Summary: New research suggests that trigger warnings shown before television content may not protect viewers from distress. Instead, warnings can prolong the negative features of traumatic memories and do not increase the likelihood that people will use coping strategies.
Source: Flinders University
Trigger warnings intended to alert viewers to distressing material may sometimes have the opposite effect, according to research from Flinders University.
The study, published in the journal Memory, examined whether brief warnings given before recalling a negative event change how that memory is experienced immediately and over time. The researchers found that, rather than reducing distress, warnings can prolong some of the negative characteristics associated with traumatic memories.
Trigger warnings appear in many media contexts—television, streaming services, and online platforms—to forewarn viewers about graphic or emotionally charged material. For example, a streaming show might include a notice such as: “The following episode contains graphic depictions of suicide and violence, which some viewers may find disturbing.”
Researchers Victoria Bridgland and Dr. Melanie Takarangi from the College of Education, Psychology and Social Work at Flinders University set out to test whether such warnings alter how people recall and react to negative memories. Their goal was to discover whether warnings help people prepare for an upsetting memory or instead change the memory’s emotional trajectory.
The study involved 209 participants, primarily female, aged between 17 and 50. Participants took part in two laboratory sessions spaced two weeks apart. In the first session they were asked to recall a personally negative event and complete questionnaires that measured aspects of the memory—such as vividness, emotional intensity, and experiences related to the event, including sleep disturbance. Some participants received a warning that recalling the event could be distressing, while others did not receive such a warning.
Two weeks later participants returned and recalled the same event again, completing the same set of questionnaires. The researchers also assessed whether participants reported using coping strategies in the period between sessions.
Contrary to what might be expected, the study found that participants who received a warning in the first session showed a smaller reduction in some negative effects of the memory over the two-week interval. In other words, certain negative features—such as the memory’s emotional impact and related experiences like sleep problems—declined less for warned participants than for those who were not warned.
“Trigger warnings are intended to mitigate this potential distress; however often they can be more distressing when they come up on screen as a surprise,” says Victoria Bridgland. The results suggest that a warning can inadvertently keep some of the memory’s negative characteristics active for longer, rather than helping people prepare for recalling the event.
Dr. Takarangi adds, “We found that participants who were warned reported a smaller decrease in emotional impacts from their negative memory—such as difficulty sleeping and the frequency of related experiences—over the two weeks between tests.” She also notes that warnings did not lead to an increased report of coping strategies, indicating that warnings did not make people more likely to use techniques to manage distress.
About this PTSD research news
Source: Flinders University
Contact: Press Office – Flinders University
Image: The image is in the public domain
Original Research: Closed access.
“Danger! Negative memories ahead: the effect of warnings on reactions to and recall of negative memories” by Victoria M. E. Bridgland et al., published in Memory.
Abstract
Danger! Negative memories ahead: the effect of warnings on reactions to and recall of negative memories
A trigger warning is an alert that upcoming material containing distressing themes might bring the details and emotions of a negative memory to mind. Warnings are intended to prevent or reduce that distress. To investigate whether this is true, the researchers tested whether telling participants in advance that recalling a negative event would be distressing changed characteristics of immediate and delayed recall—such as vividness and the sense of reliving—compared to participants who did not receive a warning.
Overall, the study found that many negative features of memories fade over time: emotion and vividness generally declined across the two-week delay. However, the emotional impact of the event—measured by the frequency of experiences related to the event, for example, trouble staying asleep—reduced less over time in participants who had been warned in the first session. These findings indicate that warning messages may sometimes prolong the negative characteristics associated with memories, rather than preparing individuals for recalling a negative experience.
Implications of this research include the need to carefully consider when and how warnings are used in media and clinical settings. While trigger warnings are often well-intentioned, this study suggests that, in some contexts, they may not deliver the protective effect that creators and broadcasters expect. Further research is needed to determine which types of warnings and delivery methods—if any—might help people prepare without unintentionally extending distress.