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 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.     

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 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.     

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 progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

Remembering and forgetting reflect fundamentally interdependent processes in human memory (Bjork, 2011). This interdependency is particularly apparent in research on retrieval-induced forgetting, which has shown that retrieving a subset of information can cause the forgetting of other information (Anderson et al. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 20:1063-1087, 1994). According to one prominent theoretical account, retrieval-induced forgetting is caused by an inhibitory process that acts to resolve competition during retrieval. Specifically, when cues activate competing, contextually inappropriate responses, those responses are claimed to be inhibited in order to facilitate the retrieval of target responses (Anderson Journal of Memory and Language 49: 415-445, 2003; Levy & Anderson Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6: 299-305, 2002; Storm, 2011b). Interest in retrieval-induced forgetting has grown steadily over the past two decades. In fact, a search of the abstracts at the 5th International Conference on Memory (ICOM, York University, 2011) revealed 40 presentations specifically mentioning "retrieval-induced forgetting," and nearly twice that number referring to the concept of inhibition. Clearly, researchers are interested in the empirical phenomenon of retrieval-induced forgetting, and inhibition is gaining increasing attention as a mechanism involved in memory. The goal of the present progress report is to critically review the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting and to provide direction so that future research can have a more meaningful impact on our understanding of human memory.     

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.     

Thinking can cause forgetting: memory dynamics in creative problem solving

Research on retrieval-induced forgetting has shown that retrieval can cause the forgetting of related or competing items in memory (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). In the present research, we examined whether an analogous phenomenon occurs in the context of creative problem solving. Using the Remote Associates Test (RAT; Mednick, 1962), we found that attempting to generate a novel common associate to 3 cue words caused the forgetting of other strong associates related to those cue words. This problem-solving-induced forgetting effect occurred even when participants failed to generate a viable solution, increased in magnitude when participants spent additional time problem solving, and was positively correlated with problem-solving success on a separate set of RAT problems. These results implicate a role for forgetting in overcoming fixation in creative problem solving.     

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.     

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.     

The influence of distinctive processing on retrieval-induced forgetting

Recall of a portion of a previously experienced list benefits subsequent recall of that portion of the list but leads to poorer recall of nonpracticed items from the same set (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). One explanation for this retrieval-induced forgetting is that during practice of part of a set, the non-practiced items compete for recall and are suppressed; this suppression process inhibits later recall of the nonpracticed items. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the relationship between distinctive processing of the original set and retrieval-induced forgetting, on the assumption that distinctive processing reduces response competition. In the first experiment, distinctive processing induced by difference judgments among the studied items did reduce forgetting relative to a standard encoding task and a similarity judgment task. In fact, the difference judgment task completely eliminated retrieval-induced forgetting. In the second experiment, the similarity judgment task was analyzed in relation to a task assumed to foster associative integration (Anderson & McCulloch, 1999). Even though the similarity judgment met the requirements for associative integration, retrieval-induced forgetting persisted following similarity judgment. The results are consistent with the view that distinctive processing benefits memory within an organizational context (Hunt & McDaniel, 1993; Smith & Hunt, in press).     

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.     

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.     

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。     

Intact retrieval inhibition in children’s episodic recall

Young children are assumed to be inefficient inhibitors in a number of cognitive tasks. In two experiments, we examined whether such deficits extend to children's episodic recall. We used two inhibition paradigms: retrieval-induced forgetting, the detrimental effect of retrieval practice with a subset of learned items on recall of the unpracticed items, and part-list cuing, the detrimental effect of the presentation of a subset of learned items on recall of the remaining items. In both experiments, the inhibitory effects were compared across three age groups: first or second graders, fourth graders, and young adults. The two children groups showed the same amounts of retrieval-induced forgetting and part-list cuing as the adult group, pointing to intact retrieval inhibition in young children's episodic recall. These results parallel very recent results on older adults' episodic recall, suggesting that both retrieval-induced forgetting and part-list cuing develop early in life and remain intact for the greater part of the lifespan.     

No inhibitory deficit in older adults' episodic memory

Selectively retrieving a subset of previously studied material can cause forgetting of the unpracticed material. Such retrieval-induced forgetting is attributed to an inhibitory mechanism recruited to resolve interference among competing items. According to the inhibition-deficit hypothesis, older people experience a specific decline in inhibitory function and thus should show reduced retrieval-induced forgetting. However, the results of the two experiments reported here show the same amount of retrieval-induced forgetting in younger and older adults. These results indicate that retrieval inhibition is intact in older adults' episodic recall. The findings suggest that the common view of a general inhibitory deficit in older adults needs to be updated and that older adults show intact inhibition in some cognitive tasks and deficient inhibition in others.     

I was always on my mind: The self and temporary forgetting

Previous research has demonstrated that the act of remembering can prompt the temporary suppression of related items in memory—that is,retrieval-induced forgetting (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). In extending work of this kind, the present research sought to identify some important boundary conditions of this effect. As expected, temporary forgetting was eliminated under task conditions that elicited distinctive encoding operations—specifically, when material was relevant to the self. This result is noteworthy since it identifies spontaneous processing operations that protect information from temporary forgetting, a finding that has important implications both for the emergence of this inhibitory effect in everyday life and for theoretical treatments of memory function.     

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.