The Initiation and Release of Retrieval Inhibition

Goernert, Phillip N.; Larson, Michael E.

doi:10.1080/00221309.1994.9711172

Cited by 25 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, recalling list 1 items first may have reinstated the list's interference potential in the forget condition and, thus, may have reduced subsequent list 2 enhancement. Corresponding evidence arises from work indicating that the successful retrieval of some of the tobe-forgotten list 1 items can eliminate the forgetting of the remaining list items (Bäuml & Samenieh, 2010, 2012b and from work showing that reexposure of some list 1 items as distractor items in a partial list 2 recognition test can eliminate subsequent list 2 enhancement for the remaining list items (E. L. Bjork & Bjork, 1996; for related results, see Bäuml & Samenieh, 2012a;Goernert & Larson, 1994).…”

Section: Serial Position Curves and The Possible Role Of List Output mentioning

confidence: 99%

List-method directed forgetting: The forget cue improves both encoding and retrieval of postcue information

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In list-method directed forgetting, people are cued to forget a previously studied item list and to learn a new list instead. Such cuing typically leads to forgetting of the first list and to memory enhancement of the second, referred to as list 1 forgetting and list 2 enhancement. In the present study, two experiments are reported that examined influences of items' serial learning position in a list and the two lists' output order on list-method directed forgetting. The results show that list output order influences list 2 enhancement but not list 1 forgetting. The enhancement was higher when list 2 was recalled first than when list 1 was recalled first and, in both cases, was higher for early list 2 items than for middle and late list 2 items. In contrast, the forgetting was equally present for all list 1 items and did not depend on the two lists' output order. The findings suggest that two separate factors can contribute to list 2 enhancement: one (encoding) factor that is restricted to early list 2 items and does not depend on list output order, and another (retrieval) factor that pertains to all list 2 items and varies with the two lists' output order. A new two-mechanism account of directed forgetting is suggested that reconciles previous (encoding or retrieval) views on list 2 enhancement.

show abstract

Section: Serial Position Curves and The Possible Role Of List Output mentioning

confidence: 99%

List-method directed forgetting: The forget cue improves both encoding and retrieval of postcue information

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Support for the claim that list method directed forgetting results from inhibition has been obtained in studies that use part-set retrieval cues (Goernert, 1992;Goernert & Larson, 1994). The part-set phenomenon occurs during memory testing when some subjects are given a part of the set of studied words as a retrieval cue.…”

Section: Part-set Cueingmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Therefore, the part-set cues decreased the directed forgetting effect, although it was not eliminated. A later study (Goernert & Larson, 1994) varied part-set size and found that as the number of retrieval cues increased, memory for List 1 increased for forget subjects and decreased for remember subjects, although again the directed forgetting effect was not entirely eliminated. These findings suggest that forget subjects inhibited List 1.…”

Section: Part-set Cueingmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Several recent articles have claimed that a retrieval mechanism is a cause of the list method directed forgetting effect. This mechanism has been identified as active inhibition (or suppression) of forget material that is already represented in memory (Bjork, 1989;Basden, Basden, & Gargano, 1993;Geiselman & Bagheri, 1985;Geiselman, Bjork, & Fishman, 1983;Goernert & Larson, 1994;Wheeler, 1995). Anderson andBjork (1994, see also Bjork, 1989), in a general review of inhibition effects, have suggested the presence of a suppression mechanism which is under conscious control and can be directed at memory representations.…”

Section: Basic Theoretical Claimsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inhibition, Contextual Segregation, and Subject Strategies in List Method Directed Forgetting

Whetstone

Cross

Whetstone

1996

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Subjects exhibit im-paired source memory for list-1 items even when item recognition is intact (e.g., Geiselman, Bjork, & Fishman, 1983). However, when some items from a list are given as cues for the remaining items (Goernert & Larson, 1994), or when some items are re-exposed in a recognition test (Bjork, Bjork, & Glenberg, 1973), accessibility of list-1 item improves, as indicated by diminished costs and diminished benefits, respectively. Finally, when directed forgetting instructions are replaced by instructions to induce a new mental context at the outset of a second list, many of the characteristics of directed forgetting are created (Sahakyan & Kelley, 2002).…”

Section: Differences In Representational Target Of Inhibitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Inhibitory Control in Forgetting Unwanted Memories: A Consideration of Three Methods

Anderson

Dynamic Cognitive Processes

113

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. When confronted with reminders to things that we would prefer not to think about, we often attempt to put the unwanted memories out of awareness. Here, I argue that the ability to control memory is a special case of a broad class of situations thought to require executive control: response override. In such situations, one must stop a strong habitual response to a stimulus due to situational demands, a function thought to be accomplished by inhibitory processes that suppress the response, enabling more flexible, context-sensitive control over behavior. Recent behavioral studies show that inhibitory mechanisms that control overt behavior are also targeted at declarative memories to control retrieval. Recent neuroimaging findings (Anderson et al., 2004) further establish that controlling awareness of unwanted memories is associated with increased dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation, reduced hippocampal activation, and impaired retention of the unwanted trace and that the magnitude of activation in prefrontal cortex predicts memory suppression. These findings indicate that cognitive and neural systems that support our ability to override prepotent responses can be recruited to override declarative memory retrieval, and that this cognitive act leads to memory failure. The relation between these findings and those obtained with the directed forgetting procedure is also discussed.

show abstract

The Initiation and Release of Retrieval Inhibition

Cited by 25 publications

References 8 publications

List-method directed forgetting: The forget cue improves both encoding and retrieval of postcue information

List-method directed forgetting: The forget cue improves both encoding and retrieval of postcue information

Inhibition, Contextual Segregation, and Subject Strategies in List Method Directed Forgetting

The Role of Inhibitory Control in Forgetting Unwanted Memories: A Consideration of Three Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About