Forgetting motor programmes: Retrieval dynamics in procedural memory

When motor sequences are stored in memory in a categorised manner, selective retrieval of some sequences can induce forgetting of the non-retrieved sequences. We show that such retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) occurs not only in cued recall but also in a test assessing memory indirectly by providing novel test cues without involving recall of items. Participants learned several sequential finger movements (SFMs), each consisting of the movement of two fingers of either the left or the right hand. Subsequently, they performed retrieval practice on half of the sequences of one hand. A final task then required participants to enter letter dyads. A subset of these dyads corresponded to the previously learned sequences. RIF was present in the response times during the entering of the dyads. The finding of RIF in the slowed-down execution of motor programmes overlapping with initially trained motor sequences suggests that inhibition resolved interference between procedural representations of the acquired motor sequences of one hand during retrieval practice.     

Test-potentiated learning of motor sequences

We investigated effects of retrieving body movements from memory on subsequent re-encoding of these movements (i.e., test-potentiated learning). In Experiment 1, participants first learned to perform 12 sequential finger movements as responses to letter stimuli. Eight of these movements then had to be recalled in response to their stimuli (initial test). Subsequently, learning trials were repeated for four of the previously to-be-retrieved movements as well as the previously not-to-be-retrieved movements. Restudy benefited from prior retrieval. In a final test, again requiring motoric recall in response to letter stimuli, performance was better for restudied items that were previously cued for retrieval as compared to items that had been restudied without prior retrieval. However, no such indirect testing benefit occurred when initial and final testing formats were incongruent, that is, when participants had to recall the stimuli in response to movements as cues at the final test. In Experiment 2, we replicated the finding of test-potentiated learning with a different design, manipulating initial-testing status between participants.     

Interference within hands: Retrieval-induced forgetting of left and right hand movements

We examined retrieval-induced forgetting of motor sequences that were categorized by the effectors (left or right hand) involved in their execution. This left–right categorization was independent from input locations or input devices. In addition, the acquired motor sequences were arbitrarily assigned to left and right. Participants learned twelve sequential joystick movements as responses to letter stimuli. Half of the sequences pertained to the left, half to the right hand. Subsequent retrieval-practice of half the items of one hand induced forgetting for the non-retrieved rest of the items of that hand in a final recall test. This finding demonstrates that the hands were used to organize the memory storage of motor sequences in a way that gave rise to later interference between commonly stored items, that is, linked to the same hand.     

The representation of response effector and response location in episodic memory for newly acquired actions: Evidence from retrieval-induced forgetting

Information retrieval can cause forgetting for related but non-retrieved information. Such retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) has been previously found for semantically and episodically related information. The current study used RIF to examine whether response effector and location are encoded explicitly in action memory. Participants learned unique touchscreen responses to ten novel objects. Correct actions to each object involved left-hand or right-hand pushing of one of four possible object buttons. After learning, participants practiced two of the ten object-specific sequences. Unpracticed actions could share hand only, button only, both hand and button, or neither hand nor button, with the practiced actions. Subsequent testing showed significant RIF (in retrieval accuracy and speed measures) for actions that shared hand only, button only, or both hand and button with the practiced action. The results have implications for understanding the representations mediating episodic action memory, and for the potential of RIF as a tool for elucidating feature-based representations in this and other domains.     

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 in episodic memory

Participants learned the locations of 12 stimuli that were uniquely colored but could be grouped by shape (4 circles, 4 triangles, 4 crosses). Following the study, a retrieval-practice phase required participants to recall the colors of a subset of the stimuli (i.e., 2 circles, 2 triangles) using shape and location as cues. In a final test, participants recalled the colors of all 12 stimuli. Compared with the control set of stimuli (i.e., 4 crosses), memory was facilitated for practiced items but impaired for related items, which were not practiced but shared the same shape group. Across experiments, retrieval-induced forgetting was observed for different perceptual groupings and for different cuing procedures. The effect, however, required retrieval of information during the interpolated phase. Providing extra presentations did not disrupt memory for related items.     

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-practice task affects relationship between working memory capacity and retrieval-induced forgetting

Retrieving a subset of items from memory can cause forgetting of other items in memory, a phenomenon referred to as retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). Individuals who exhibit greater amounts of RIF have been shown to also exhibit superior working memory capacity (WMC) and faster stop-signal reaction times (SSRTs), results which have been interpreted as suggesting that RIF reflects an inhibitory process that is mediated by the processes of executive control. Across four experiments, we sought to further elucidate this issue by manipulating the way in which participants retrieved items during retrieval practice and examining how the resulting effects of forgetting correlated with WMC (Experiments 1–3) and SSRT (Experiment 4). Significant correlations were observed when participants retrieved items from an earlier study phase (within-list retrieval practice), but not when participants generated items from semantic memory (extra-list retrieval practice). These results provide important new insight into the role of executive-control processes in RIF.     

Categorization by movement direction: Retrieval-induced forgetting of motor sequences grouped by motion features

We investigated the organized storage of motor sequences in memory by assuming that processes related to interference at retrieval are indicative of memory organization. Effects resulting from these processes, thus, would allow inferences on how motor sequences are represented and organized. Participants learned motor sequences that were categorized by the direction of the initial movement. The subsequent selective retrieval of a subset of sequences of one category resulted in retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) for the non-retrieved sequences of the same category. RIF occurred in an explicit recall test (Experiment 1), as well in an implicit test assessing memory with novel cues (Experiment 2). The results suggest that RIF affected motor programmes and that other cues as the used effectors (here movement direction) can be used for the organization of procedural memory. Basic retrieval dynamics apparently operate within the declarative and procedural systems in a similar way.     

From A to Z? Retrieval-induced forgetting of non-verbal information indicates how writing systems can shape memory organisation

We investigated retrieval-induced forgetting of motor sequences in samples of Chinese participants. Retrieval-induced forgetting occurs when selective retrieval of a subset of information stored in memory causes forgetting for the non-retrieved rest. This phenomenon critically depends on the organised storage of separate categories of memory representations. In studies with participants from a Western culture (Germany), a categorization in left- and right-hand movements previously had been supported by letter stimuli based on a spatial mental representation of the Roman alphabet. The same assignment of letters from the beginning or end of the alphabet to motor sequences performed either with the left- or the right-hand did not entail retrieval-induced forgetting in the present study, however (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, visual features of displaying to-be-learned sequences additionally supported a distinction into left and right. In Experiment 3, learning trials provided verbal category labels. The occurrence of retrieval-induced forgetting in the latter two experiments suggests language-dependent organisation of non-verbal items in memory.     

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.     

Incidental retrieval-induced forgetting of location information

Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) has been studied with different types of tests and materials. However, RIF has always been tested on the items' central features, and there is no information on whether inhibition also extends to peripheral features of the events in which the items are embedded. In two experiments, we specifically tested the presence of RIF in a task in which recall of peripheral information was required. After a standard retrieval practice task oriented to item identity, participants were cued with colors (Exp. 1) or with the items themselves (Exp. 2) and asked to recall the screen locations where the items had been displayed during the study phase. RIF for locations was observed after retrieval practice, an effect that was not present when participants were asked to read instead of retrieving the items. Our findings provide evidence that peripheral location information associated with an item during study can be also inhibited when the retrieval conditions promote the inhibition of more central, item identity information.     

Forgetting the unforgotten affective autobiographical memories in nonclinical dissociators

Inefficient memory inhibition has been observed in nonclinical and clinical dissociators. Paradoxically, dissociators also report unusual forgetfulness. Investigating how forgetting emerges in dissociators may uncover the antecedents for their self-report memory problems. We postulated that set switch can link inefficient memory inhibition to forgetting. Recollection detour, which involves an affect switch, may elicit forgetting of previously uninhibited memories in nonclinical dissociators. This hypothesis was verified in participants with high- and low-dissociation proneness via a retrieval practice paradigm using positive and negative autobiographical memories. After the study and retrieval-practice phases, memories of the practiced affect category were tested without and with intervening recall of the unpracticed affect category in the control and detour condition, respectively. Nondissociators showed reduced recall in the control condition, replicating the retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) effect and recollection detour did not alter the RIF effect. By contrast, nonclinical dissociators showed the RIF effect in the detour condition but not in the control condition. Detour to recollecting memories of another affect category rendered an aftereffect of forgetting of previously uninhibited memories in nonclinical dissociators. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Retrieval-induced forgetting in recall and recognition of thematically related and unrelated sentences

In three experiments, we assessed the effects of type of relation and memory test on retrieval-induced forgetting of facts. In Experiments 1 and 2, eight sets of four shared-subject sentences were presented for study. They were constructed so that half were thematically related and half were unrelated. A retrieval practice phase required participants to recall a subset of the studied sentences. In the final test, the participants were prompted to recall all the sentences (character cued in Experiment 1 and character plus stem cued in Experiment 2). The results showed that the retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) effect was similar for thematically related and unrelated sentences, indicating that the presence of episodic relations among the sentences was sufficient to produce the effect. In Experiment 3, a recognition task was introduced and the RIF effect emerged in accuracy as well as in latency measures. The presence of this effect with item-specific cues is difficult to accommodate for noninhibitory theories of retrieval.     

Are the inhibitory and faciliatory effects during retrieval of semantically related items present in amnestic mild cognitive impairment?

Prefrontal functions subserve inhibition control for retrieval of semantically related items inducing forgetting 19 a-MCI patients and 29 controls underwent neuropsychological evaluation and retrieval-practice paradigm (RPP) to estimate baseline remember (BR), retrieval-induced facilitation (FAC) and retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). A-MCI patients underwent also 3 T-MRI to assess relationship between regional grey matter (rGM) volumes and RPP indexes Behaviourally, RIF and FAC were both observed controls, while RIF only was observed in a-MCI patients. In patients but not in controls, RIF was associated with cognitive efficiency and FAC with memory performance. Patients showed also associations between BR and rGM volumes in the precuneus, no association was found between rGM volumes and RIF and FAC. A-MCI patients did not benefit from repeated practice during retrieval of studied items, which is likely due to their memory disorder. In contrast, patient cognitive efficiency would drive retrieval suppression of interfering stimuli.     

提取诱发遗忘中的相关代价与效益问题：反应抑制能力与项目竞争强度的影响

采用提取练习范式,通过操作反应抑制能力和项目竞争强度两个变量,考察相关代价与效益问题（CCB）对大学生提取诱发遗忘（RIF）的影响。实验为2（反应抑制能力：高、低）×2（项目竞争强度：高、低）×3（项目类型：Rp+、Rp-、Nrp）三因素混合设计。结果发现,高反应抑制能力者在高项目竞争强度下产生了RIF,在低项目竞争强度下则未产生;低反应抑制能力者在高、低项目竞争强度下均未产生RIF。这些结果表明,对反应抑制能力正常的大学生而言,需要认知资源的抑制控制加工是RIF的产生机制,且这种抑制性RIF不受CCB的影响。     

Semantic generation can cause episodic forgetting

The repeated retrieval of a subset of previously learned items can cause forgetting of the nonretrieved items. The study reported here investigated whether retrieval-induced forgetting generalizes to a situation in which the retrieved and nonretrieved items are not part of the same experiential episode and task. Subjects learned an item list that they had to recall later in the experiment. In a separate intermediate phase, they repeatedly generated related items from semantic memory, or were presented the same items intact for study. Only the semantic generation of items, and not their presentation for study, induced forgetting of the initially learned items. This result indicates that, first, semantic generation can cause recall-specific episodic forgetting and, second, retrieval-induced forgetting can occur even if the retrieved and nonretrieved items belong to different experiential episodes and tasks. Connections of the present results to other memory phenomena, such as part-set cuing and the generation effect, social cognition, and eyewitness memory, are discussed.     

Retrieval‐induced forgetting of autobiographical memory details

Several studies suggest that intrusive and overgeneral autobiographical memory are correlated. Thus, paradoxically, in some patients a hyperaccessibility of memory for one (series of) event(s) goes hand‐in‐hand with a scarcity of memories for other personal experiences. This clinical observation is reminiscent of the laboratory phenomenon of retrieval‐induced forgetting (RIF). This refers to the finding that repeatedly recalling some experimental stimuli impairs subsequent recall of related (i.e., tied to the same retrieval cue) stimuli. RIF of emotional autobiographical memories might provide an experimental model for the clinical memory phenomena in question. The present paper reports two experiments that explored the merits of applying the retrieval practice paradigm to relatively broad categories of autobiographical memories. Both studies found a significant RIF effect in that practised memories were recalled better than unrelated unpractised (baseline) memories. In addition, unpractised memories that were related to the practised memories were recalled more poorly than baseline memories. Implications of these findings for modelling the co‐occurrence of intrusive and overgeneral memories are discussed.     

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.