Mortality salience effects grow over time while uncertainty and meaninglessness effects decay.

Evidence

It is worthy of note, however, that a meta-analysis has determined that MS effects differ from meaninglessness and uncertainty effects in terms of their time course: While MS effects tend to increase over time, meaninglessness and uncertainty effects tend to decrease (Martens et al., 2011). Since we included several delay tasks in all our experiments between threat induction and outcome measurement, control deprivation seems to work similarly lastingly to mortality awareness. — Dmitrij Agroskin and Eva Jonas, Controlling death by defending ingroups, 163

Categorization

• XREF: The rising vs. falling time-course of MS vs. uncertainty effects helps disambiguate which process actually drives an observed defense — diagnostic for testing the hollowed-identity question. — connects to: Control motivation but not implicit death cognition drives threat-based ingroup defense. — Dmitrij Agroskin and Eva Jonas, Controlling death by defending…, 143; Death-thought accessibility does not mediate mortality salience effects on ingroup defense. — Dmitrij Agroskin and Eva Jonas, Controlling death by defending…, 160; Ingroup defenses like prejudice function primarily to restore an orderly worldview. — Dmitrij Agroskin and Eva Jonas, Controlling death by defending…, 168 (+2 more)
• SHARE: A discriminating fact for a methods-minded colleague working on threat paradigms and delay intervals.

Related

• Mortality salience effects require sufficient delay before defense measurement. (similarity 0.88)
• Death-thought accessibility does not mediate mortality salience effects on ingroup defense. (similarity 0.88)
• Prolonged death contemplation keeps mortality thoughts conscious and suppresses defensive reactions (similarity 0.84)
• Mortality salience triggers ingroup defense through control deprivation (similarity 0.83)
• Mortality reminders increase perceived in-group entitativity, buffering death anxiety. (similarity 0.83)
• Control motivation but not implicit death cognition drives threat-based ingroup defense. (similarity 0.82)
• Mortality threats drive group identification through perceived loss of control, not symbolic immortality. (similarity 0.81)
• Mortality salience effects are not confounded with negative mood, which prior TMT research predicts. (similarity 0.80)
• Mortality reminders uniquely trigger worldview defense unlike other threats (similarity 0.79)
• Conscious and unconscious death thoughts trigger different defense systems (similarity 0.79)
• Death reminders evoke ingroup defense through a shared loss-of-control mechanism (similarity 0.78)
• Conscious death thoughts require delay to trigger worldview defenses (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Average-level comparisons can confound threat effects with long-term secular trends #qualifies (0.80)
• Prolonged death contemplation keeps mortality thoughts conscious and suppresses defensive reactions #contradicts (0.75) — Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, Tom Pyszczynski, The Worm at the Core, 625