Retrieval-induced forgetting without competition: Testing the retrieval specificity assumption of the inhibition theory

According to the inhibition theory of forgetting (Anderson, Journal of Memory and Language 49:415–445, 2003; Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 7:522-530, 2000), retrieval practice on a subset of target items leads to forgetting for the other, nontarget items, due to the fact that these other items interfere during the retrieval process and have to be inhibited in order to resolve the interference. In this account, retrieval-induced forgetting occurs only when competition takes place between target and nontarget items during target item practice, since only in such a case is inhibition of the nontarget items necessary. Strengthening of the target item without active retrieval should not lead to such an impairment. In two experiments, we investigated this assumption by using noncompetitive retrieval during the practice phase. We strengthened the cue–target item association during practice by recall of the category name instead of the target item, and thus eliminated competition between the different item types (as in Anderson et al., Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 7:522-530 2000). In contrast to the expectations of the inhibition theory, retrieval-induced forgetting occurred even without competition, and thus the present study does not support the retrieval specificity assumption.     

Is retrieval-induced forgetting an inhibitory process?

Three experiments investigated memory performance in the retrieval practice paradigm (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994; Anderson & Spellman, 1995). This paradigm produces a retrieval-induced forgetting effect, wherein practicing some members of a studied category decreases the recall of other members of that category relative to a baseline. Our findings indicate that the retrieval-induced forgetting effect is replicable but that previous findings supporting an inhibitory account of this phenomenon may not be.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting in implicit memory tests: The role of test awareness

Retrieval practice with particular items in memory may result in decreased recall of different, semantically related, items. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been demonstrated in studies using explicit memory tests. Anderson and Spellman (1995) have attributed retrieval-induced forgetting to inhibitory mechanisms. This hypothesis predicts similar effects in implicit memory tasks. In our first experiment, using Anderson and Spellman’s original paradigm, retrieval-induced forgetting was found using an explicit memory test with independent extralist retrieval cues. In our second experiment, using the same materials, retrieval-induced forgetting was also found using an implicit memory test with independent extralist retrieval cues, but only for participants who were aware of the relationship between the study and practice phase on the one hand, and the test phase of the experiment on the other. Thus, test awareness seems to mediate retrieval-induced forgetting in implicit memory tasks.     

A strategy disruption component to retrieval-induced forgetting

Retrieval-induced forgetting refers to a paradoxical occurrence wherein the act of remembering some material disrupts the retrieval of other, related material (see, e.g., M. C. Anderson, R. A. Bjork, & E. L. Bjork, 1994). This effect is generally accounted for in terms of inhibitory processes. Across three experiments, we test the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting, as well as whether there may be a strategy disruption component to the effect. In our first two experiments, we manipulate which items individuals are cued to recall during retrieval practice and demonstrate that retrieval-induced forgetting can be neutralized when those items do not interfere with the individual's retrieval strategy. In the third experiment, we confirm this finding with a different set of stimuli. These results are inconsistent with a purely inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting, and we discuss implications for inhibition theory and strategy disruption in light of these and other findings.     

No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account

Retrieval practice with particular items from memory can impair the recall of related items on a later memory test. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been ascribed to inhibitory processes (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995). A critical finding that distinguishes inhibitory from interference explanations is that forgetting is found with independent (or extralist) cues. In 4 experiments, the authors tested whether the forgetting effect is cue-independent. Forgetting was investigated for both studied and unstudied semantically related items. Retrieval-induced forgetting was not found using item-specific independent cues for either studied or unstudied items. However, forgetting was found for both item types when studied categories were used as cues. These results are not in line with a general inhibitory account, because this account predicts retrieval-induced forgetting with independent cues. Interference and context-specific inhibition are discussed as possible explanations for the data.     

When intended remembering leads to unintended forgetting

As a means of clarifying the memory dynamics that underlie retrieval-induced forgetting, we explored how instructing participants either to remember or to forget a previously presented list of items influences the susceptibility of those items to inhibition. According to the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting, it is the items that interfere most with retrieval practice that should be the most susceptible to the effects of inhibition. Consistent with this prediction, items from lists that participants were told to remember suffered from significantly more retrieval-induced forgetting than did items from lists that participants were told to forget.     

When intended remembering leads to unintended forgetting

As a means of clarifying the memory dynamics that underlie retrieval-induced forgetting, we explored how instructing participants either to remember or to forget a previously presented list of items influences the susceptibility of those items to inhibition. According to the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting, it is the items that interfere most with retrieval practice that should be the most susceptible to the effects of inhibition. Consistent with this prediction, items from lists that participants were told to remember suffered from significantly more retrieval-induced forgetting than did items from lists that participants were told to forget.     

Similarity and inhibition in long-term memory: evidence for a two-factor theory

Recalling a past experience often requires the suppression of related memories that compete with the retrieval target, causing memory impairment known as retrieval-induced forgetting. Two experiments examined how retrieval-induced forgetting varies with the similarity of the competitor and the target item (target-competitor similarity) and with the similarity between the competitors themselves (competitor-competitor similarity). According to the pattern-suppression model (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995), high target-competitor similarity should reduce impairment, whereas high competitor-competitor similarity should increase it. Both predictions were supported: Encoding target-competitor similarities not only eliminated retrieval-induced forgetting but also reversed it, whereas encoding competitor-competitor similarities increased impairment. The differing effects of target-competitor and competitor-competitor similarity may resolve conflicting results concerning the effects of similarity on inhibition.     

Is retrieval success a necessary condition for retrieval-induced forgetting?

When information is retrieved from memory, it becomes more recallable than it would have been otherwise. Other information associated with the same cue or configuration of cues, however, becomes less recallable. Such retrieval-induced forgetting (Anderson, Bjork, &; Bjork, 1994) appears to reflect the suppression of competing nontarget information, with this suppression facilitating the selection of target information. But is success at such selection a necessary condition for retrieval-induced forgetting? Using a procedure in which some cues posed an impossible retrieval task for participants, we report evidence that the attempt to retrieve, even if unsuccessful, can produce retrieval-induced forgetting. This finding, we believe, supports and refines a suppression/inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting.     

Disrupted memory inhibition in dementia of Alzheimer’s type

Cognitive inhibition has been suggested to deteriorate in Alzheimer’s disease. While numerous studies with different experimental paradigms found evidence on impaired inhibition in attention and memory, evidence in favour of intact memory inhibition has been reported with regard to the phenomenon of retrieval-induced forgetting (Moulin et al., 2002). Here, we adapted the previously used paradigm in order to reduce the contribution of non-inhibitory processes and examined whether retrieval-induced forgetting could still be observed in a sample of participants with diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease. In contrast to the previous finding, we found that retrieval-induced forgetting only occurred in an age-matched control group. These results suggest that inhibitory deficits in Alzheimer’s disease also generalize to memory inhibition that resolves interference occurring during retrieval, whereas effects of retrieval-induced forgetting may still occur when non-inhibitory causes, such as, blocking by previously retrieved content, are not precluded.     

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.     

Can inhibition resolve retrieval competition through the control of spreading activation?

Two experiments are reported in which the mechanisms underlying retrieval-induced forgetting for complex prose materials were investigated, using the independent probe technique pioneered by Anderson and Spellman (1995). These experiments provide additional empirical evidence in support of an inhibitory account of memory. Specifically, evidence emerged not only for the inhibition of nonpracticed items from practiced sets (i.e., first-order effects), but also for the inhibition of items from nonpracticed sets that were semantically related to practiced items in practiced sets (i.e., cross-category effects) and for items from nonpracticed sets that were semantically related to nonpracticed items in practiced sets (ie., second-order effects). These findings are considered in terms of Anderson and Spellman's model of inhibitory processing. We also outline an alternative inhibitory interpretation. Specifically, we consider how inhibition may function as a way of controlling the spread of activation and what implications this may have for the flexibility and adaptiveness of memory.     

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.     

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.     

The role of inhibitory control in the production of misinformation effects

Recent research has indicated a link between retrieval-induced forgetting and the production of misinformation effects (J. Saunders & M. D. MacLeod, 2002). The mechanism underlying this relationship, however, remains unclear. In an attempt to clarify this issue, the authors presented 150 participants with misinformation under conditions designed to promote the activation of inhibitory control during the retrieval of information about a target event. A modified retrieval practice paradigm that used the independent probe method pioneered by M. C. Anderson and B. A. Spellman (1995) revealed that misinformation effects emerged only where misinformation had been introduced about items that had been subject to 1st-order, 2nd-order, or cross-category inhibition. By contrast, misinformation effects failed to emerge where inhibitory processing had not been activated. These findings are discussed in terms of inhibitory control, memory malleability, and their implications for the interviewing of eyewitnesses.     

Episodic generation can cause semantic forgetting: Retrieval-induced forgetting of false memories

In two experiments, we tested whether false recognition and false recall were prone to retrieval-induced forgetting, using the retrieval practice paradigm (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). Participants encoded lists of cue-target word pairs associated with a nonpresented, critical theme word and then engaged in retrieval practice for half of the word pairs from half of the lists. As expected, unpracticed targets from practiced lists were recognized (Experiment 1) and recalled (Experiment 2) less well than those from unpracticed lists. In addition, false recognition and false recall of critical items associated with practiced lists was lower than false recognition and false recall of items associated with unpracticed lists. We argue that false memories are prone to inhibitory mechanisms engendered by the retrieval practice paradigm. The results are consistent with the claim that semantically activated critical themes interfere with the episodic retrieval of list words and that inhibition decreases the activation level of these interfering memory representations during retrieval practice.     

A limit on retrieval-induced forgetting

Retrieving some members of a memory set impairs later recall of semantically related but not unrelated members (M. C. Anderson, R. A. Bjork, & E. L. Bjork, 1994; M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995). The authors investigated whether this retrieval-induced forgetting effect would generalize to testing procedures other than category-cued recall. Although the authors demonstrated a retrieval-induced forgetting effect using a category-cued recall task, they failed to show retrieval-induced forgetting on several different memory tests that used item-specific cues, including a category-plus-stem-cued recall test, a category-plus-fragment-cued recall test, a fragment-cued recall test, and a fragment completion task.     

记忆提取研究的新进展

该文从3个方面回顾了记忆提取研究领域内的最新进展:(1)记忆编码和提取之间的关系,主要针对提取过程的自动性和控制性及相应的神经机制进行了讨论;(2)基于记忆提取的抑制机制,主要涉及指向性遗忘、提取-练习范式的研究及负启动范式在记忆提取研究中的应用;(3)工作记忆能力与记忆提取之间的关系,主要集中于工作记忆能力与控制性记忆提取及记忆提取中的抑制机制之间的关系。     

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