Retrieval induces forgetting, but only when nontested items compete for retrieval: Implication for interference, inhibition, and context reinstatement.

Abstract

The mechanism responsible for retrieval-induced forgetting has been the subject of rigorous theoretical debate, with some researchers postulating that retrieval-induced forgetting can be explained by interference ( J. G .W. Raaijmakers & E. Jakab, 2013) or context reinstatement (T. R. Jonker, P. Seli, & C. M. MacLeod, 2013), whereas others claim that retrieval-induced forgetting is better explained by inhibition (M. C. Anderson, 2003). A fundamental assumption of the inhibition account is that nonpracticed items are suppressed because they compete for retrieval during initial testing. In the current study, we manipulated competition in a novel interpolated testing paradigm by having subjects learn the nonpracticed items either before (high-competition condition) or after (low-competition condition) they practiced retrieval of the target items. We found retrieval-induced forgetting for the nonpracticed competitors only when they were studied before retrieval practice. This result provides support for a critical assumption of the inhibition account. RETRIEVAL-INDUCED FORGETTING AND COMPETITION 2 Authors' NoteMatthew Erdman, who is now at Trane (Ingersoll Rand), collected the data from Experiments 1 and 2 as part of his dissertation. The data from Experiments 3 were 4 were collected by SaraDavis. Jason Chan wrote the manuscript. RETRIEVAL-INDUCED FORGETTING AND COMPETITION 3 AbstractThe mechanism responsible for retrieval-induced forgetting has been the subject of rigorous

Competition dependence of retrieval-induced forgetting in motor memory

“…The results matched the recent findings by Chan et al (2015). A standard RIF effect occurred when retrieval practice took place after all items had been encoded.…”

“…In Experiment 1, we adopted the approach of Chan et al (2015). The learning phase consisted of two blocks.…”

“…This finding suggests that lowered accessibility due to intentional forgetting prevented competition. Chan, Erdman, and Davis (2015) recently showed that RIF affects Rp-items only if retrieval practice takes place after the Rp-items have been encoded. Instead of including retrieval practice after termination of the learning phase, several study blocks and retrieval-practice blocks alternated.…”

Interferência retroativa: o esquecimento como uma interrupção na consolidação da memória

“…Consequentemente, o esquecimento aconteceria não por um processo passivo de perda, mas sim por um processo inibitório em que cognitivamente algumas informações seriam mais importantes que outras para uma futura recuperação, e com isso, as informações menos relevantes seriam suprimidas por estas (Anderson, 2003;Fawcett & Taylor, 2008). Segundo esta perspectiva, o ato de lembrar algumas informações -e assim, tornando-as mais relevantes -consequentemente faz com que outras sejam perdidas (Anderson, 2003;Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994;Chan, Erdman, & Davis, 2015). Esta ideia traz diversos desafi os metodológicos e com consequên-cias teóricas muito interessantes.…”

Retroactive Interference: Forgetting as an Interruption of Memory Consolidation

“…Consequently, forgetting does not occur through a passive process of loss but instead through an inhibitory process in which some information is more cognitively important than other information for future retrieval, thus suppressing the less relevant information (Anderson, 2003;Fawcett & Taylor, 2008). From this perspective, the act of remembering some information -and thus making it more relevant -causes other information to be lost (Anderson, 2003;Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994;Chan, Erdman, & Davis, 2015). This idea raises several methodological challenges and has very interesting theoretical consequences.…”