Retrieval-induced forgetting occurs in tests of item recognition

Using the retrieval-practice paradigm (Anderson, R. A. Bjork, & E. L. Bjork, 1994), we tested whether or not retrieval-induced forgetting could be found in item recognition tests. In Experiment 1, retrieval practice on items from semantic categories depressed recognition of nonpracticed items from the same categories. Similar results were found in Experiment 2 in a more stringent source test for practiced, nonpracticed, and new items. These results conceptually replicate those of previous retrieval-induced forgetting studies done with cued recall (e.g., Anderson et al., 1994). Our findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis that item-specific cues during retrieval will eliminate retrieval interference in the retrieval-practice paradigm (Butler, Williams, Zacks, & Maki, 2001). We discuss our results in relation to other retrieval interference and inhibition effects in recall and recognition.     

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.     

The roles of delay and retroactive interference in retrieval-induced forgetting

When subjects study items from different categories and then repeatedly retrieve some of the items from some of the categories, retrieval practice typically improves recall of the practiced items but impairs recall of related but unpracticed items, relative to control items from unpracticed categories. Here, we report the results of three experiments, in which we examined practiced and unpracticed items’ delay-induced forgetting (Exp. 1) and their susceptibility to retroactive interference (Exps. 2 and 3). Control items showed the expected memory impairment after longer delay between practice and test and in the presence of retroactive interference. In contrast, both the practiced and the related unpracticed items showed hardly any forgetting under these conditions. The findings are consistent with the results from recent testing-effect studies, which have reported reduced delay-induced forgetting and reduced susceptibility to interference for retrieval-practiced items, and generalize the results to related unpracticed items. The findings are discussed with respect to the inhibitory and noninhibitory accounts of retrieval-induced forgetting, as well as the possible role of selective segregation processes, which may be induced by retrieval practice.     

Does collaborative remembering reduce false memories?

Collaborative remembering refers to recall by groups rather than by an individual. Three experiments investigated whether, relative to individual remembering, collaborative remembering decreased correct recall and false recall using the Deese‐Roediger‐McDermott paradigm. Participants were first asked to study and recall five lists of 15 words that were each semantically associated with a critical non‐presented word. Half the participants recalled the words by themselves, while the remaining half were assigned to pairs and collaboratively recalled the words. In Experiment 1, pairs produced the same number of false or correct words as individuals who were tested alone. In Experiment 2, the interpersonal closeness of the groups was also manipulated: friends and pairs who were not friends were assigned to the collaborative groups. Both friends and non‐friends produced fewer false or correct words than individuals. Experiment 3, in which the performance of the individuals and non‐friend pairs were compared using a recall test of the same 75 words as the previous experiments, replicated the results of Experiment 2. These results are discussed in terms of the retrieval‐strategy disruption.     

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.     

The role of test structure in creating false memories

In the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm, studying lists of semantic associates results in high rates of false recognition of a nonpresented critical word. The present set of experiments was designed to measure the contribution of additional processing of list items at test to this false memory effect. The participants studied sets of lists and then performed a recognition task for each set. In three experiments, using this paradigm, we investigated false recognition when the number of studied list items presented at test (0, 6, or 12) was manipulated. In Experiments 2 and 3, false recognition of critical lures associated to both studied and nonstudied lists increased significantly as the number of list items included in the test increased. These results indicate that processes occurring at retrieval contribute to false memory effects found with the DRM paradigm.     

Norms for word lists that create false memories

Roediger and McDermott (1995) induced false recall and false recognition for words that were not presented in lists. They had subjects study 24 lists of 15 words that were associates of a common word (called the critical target or critical lure) that was not presented in the list. False recall and false recognition of the critical target occurred frequently in response to these lists. The purpose of the current work was to provide a set of normative data for the lists Roediger and McDermott used and for 12 others developed more recently. We tested false recall and false recognition for critical targets from 36 lists. Despite the fact that all lists were constructed to produce false remembering, the diversity in their effectiveness was large--60% or more of subjects falsely recalled window and sleep following the appropriate lists, and false recognition for these items was greater than 80%. However, the list generated from king led to 10% false recall and 27% false recognition. Possible reasons for these wide differences in effectiveness of the lists are discussed. These norms serve as a useful benchmark for designing experiments about false recall and false recognition in this paradigm.     

ASSOCIATIVE PROCESSES IN FALSE RECALL AND FALSE RECOGNITION

Abstract— Studying a list of words associated to a critical nonpresented word results in high rates of false recall and false recognition for that nonpresented item (Roediger & McDermott, 1995) Two experiments examined the effect of manipulating the number of associates presented on false recall and later false recognition of a nonpresented item. In Experiment 1, associate lists of varying lengths were studied, in Experiment 2, list length was held constant and the number of associates within the list was manipulated. In both experiments, the rate of critical intrusions in recall increased steadily with increasing number of associates studied Most notably, the filler words used in Experiment 2 to equate the list lengths did not affect the rate of critical intrusions, although they did depress recall of studied words. False recall and false recognition appear to be tied to the total, not the mean, associative strength of items in the list.     

Reversing the testing effect by feedback: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence

The testing effect refers to the finding that retrieval practice of previously studied information enhances its long-term retention more than restudy practice does. Recent work showed that the testing effect can be dramatically reversed when feedback is provided to participants during final recall testing (Storm, Friedman, Murayama, & Bjork, 2014). Following this prior work, in this study, we examined the reversal of the testing effect by investigating oscillatory brain activity during final recall testing. Twenty-six healthy participants learned cue–target word pairs and underwent a practice phase in which half of the items were retrieval practiced and half were restudy practiced. Two days later, two cued recall tests were administered, and immediate feedback was provided to participants in Test 1. Behavioral results replicated the prior work by showing a testing effect in Test 1, but a reversed testing effect in Test 2. Extending the prior work, EEG results revealed a feedback-related effect in alpha/lower-beta and retrieval-related effects in slow and fast theta power, with practice condition modulating the fast theta power effect for items that were not recalled in Test 1. The results indicate that the reversed testing effect can arise without differential strengthening of restudied and retrieval-practiced items via feedback learning. Theoretical implications of the findings, in particular with respect to the distribution-based bifurcation model of testing effects (Kornell, Bjork, & Garcia, 2011), are discussed.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting: Evidence for a recall-specific mechanism

Previous work has shown that recalling information from long-term memory can impair the long-term retention of related representations—a phenomenon known as retrieval-induced forgetting (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). We report an experiment in which the question of whether retrieval is necessary to induce this form of impairment was examined. All the subjects studied six members from each of eight taxonomic categories (e.g.,fruit orange). In the competitive practice condition, the subjects practiced recalling three of the six members, using category-stem cues (e.g.,fruit or____). In the noncompetitive practice condition, the subjects were reexposed to these same members for the same number of repetitions but were asked to recall the category name by using the exemplar and a stem as cues (e.g.,fr____orange). Despite significant and comparable facilitation of practiced items in both conditions, only the competitive practice subjects were impaired in their ability to recall the nonpracticed members on a delayed cued-recall test. These findings argue that retrieval-induced forgetting is not caused by increased competition arising from the strengthening of practiced items, but by inhibitory processes specific to the situation of recall.     

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: II. Recall and recognition of word lists at different levels of organization.

Amnesic rate of decline of free recall, cued recall, and recognition of word lists with different levels of organization was investigated in 2 experiments. In Experiment 1, it was found that amnesic free recall of semantically related word lists declined at an accelerated rate, whereas free recall of lists of unrelated words declined at a normal rate. Cued recall and recognition performance of both kinds of word lists appeared to decline at a normal rate. In Experiment 2, the results of the free-recall and recognition conditions were replicated using an improved experimental design. The observed amnesic forgetting pattern is interpreted as arising from an impairment in consolidation of long-term memory for complex associations between 2 or more items and their study context that is caused by extended hippocampal system lesions.     

Influences of intentional and unintentional forgetting on false memories

In 2 experiments, we examined the interplay of 2 types of memory errors: forgetting and false memory--errors of omission and commission, respectively. We examined the effects of 2 manipulations known to inhibit retrieval of studied words--directed forgetting and part-list cuing--on the false recall of an unstudied "critical" word following study of its 15 strongest associates. Participants cued to forget the 1st of 2 studied lists before studying the 2nd recalled fewer List 1 words but intruded the missing critical word more often than did participants cued to remember both lists. By contrast, providing some studied words as cues during recall reduced both recall of the remaining studied words and intrusions of the critical word. The results suggest that forgetting can increase or decrease false memories, depending on whether such forgetting reflects impaired access to an entire episode or retrieval competition among elements of an episode.     

Limits of the retrieval-inhibition construct: list segregation in directed forgetting

The authors hypothesized that retrieval inhibition in list method directed forgetting could be improved by presenting a task that maximized the segregation step of the retrieval-inhibition process. In Experiment 1, they presented lists of semantically related words in a list method directed-forgetting task to maximize retrieval inhibition. Contrary to predictions, this manipulation eliminated the directed-forgetting effect. The authors further investigated the results of Experiment 1 in Experiments 2 and 3 by manipulating recall instructions and by presenting lists that contained both a categorized and an unrelated list-half. They found directed-forgetting effects for semantically related word lists when participants were asked to recall only the TBR (to-be-remembered) items but not when participants were asked to recall both the TBF (to-be-forgotten) and TBR items. They also found that directed-forgetting effects were not produced when categorized items were presented in the 1st list.     

Associative false recognition occurs without strategic criterion shifts

In the DRM (Deese/Roediger and McDermott) false memory paradigm, subjects studied lists of words associated with nonpresented critical words. They were tested in one of four instructional conditions. In a standard condition, subjects were not warned about the DRM Effect. In three other conditions, they were told to avoid false recognition of critical words. One group was warned before study of the lists (affecting encoding and retrieval processes), and two groups were warned after study (affecting only retrieval processes). Replicating prior work, the warning before study considerably reduced false recognition. The warning after study also reduced false recognition, but only when critical items had never been studied; when critical items were studied in half the lists so that subjects had to monitor memory for their presence or absence, the warning after study had little effect on false recognition. Because warned subjects were trying to avoid false recognition, the high levels of false recognition in the latter condition cannot be due to strategically guessing that critical test items were studied. False memories in the DRM paradigm are not caused by such liberal criterion shifts.     

提取诱发遗忘：项目强度与测试顺序的影响

提取诱发遗忘是指对先前学过的部分材料进行提取练习会使与练习材料相关的其它材料发生遗忘。目前该现象存在抑制与非抑制理论之争。本研究以64名大学生为被试,通过考察项目强度和测试顺序对提取诱发遗忘的影响,对上述争论进行了探讨。结果表明：（1）只有高强度项目才会引发提取诱发遗忘;（2）当控制由测试顺序所产生的输出干扰效应后,高强度项目仍然会引发提取诱发遗忘。本研究结果支持了提取诱发遗忘的抑制理论。     

Retrieval-induced forgetting and mental imagery

In the present article, we present four experiments in which we examined whether mental imagery can initiate retrieval-induced forgetting. Participants were presented with word pairs (Experiments 1, 2, and 3) or narratives (Experiment 4) and then engaged in selective mental imagery about half of the details from half of the categories. The results indicated that mental imagery can produce the same pattern of impairment as retrieval practice (Experiment 1) and postevent questioning (Experiment 4). Additionally, mental imagery-invoked, retrievalinduced forgetting was found for category cued recall (Experiments 1, 3, and 4) and cued recall (Experiment 2); it was found to dissipate across a 24-h delay, but only when there was no pre-delay test (Experiment 3). Such retrieval-induced forgetting was also found for imagining from the first-person and third-person perspectives (Experiment 4). From these findings, we suggest that the underlying retrieval processes behind mental imagery can initiate retrieval-induced forgetting. The findings are discussed in terms of inhibitory processes.     

Feedback increases benefits but not costs of retrieval practice: Retrieval-induced forgetting is strength independent

We examined how the provision of feedback affected two separate effects of retrieval practice: strengthening of practiced information and forgetting of related, unpracticed information. Feedback substantially increased recall of retrieval-practiced items. This unsurprising result shows once again that restudy opportunities boost the benefits of testing. In contrast, retrieval-induced forgetting was unaffected by the manipulation and occurred in equal size with or without feedback. These findings demonstrate strength independence of retrieval-induced forgetting and thus support a theoretical account assuming that an inhibitory mechanism causes retrieval-induced forgetting. According to this theory, inhibition resolves competition that arises during retrieval attempts but is unrelated to the consequences of retrieval practice concerning practiced items. The present results match these assumptions and contradict the theoretical alternative that blocking by strengthened information might explain retrieval-induced forgetting. We discuss our findings against the background of previous studies.     

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.