Age, interference, and forgetting

Koppenaal, R. J.; Krull, Anna; Katz, Hannah

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(64)90029-3

Cited by 28 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although developmental changes in memory were not the core concerns of North American verbal learning researchers, the findings by Bousfield et al (1958) and Koppenaal et al (1964) provided evidence for the importance of developmental differences, thus falsifying the view that the processes mediating verbal learning and memory at different age levels are qualitatively identical. In fact, Goulet's (1968) review of verbal learning in children published only 4 years after Keppel's overview differed considerably from the latter, pointing to the lack of correspondence between data on children and adults.…”

Section: American Researchmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In this sense, the conclusion made by contemporary authors (Brainerd and Pressley 1985;Kail and Strauss 1984) regarding a dearth of research on memory development prior to 1965 applies to American developmental psychology between 1936 and 1965. Most of the verbal learning studies with children were descriptive, and many were conducted at a single age level, but there were a few notable exceptions. For instance, Koppenaal et al (1964) used a paired-associate learning paradigm to test the developmental hypothesis that older children should experience greater interference when tested on highly associative learning materials than younger children. This assumption was based on the observation that verbal associative strength is determined by children's prior knowledge and that prior knowledge is richer for older compared to younger children.…”

Section: American Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Memory Development from Early Childhood Through Emerging Adulthood

Schneider

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: American Researchmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: American Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory Development from Early Childhood Through Emerging Adulthood

Schneider

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For instance, Darby and Sloutsky () found that memories of 5‐year‐old children were disrupted by task‐related post‐learning interference, whereas Bauer, Van Abbema, and de Haan (; Experiment 3) found no such differences in 20‐month‐old toddlers. Others found that preschoolers were either less or equally susceptible to retroactive interference than older children (Howe, ; Koppenaal, Krull, & Katz, ). A better understanding of the impact of post‐encoding conditions on memory retention over shorter and longer temporal intervals in different age groups of children is of importance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post‐encoding wakeful resting supports the retention of new verbal memories in children aged 13–14 years

Martini

Bernegger

et al. 2018

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence primarily exists in adults that engaging in task‐related mental activity after new learning results in increased forgetting of learned information, compared with quietly resting in the minutes that follow learning, where less forgetting is observed. The current study investigated whether the beneficial effect of post‐encoding rest can be observed in children aged 13–14 years. Each child ( N = 102) encoded two word lists. After the presentation and immediate recall of one word list, children wakefully rested for 10 min (resting condition), after presentation and immediate recall of the other word list, they solved visuo‐spatial problems for 10 min (problem‐solving condition). Seven days later, a surprise free recall test for the two word lists took place. Our results showed that children retained more words over 7 days in the resting condition than with the problem‐solving condition. Post‐hoc analyses revealed that the resting effect was a function of the number of words recollected during the immediate recall. Specifically, those children who recalled fewest words (≤ 13/30 words) in the immediate recall showed a significant resting effect. There was no resting effect in those who recalled a mid‐range (14–16/30 words) or a high number (>16/30 words) of words. These results provide new insights into the factors that influence memory in children, and suggest that a few minutes of wakeful rest benefits memory, relative to engaging in an ongoing task. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Task‐related mental activity after encoding weakens memory retention more than wakeful resting. Beneficial effect of resting after encoding was found primarily in younger and older adults. What does this study add? We investigated children at the age of 13–14 years. 8‐min post‐encoding wakeful resting supports memory retention over 7 days. Individuals differ in the impact of a brief period of wakeful resting after learning. Only children with lower immediate memory performances profited from wakeful resting.

show abstract

“…While an early study with 4-, 5-, and 8-yearolds showed an age-related increase in retroactive interference (Koppenaal, Krull, & Katz, 1964), Howe (1995) found large and age-invariant interference effects in preschool and kindergarten children and identified the locus of the interference effects at storage. Lee and Bussey (2001) reported similar age-invariant retroactive interference effects for 4-and 7-year-olds, and, like Howe (1995), found that retroactive interference effects were independent of initial levels of learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Episodic memory updating: The role of context familiarity

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We previously demonstrated that spatial context is a powerful reminder that can trigger memory updating (Hupbach, Hardt, Gomez, & Nadel in Learning & Memory, 15, 574-579 2008). In the present study, we asked whether the familiarity of the spatial context modulates the role of spatial context as a reminder. Since context familiarity can be easily manipulated in children, we chose 5-year-olds as study participants. In two experiments, we demonstrated robust memory-updating effects in children. Spatial context triggered incorporation of new information into old memories only when the context was unfamiliar. In highly familiar spatial environments (children's homes), spatial context did not initiate memory updating. Other reminders (the experimenter and a reminder question) became highly effective in familiar contexts. These findings shed further light on the specific conditions that trigger memory updating and support the view that the mechanisms underlying it are similar in children and adults.

show abstract

Age, interference, and forgetting

Cited by 28 publications

References 12 publications

Memory Development from Early Childhood Through Emerging Adulthood

Memory Development from Early Childhood Through Emerging Adulthood

Post‐encoding wakeful resting supports the retention of new verbal memories in children aged 13–14 years

Episodic memory updating: The role of context familiarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About