Retrieval‐induced forgetting: A developmental study

Two studies examined the possibility of retrieval‐induced forgetting by 7‐year‐olds. Children heard a story while viewing pictures of events mentioned in the story, each highlighting objects drawn from two distinct semantic categories (e.g. animals and food). Over the next several days, children were asked the same yes/no questions about half the examples from one category and, finally, were tested for their memory of the complete set of examples from both categories. Both a category‐cued recall test (Study 1) and a written recognition‐memory test (Study 2) produced results suggestive of retrieval‐induced forgetting. That is, children showed poorer memory for unpractised items from the practised category than for unpractised items from the other category. The severity of the effect did not differ reliably between the children and young adults, and was unaffected by whether practised items appeared before or after the unpractised competitors (Study 2). We consider the implications of these findings for competing views about retrieval‐induced forgetting and the development of cognitive inhibition.     

Forgetting Trauma: Socially Shared Retrieval‐induced Forgetting and Post‐traumatic Stress Disorder

Memory for related but unpracticed aspects of an event can be impaired by selectively retrieving parts of the same event. This occurs when selective retrieval [within‐individual retrieval‐induced forgetting (WI‐RIF)] is undertaken by individuals and has been extended to social contexts—RIF can be produced in listeners [socially shared retrieval‐induced forgetting (SS‐RIF)] by a speaker's selective recounting. The effects of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on WI‐RIF and SS‐RIF were examined by two experiments. In Experiment 1, combat veterans (with or without PTSD) and non‐veteran dyads participated in a RIF paired‐associates paradigm adapted for combat‐related stimuli. WI‐RIF and SS‐RIF occurred for combat‐related and neutral pairs regardless of group. However, greater WI‐RIF and SS‐RIF for combat‐related words were shown by individuals with PTSD. These findings were replicated by Experiment 2, in which either a combat‐related or neutral story was learned by participants, and selective retrieval was embedded in a conversation. That the selective retrieval of trauma‐related stimuli leads to enhancement of induced forgetting for individuals with PTSD under certain conditions is suggested by these data. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Repeated partial eyewitness questioning causes confidence inflation but not retrieval‐induced forgetting

During a crime investigation eyewitnesses are often interviewed more than once. Repeated post‐event questioning offers an opportunity for retrieval practice. Practicing retrieval of a subset of memories may suppress access to related memories, a phenomenon known as retrieval‐induced forgetting. In this short report we investigated the generalization of retrieval‐induced forgetting to episodic eyewitness memory of a complex event. The results indicated that repeated retrieval improves future recall of practiced information, but does not induce forgetting of related information. Retrieval practice, however, did result in higher confidence ratings, both for correct and incorrect answers. The practical consequence of this study is that repeated questioning should be avoided if possible. Not because it may induce retrieval‐induced forgetting, but because it may lead to confidence inflation. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Applying Retrieval‐Induced Forgetting to Children's Testimony

When a crime has been committed, investigators must obtain as much and as accurate information as possible from witnesses. Initial incomplete interviews may pose a potential cost to unretrieved information. We explored retrieval‐induced forgetting (RIF) in children's autobiographical memory for related episodic events. Children experienced four related play sessions across 4 days, followed by word stem retrieval practice of half of the items, and a cued recall task that took place either 15 minutes or 2 hours later. Categorized details were experienced either within a single day or across multiple days. The emergence of RIF was dependent upon the length of delay between practice and test phases and the temporal distribution of the episodic events. Our observations demonstrate that RIF can be a subtle phenomenon whose occurrence depends upon whether the retrieval context supports an environment of retrieval interference. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting: Dynamic effects between retrieval and restudy trials when practice is mixed

Results from numerous previous studies suggest that when subjects study items from different categories and then repeatedly retrieve, or restudy, some of the items from some of the categories, repeated retrieval, but not repeated study, induces forgetting of related unpracticed items. We investigated in two experiments whether such effects of pure retrieval and pure study practice generalize to mixed practice—that is, when retrieval and restudy trials are randomly interleaved within a single experimental block. Experiment 1 employed cued recall; Experiment 2 employed item recognition testing. In both experiments, pure repeated retrieval, but not pure repeated study, caused forgetting of related unpracticed items, which is consistent with the prior work. In contrast, with mixed practice, both retrieval and restudy induced forgetting. Thus, whereas retrieval caused forgetting regardless of practice mode, restudy caused forgetting with mixed practice, but not with pure practice. The finding provides first evidence for dynamic effects between retrieval and restudy trials when practice is mixed. It is consistent with the view that, with mixed practice, subjects engage in more retrieval during restudy trials, so that restudy trials may trigger similar processes as retrieval trials and, thus, induce forgetting of related, not restudied, items.     

On the role of item similarity in retrieval-induced forgetting

We report on two experiments designed to examine how the similarity of retrieval-practised and not-retrieval-practised items influences the amount of retrieval-induced forgetting. Participants studied categorised item lists with each category consisting of exemplars from two different semantic subcategories. Using both the retrieval practice paradigm (Experiment 1) and the output interference paradigm (Experiment 2) we found that the retrieval of a subset of the studied items impaired the subsequent recall of the nonpractised items if the two types of items were fairly dissimilar to each other (same category but different subcategory) but did not induce impairment if the two types of items were highly similar (same category and subcategory). These results indicate that a high degree of similarity of practised and nonpractised items can eliminate retrieval-induced forgetting. They also suggest that forgetting in the retrieval practice paradigm and forgetting in the output interference paradigm are mediated by the same mechanisms. The relation of the present results to other very recent findings about the role of item similarity in retrieval-induced forgetting in discussed.     

Thinking about “why” eliminates retrieval‐induced forgetting: Levels of construal affect retrieval dynamics

The present study examined how levels of construal affect retrieval‐induced forgetting. Higher‐level construal is associated with the focus on the similarities among stimuli, suggesting that high‐level construal promotes relational processing. Based on this fact, retrieval‐induced forgetting may be reduced or eliminated under high‐level construal condition because of the effect of relational processing. Two experiments were conducted using a retrieval‐practice paradigm with different stimuli while priming the level of construal. A meta‐analysis synthesizing the results showed that retrieval‐induced forgetting occurred under the low‐level construal condition, whereas forgetting did not occur under the high‐level construal condition. These results suggest that abstract thinking can eliminate retrieval‐induced forgetting because of relational processing, demonstrating the role of the levels of construal on memory inhibition.     

情绪对提取诱发遗忘的影响

从学习材料的情绪性和提取过程的情绪状态两方面考察了情绪对提取诱发遗忘的影响。结果发现提取练习对情绪性与非情绪性材料引发了同等程度的遗忘;提取练习阶段,当被试处于正性或中性情绪状态下也会发生明显的提取诱发遗忘现象,而当被试处于负性情绪状态时,提取练习不会导致对未提取项目的遗忘。研究结果表明,学习材料的情绪性不影响提取诱发遗忘,而提取过程的情绪状态会对提取诱发遗忘产生影响,负性情绪状态可以消除提取诱发遗忘。     

Noncompetitive retrieval practice causes retrieval-induced forgetting in cued recall but not in recognition

Retrieving a subset of learned items can lead to the forgetting of related items. Such retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) can be explained by the inhibition of irrelevant items in order to overcome retrieval competition when the target item is retrieved. According to the retrieval inhibition account, such retrieval competition is a necessary condition for RIF. However, research has indicated that noncompetitive retrieval practice can also cause RIF by strengthening cue–item associations. According to the strength-dependent competition account, the strengthened items interfere with the retrieval of weaker items, resulting in impaired recall of weaker items in the final memory test. The aim of this study was to replicate RIF caused by noncompetitive retrieval practice and to determine whether this forgetting is also observed in recognition tests. In the context of RIF, it has been assumed that recognition tests circumvent interference and, therefore, should not be sensitive to forgetting due to strength-dependent competition. However, this has not been empirically tested, and it has been suggested that participants may reinstate learned cues as retrieval aids during the final test. In the present experiments, competitive practice or noncompetitive practice was followed by either final cued-recall tests or recognition tests. In cued-recall tests, RIF was observed in both competitive and noncompetitive conditions. However, in recognition tests, RIF was observed only in the competitive condition and was absent in the noncompetitive condition. The result underscores the contribution of strength-dependent competition to RIF. However, recognition tests seem to be a reliable way of distinguishing between RIF due to retrieval inhibition or strength-dependent competition.     

Retrieval‐induced forgetting of emotional and unemotional autobiographical memories

This experiment extended the retrieval‐induced forgetting (RIF) procedure from simple, episodic information to emotional and unemotional autobiographical memories. In the elicitation phase, participants generated specific memories from their past in response to negative, neutral, or positive category cues. In the retrieval‐practice phase, they practised retrieving (and elaborated further on) some of the memories for some of the categories. In the final test phase, they tried to recall all memories. Memories that received retrieval practice were recalled more often on final test than baseline memories, whereas memories that were not practised, yet competed with practised memories via a shared category cue, were recalled less often than baseline memories. We discuss the roles of inhibition, competition, emotion, and self‐relevance, and consider what laboratory manipulations of memory might reveal about everyday and pathological personal memory.     

Source‐monitoring accuracy across repeated tests following directed forgetting

The repeated recall of items from lists that participants were earlier instructed to either remember or to forget was examined in two experiments. RR participants (those instructed to remember both lists they were presented) tended to recall more List 1 items than FR participants (those instructed to forget the first list and to remember the second list). FR participants recalled more List 2 items than did RR participants, but only when directed to report those items (Experiment 1), not when directed to report items from both lists (Experiment 2). Participants experienced difficulty correctly reporting the list source of items they recalled and incorrect source recall increased across tests, showing hypermnesia. This later result underscores the need for caution when assessing the accuracy of information retrieved from multiple sources across repeated tests. Together, the data patterns provide support for the retrieval dynamics account of hypermnesia, the context‐change account of directed forgetting, and limited support for the retrieval inhibition view of directed forgetting.     

定向遗忘中提取抑制的机制：成功提取引起抑制

两个实验采用无关材料考察了字表方式下提取诱发遗忘解释定向遗忘中提取抑制的可能性。在实验中,学习完两个字表后,对字表2 进行不同次数（0、1、3次）的提取练习以考察是否会增强定向遗忘效应以及定向遗忘效应是否随着提取练习次数的增加而增强。实验一中,字表2提取练习是要求被试回忆字表2项目,不给予线索提示。在实验二中,采用词干补笔测验的形式对字表2进行提取练习,词干补笔测验保证了对字表2项目的成功提取。研究结果发现,只有在实验二中对字表2的成功提取练习增强了定向遗忘效应,从而表明成功提取可以解释定向遗忘中的提取抑制     

The role of retrieval practice in directed forgetting

Three experiments tested the possibility that retrieval-induced forgetting is responsible for directed forgetting with the list method. In Experiments 1 and 2, additional List 2 retrieval practice was given to determine whether this would increase directed forgetting. In Experiment 1 all items came from a single category, and in Experiment 2 unrelated words were used. In Experiment 3 additional List 2 study accompanied List 2 retrieval practice. There was no evidence that List 2 retrieval practice, with or without additional List 2 study, affected the magnitude of directed forgetting. It was argued that retrieval-induced forgetting could not account for these results. Accounts with greater viability include retrieval strategy disruption and a modified version of the dissociation hypothesis.     

The subjective experience of retrieval-induced forgetting

The objective was to examine whether the lower accessibility of studied items (Rp?) that follows retrieval practice with studied items from the same category (Rp+; retrieval-induced forgetting) is correctly monitored by our cognitive system. If monitored, lower confidence for Rp? items would be expected which, in turn, would allow the control of the retrieval-induced forgetting through the report option. In Experiment 1 the standard retrieval-practice paradigm with categorised word lists was followed by a recognition test with confidence rating and the option to report or withhold the answer. Accuracy showed retrieval-induced forgetting, but there were no differences in confidence. The report option did not affect retrieval-induced forgetting. The confidence–accuracy dissociation could be due to a correct monitoring of the retrieval-induced forgetting joined with a factor that incorrectly increases confidence for Rp? items. Familiarity with the practised category was proposed as this factor and tested in Experiment 2. Despite presenting the categories more times during the retrieval-practice phase to increase their familiarity, confidence ratings were unaffected. In conclusion, this research suggests that retrieval-induced forgetting was not monitored, giving rise to a confidence–accuracy dissociation.     

Gone but not forgotten: the transient nature of retrieval-induced forgetting

Recent research has demonstrated that the act of remembering can prompt temporary forgetting or, more specifically, the inhibition of particular items in memory. Extending work of this kind, the present research investigated some possible boundary conditions of retrieval-induced forgetting. As expected, a critical determinant of temporary forgetting was the interval between guided retrieval practice and a final recall test. When these two phases were separated by 24 hr, retrieval-induced forgetting failed to emerge. When they occurred in the same testing session, however, retrieval practice prompted the inhibition of related items in memory (i.e., Experiment 1). A delay of 24 hr between the encoding of material and guided retrieval practice reduced but did not eliminate retrieval-induced forgetting (i.e., Experiment 2). These findings are considered in the wider context of adaptive forgetting.     

Providing corrective feedback during retrieval practice does not increase retrieval-induced forgetting

Recalling a subset of studied materials can impair subsequent retrieval of related, nontested materials. In two experiments, we examined the influence of providing corrective feedback (no feedback, immediate feedback, delayed feedback) during retrieval practice on this retrieval-induced forgetting effect. Performance was assessed with category cued recall (e.g., recall all exemplars studied under Weather), category-and-stem cued recall (e.g., Weather–B___), and recognition. We report a dissociation between the effects of feedback on memory of the tested materials and the nontested materials. Whereas providing immediate or delayed feedback (compared to no feedback) improved recall and recognition of the tested items, it had no influence on retrieval-induced forgetting. These results are consistent with the inhibition account of retrieval-induced forgetting. From an applied perspective, this finding is encouraging for students and educators who use testing to foster learning.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting and part-list cuing in associatively structured lists

Using DRM lists (Roediger & McDermott, 1995) in two experiments, we compared the effects of retrieval practice on a subset of the items and of the presentation of those items as retrieval cues at test on recall of the lists' critical items. In Experiment 1, the critical items were part of the studied lists, thus addressing these items' veridical recall; in Experiment 2, they were not studied, thus addressing these items' false recall. Three major results emerged. First, retrieval practice and part-list cuing reduced both veridical and false recall. Second, the two manipulations induced an integration effect in veridical recall, with substantial forgetting in lists with low false recall levels and no forgetting in lists with high false recall levels. Third, retrieval practice and part-list cuing created the same effects on recall, qualitatively and quantitatively. These results suggest that the detrimental effects of retrieval practice and part-list cuing were mediated by similar mechanisms. They are consistent with the view that not only retrieval-induced forgetting, but also part-list cuing is caused by inhibitory processes.     

Retrieval‐induced forgetting is inversely relatedto everyday cognitive failures

It has recently been suggested ( Anderson, 2003 ) that forgetting is an adaptive process arising from successful inhibition of unwanted items, rather than arising from a failure of the memory system. This inhibition process is thought to make use of retrieval‐induced forgetting (RIF). In the present study, individual susceptibility to RIF was measured in a group of 40 normal participants, whose RIF scores were then compared with their scores on the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ). A significant inverse correlation was found between RIF and CFQ scores, indicating that individuals who show a strong RIF effect tend to suffer a lower rate of cognitive failures and forgetfulness in everyday life. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that RIF might play a role in facilitating memory function by assisting selective retrieval.     

Overcoming the negative consequences of interference from recognition memory testing

Theories of why humans forget have been challenged by the newly discovered list-length/output-interference paradox, in which--under certain testing conditions--learning is not harmed by the amount of verbal material studied, whereas retrieval of that material becomes more difficult with increases in the number of items tested. The latter finding is known as output interference, and the results of the experiment reported here indicate that a release from output interference is obtained when the nature of the items is changed during testing. Specifically, when participants are asked to recognize items from two categories, output interference is minimized when items from each category are tested separately in large blocks. This finding supports models of forgetting that assume interference arises from information about the to-be-learned material that is stored in memory; in contrast, this finding is difficult to explain using models that assume forgetting is the result only of changing context.