Objective: We experimentally examined and tested four prespecified hypotheses regarding the role of WMC and EM speed in reducing emotionality and vividness ratings: 1) EM—regardless of WMC and EM speed—are more effective compared to no dual task, 2) increasing EM speed only affects the decrease in memory ratings irrespective of WMC, 3) low-WMC individuals—compared to high-WMC individuals—benefit more from making either type of EM, 4) the EM intervention is most effective when—as predicted by WM theory—EM are adjusted to WMC.

Method: Undergraduates with low (n=31) or high (n=35) WMC recalled three emotional memories and rated vividness and emotionality before and after each condition (recall only, recall + slow EM, and recall + fast EM).

Results: Contrary to the theory, the data do not support the hypothesis that EM speed should be adjusted to WMC (hypothesis 4). However, the data show that a dual task in general is more effective in reducing memory ratings than no dual task (hypothesis 1), and that a more cognitively demanding dual task increases the intervention’s effectiveness (hypothesis 2).

Conclusions: Although adjusting EM speed to an individual’s WMC seems a straightforward clinical implication, the data do not show any indication that such a titration is helpful.”