Less we forget: Retrieval cues and release from retrieval-induced forgetting

Jonker, Tanya R.; Seli, Paul; MacLeod, Colin M.

doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0224-2

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(62 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although we observed evidence for RIFA, studies of retrievalinduced forgetting (RIF) (2,(32)(33)(34)(35) typically show that retrieval can impair recall of related, nonretrieved information. Chan (8) has determined that at least two factors affect whether retrieval will facilitate or impair memory for linked items.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

Neural reactivation in parietal cortex enhances memory for episodically linked information

Jonker

Dimsdale-Zucker

Ritchey

et al. 2018

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Remembering is a complex process that involves recalling specific details, such as who you were with when you celebrated your last birthday, as well as contextual information, such as the place where you celebrated. It is well established that the act of remembering enhances long-term retention of the retrieved information, but the neural and cognitive mechanisms that drive memory enhancement are not yet understood. One possibility is that the process of remembering results in reactivation of the broader episodic context. Consistent with this idea, in two experiments, we found that multiple retrieval attempts enhanced long-term retention of both the retrieved object and the nontarget object that shared scene context, compared with a restudy control. Using representational similarity analysis of fMRI data in experiment 2, we found that retrieval resulted in greater neural reactivation of both the target objects and contextually linked objects compared with restudy. Furthermore, this reactivation occurred in a network of medial and lateral parietal lobe regions that have been linked to episodic recollection. The results demonstrate that retrieving a memory can enhance retention of information that is linked in the broader event context and the hippocampus and a posterior medial network of parietal cortical areas (also known as the Default Network) play complementary roles in supporting the reactivation of episodically linked information during retrieval.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

Neural reactivation in parietal cortex enhances memory for episodically linked information

Jonker

Dimsdale-Zucker

Ritchey

et al. 2018

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"birds of prey" "pet birds" Jonker, Seli, and MacLeod (2012). Panel (a) reflects context reinstatement following the presentation of subcategory information unique to the unpracticed, categorically related exemplars.…”

Section: Recommended Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting and Context

Jonker

Seli

MacLeod

2015

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrieving information can result in the forgetting of related information, a phenomenon referred to as retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). To date, the dominant explanation of RIF has been an inhibition account, which emphasizes longterm suppression of interfering memories. As one alternative, some have advocated for a strength-based interference account, which emphasizes the role of strengthening associations. More recently, we have proposed a context account, which emphasizes the role of context change and context reinstatement. In this article, we outline these three accounts of RIF and demonstrate that there is substantial evidence that uniquely supports our context account.

show abstract

“…The lack of RIF with episodic independent cues in the present study is thus inconsistent with the predictions derived from this fi-amework. Ours and Perfect et al's results, together with some other failures to obtain RIF with independent cues (Camp et al, 2007;Jonker, Seli, & MacLeod, 2012;WiUiams & Zacks, 2001), suggest that cue-independence may not be a general property of RIF. The lack of RIF with independent cues is obviously predicted by, and thus supportive of, the interference account of RIF, which assigns forgetting in the RPP to blocking of Rp-items by Rp-F items, an effect that occurs only when original cues, used during retrieval practice, are again utilized at test.…”

Section: Eneral Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Contextual match and cue-independence of retrieval-induced forgetting: Testing the prediction of the model by Norman, Newman, and Detre (2007).

Hanczakowski

Mazzoni

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) is the finding of impaired memory performance for information stored in long-term memory due to retrieval of a related set of information. This phenomenon is often assigned to operations of a specialized mechanism recruited to resolve interference during retrieval by deactivating competing memory representations. This inhibitory account is supported by, among others, findings showing that RIF occurs with independent cues not used during retrieval practice. However, these findings are not always consistent. Recently, Norman, Newman, and Detre (2007) have proposed a model that aims at resolving discrepancies concerning cue-independence of RIF. The model predicts that RIF should be present with independent cues when episodic associations are created between independent cues and their targets in the same episodic context that is later used to cue memory during retrieval practice. In the present study we aimed to test this prediction. We associated studied items with semantically unrelated words during the main study phase of the retrieval practice paradigm, and we tested memory with both cues used during retrieval practice (Experiment 2) and episodic associates serving as independent cues (Experiments 3a and 3b). Although RIF was present when the same cues were used during retrieval practice and a final test, contrary to the prediction formulated by Norman et al., RIF failed to emerge when episodic associates were employed as independent cues.

show abstract

Less we forget: Retrieval cues and release from retrieval-induced forgetting

Cited by 16 publications

References 33 publications

Neural reactivation in parietal cortex enhances memory for episodically linked information

Neural reactivation in parietal cortex enhances memory for episodically linked information

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting and Context

Contextual match and cue-independence of retrieval-induced forgetting: Testing the prediction of the model by Norman, Newman, and Detre (2007).

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About