evaluated.
To the extent that the elaborated information represents
bodily responses to arousing content, this proposed processing
mechanism is also consistent with evidence that concurrently
presented, peripheral stimulus information does not appear
to be well-represented in episodic memories of arousing
events. Activation of emotional responses to arousing stimuli
may interfere with deployment of other behaviors necessary
for encoding peripheral detail (e.g., in this study, scanning the
visual display). If this were the case, high reactivity to an
arousing stimulus would produce an elaborated representa-
tion (and good memory performance) for elements associated
with the arousal response and poor memory for information
relying on other types of behavioral operations at encoding.
Future investigations that probe memory for either details or
central components of the arousing stimuli used here can
easily be implemented. The primary conclusion from the
current study is an empirical one: When emotion is defined
by the dimensions of pleasantness and arousal, the major
predictor of future memory performance is not the valence
of the specific emotion but its intensity.
 PLEASURE AND AROUSAL IN MEMORY
References
Bohannon, J. N., III. (1988). Flashbulb memories for the space shuttle
disaster: A tale of two theories. Cognition, 29, 179-196.
Bradley, B. P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1990). Emotional factors in
forgetting. Psychological Medicine, 20, 351-355.
Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1990) Startle reflex
modification: Emotion or attention? Psychophysiology 27, 513—
523.
Bradley, M. M., Greenwald, M. K., & Hamm, A. O. (in press).
Affective picture processing. In N. Birbaumer & A. Ohman (Eds.),
The structure of emotion: Psychophysiological, cognitive, and clin- Lang, P. J. (1980). Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assess-
ical aspects. Toronto: Hogrefe & Huber.
Brown, R., & Kulik, J. (1977). Flashbulb memories. Cognition, 5,
73-99.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Christianson, S.-A. (1986). Effects of positive emotional events on
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
memory. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 27, 287-299.
Christianson, S.-A., & Loftus, E. F. (1987). Memory for traumatic
events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1, 225-239.
Christianson, S.-A., & Nilsson, L.-G. (1984). Functional amnesia as
induced by a psychological trauma. Memory & Cognition, 12, 142—
155.
Christianson, S.-A., Nilsson, L.-G., Mjorndal, T., Perris, C, &
Tjellden, G. (1986). Psychological versus physiological determi-
nants of emotional arousal and its relationship to laboratory in-
duced amnesia. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 27, 300-310. Lang, P. J., Ohman, A., & Vaitl, D. (1988). The international affective
Clifford, B. R., & Hollin, C. R. (1981). Effects of the type of incident
and number of perpetrators on eyewitness memory. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 66, 364-370.
Craik, F. I. M., & Blankstein, K. R. (1975). Psychophysiology and
human memory. In P. H. Venables & M. J. Christie (Eds.), Re-
search in psychophysiology (pp. 388-417). New York: Wiley.
Detterman, D. K. (1975). The Von Restorff effect and induced
amnesia: Production by manipulation of sound intensity. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1,
614-628.
Detterman, D. K., & Ellis, N. R. (1972). Determinants of induced
amnesia in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychol-
ogy, 95, 308-316.
Eysenck, M. W. (1976). Arousal, learning, and memory. Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 83, 389-404.
Gold, P. E., & McGaugh, J. L. (1975). A single-trace, dual-process
view of memory storage processes. In D. Deutsch & J. A. Deutsch
(Eds.), Short-term memory (pp. 355-378). San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic Press.
Greenwald, M. K., Cook, E. W., & Lang, P. J. (1989). Affective
judgment and psychophysiological response: Dimensional covar-
iation in the evaluation of pictorial stimuli. Journal of Psychophys-
iology, 3, 51-64.
Hamm, A. O., Stark, R., & Vaitl, D. (1990). Classical fear condition-
ing and the startle probe reflex [Abstract]. Psychophysiology, 27,
537.
Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior: A neuropsycholog-
ical theory. New York: Wiley.
Hodes, R. L., Cook, E. W., & Lang, P. J. (1985). Individual differences
in autonomic response: Conditioned association or conditioned
fear? Psychophysiology, 22, 545-560.
(Appendix follows on next page)
389
Kety, S. (1972). Brain catecholamines, affective states, and memory.
In J. L. McGaugh (Ed.), The chemistry of mood, motivation, and
memory (pp. 65-80). New York: Plenum Press.
Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative activity of the brain: An interdiscipli-
nary approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lacey, J. I. (1967). Somatic response patterning and stress: Some
revisions for activation theory. In M. M. Appley & R. Trumbull
(Eds.), Psychological stress (pp. 14-36). New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts.
Lang, P. J. (1979). Presidential address, 1978: A bio-informational
theory of emotional imagery. Psychophysiology, 16, 495-512.
ment: Computer applications. In J. B. Sidowski, J. H. Johnson, &
T. A. Williams (Eds.), Technology in mental health care delivery
systems (pp. 119-137). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lang, P. J. (1984). Cognition in emotion: Concept and action. In C.
E. Izard, J. Kagan, & R. B. Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, cognitions,
and behavior (pp. 192-228). Cambridge, England: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1990). Emotion,
attention, and the startle reflex. Psychological Review, 97, 377—
398.
Lang, P. J., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M., & Hamm, A. O. (in
press). Looking at pictures: Evaluative, facial, visceral, and behav-
ioral responses. Psychophysiology.
picture system [Photographic slides]. Gainesville: University of
Florida, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology.
Loftus, E. F., & Burns, T. E. (1982). Mental shock can produce
retrograde amnesia. Memory & Cognition, 10, 318-323.
Maltzman, I., Kantor, W., & Langdon, B. (1966). Immediate and
delayed retention, arousal and defensive reflexes. Psychonomic
Science, 6, 445-446.
Matlin, M., & Stang, D. (1978). The Pollyanna principle: Selectivity
in language, memory and thought. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.
McGaugh, J. L., Gold, P. E., Handwerker, M. J., Jensen, R. A.,
Martinez, J. L., Meligeni, J. A., & Vasquez, B. J. (1979). Altering
memory by electrical and chemical stimulation of the brain. In M.
A. B. Brazier (Ed.), Brain mechanisms in memory and learning:
From the single neuron to man (pp. 151-164). New York: Raven
Press.
Osgood, C, Suci, G., & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The measurement
of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois.
Russell, J. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161-1178.
Sternberg, D. B., Isaacs, K. R., Gold, P. E., & McGaugh, J. L. (1985).
Epinephrine facilitation of appetitive learning: Attenuation with
adrenergic receptor antagonists. Behavioral and Neural Biology,
44, 447-453.
Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their
relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report. In
A. H. Tuma & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders
(pp. 681-706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Thompson, C. P. (1985). Memory for unique personal events: Effects
of pleasantness. Motivation & Emotion, 2, 277-289.
Walker, E. L. (1958). Action decrement and its relation to learning.
Psychological Review, 65, 129-142.
 Appendix
List of Slides, Affective Ratings, and Free Recall for All Stimuli Used in Experiment 1
IAPS Mean pleasantness Mean arousal Proportion of Ss
number Description rating rating recalling slide
109 Attacking snake 3.70 5.90 .49
111 Black cobra 3.84 5.96 .52
123 Spider 4.61 4.03 .56
159 Horse 7.18 4.74 .60
161 Rabbit 7.69 3.98 .48
164 Coyote 6.16 5.18 .38
167 Cow 5.82 3.33 .63
213 Angry woman 4.08 5.02 .20
215 Man with baby 7.92 5.00 .37
221 Neutral face 4.70 3.08 .30
250 Old man 6.16 3.61 .64
251 Old woman 6.91 4.00 .70
301 Mutilated face 1.71 2.88 .74
310 Burn victim 1.60 6.49 .75
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

314 Mutilated body 1.83 3.20 .61

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

315 Bloody finger 2.26 6.55 .75

321 Surgery 4.49 5.39 .17
461 Romantic couple 7.29 5.54 .44
465 Couple in bed 6.96 5.56 .62
560 Mountains 7.57 5.19 .60
582 River 7.33 4.61 .39
583 Beach at sunset 8.00 4.92 .77
620 Man with gun 3.20 5.82 .56
623 Aimed pistol 2.37 7.39 .59
690 Bomber aircraft 4.76 5.64 .43
693 Missile range 4.39 4.88 .31
700 Rolling pin 5.00 2.42 .32
705 Hair dryer 4.93 2.75 .45
706 Trash can 4.43 2.55 .45
715 Umbrella 4.72 2.61 .51
717 Light bulb 5.14 3.21 .25
723 Turkey dinner 7.38 5.52 .41
726 Strawberry pie 7.21 6.03 .35
727 Chocolate soda 7.53 5.88 .37
728 Wine 7.20 4.46 .31
750 Urban building 5.33 5.17 .32
751 City landscape 6.05 4.52 .39
803 Ski jump 7.33 7.35 .48
808 Sailing 7.73 6.65 .53
809 Gymnast 7.02 5.71 .30
812 Tennis player 7.09 4.85 .16
813 Pole vaulter 6.58 5.49 .29
900 Cemetery 2.55 4.06 .05
90! Barbed wire 3.94 4.14 .31
904 Starving child 1.67 3.10 .51
905 Plane crash 2.43 6.36 .35
907 Solemn boy 5.01 3.63 .53
908 Electric wires 4.07 4.05 .31
909 Auto exhaust 3.56 3.97 .28
911 Dirty puddle 3.76 4.88 .14
914 Animal carcass 2.19 5.38 .37
916 Soldier 3.23 5.87 .30
918 Dead seal 2.99 5.02 .38
919 African woman 3.90 3.91 .49
Mean pleasantness Mean arousal Recall
rating rating
Erotic Stimuli Males Females Males Females Males I-emales
422 Woman in swimsuit 8.02 5.29 7.17 3.63 .80 .60
429 Nude woman 7.61 3.67 7.20 4.10 .95 .93
203 Woman on beach 7.51 6.02 6.24 3.08 .51 .54
449 Nude man 4.29 6.27 2.85 6.06 .90 .98
452 Man in swimsuit 4.76 7.04 2.68 5.48 .33 .40
453 Man in bed 4.46 6.19 3.15 5.31 .51 .52
Note. IAPS = International Affective Picture System, Lang et al., 1988.

Received December 3, 1990

Revision received June 28, 1991
Accepted August 23, 1991