Methodological problems with the use of the retroactive interference design to infer what is stored

Abstract

The retroactive interference paradigm has been used in a variety of settings to investigate the nature of the representation of memory. Much of the research using this paradigm is methodologically flawed because it involves treatment comparisons which are inappropriate. It is argued that comparisons must be made between presentation conditions having the same interpolated activity and that, in addition, evidence is required that the differences are not confounded by acquisition level differences if one is to infer mode-specific interference and representation. The methodological issues are discussed in detail and the utility of the retroactive interference design is questioned. Studies employing the design are reviewed, and several conclusions are drawn: (1) there has been no unambiguous demonstration of visual mode-specific interference, (2) there has been no clear demonstration that imagery instructions produce memories that are more susceptible to visual than to auditory interpolation, and (3)no clear demonstrations are yet available that memory for spatial location is more susceptible to visual interference than memory for letters.

Visual working memory in young children

“…There are many methodological problems with the present type of experiment, not least of which is that of assuring that any differences between interfering tasks are due to their modality as opposed to other factors such as their general level of difficulty (see Clayton & Warren, 1976). As one precaution against this, the decision components of the visual and auditory-verbal interference tasks were made as similar as possible.…”

Modality-specific interference with verbal and nonverbal stimulus information

“…In order to assess for the presence of modalityspecific interference, planned comparisons were made among the mean performances of these conditions in accordance with the suggestions of Clayton and Warren (1976). The appropriate orthogonal comparisons were made using t ratios.…”

“…An additional shortcoming noted by Clayton and Warren (1976) concerns the failure to test for differences in the degree of original learning of location and identity information. The experimental condition necessary to test for differences in the degree of original learning-an unfilled retention interval-was not included in the design of the Meudell (1972) study.…”

“…The purpose of the present study was to assess the presence of both visual and verbal representation modes by using a design and procedure that would correct for the problems noted by Clayton and Warren (1976). It was hypothesized that if location information is stored visually, then the recall of this information would be more susceptible to interference from a visual interpolated activity.…”

“…Clayton and Warren (1976), in a recent examination of the retroactive interference paradigm, argued that this paradigm has not been used appropriately in studying modality-specific representation. In using this paradigm, the experimenter must make comparisons that distinguish between general interference effects and modality-specific effects produced by the intervening activity.…”