International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences 2015
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.51054-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proactive Interference

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Cognitive mapping benefits from the integration and generalization of memories as is central to schema theory, but in other fields of memory research, a dominant theme for how overlapping memories interact is representational interference. This has been widely observed in perceptual, procedural, semantic, and episodic memory systems (Craig, Dewar, & Sala, 2015;Neath & Surprenant, 2015), and minimizing such interference in declarative memory encoding and retrieval is perhaps a primary function of the hippocampus (e.g., Brown, Ross, Keller, Hasselmo, & Stern, 2010;Chanales et al, 2017;Lacy, Yassa, Stark, Muftuler, & Stark, 2011;LaRocque et al, 2013;Wood, Dudchenko, Robitsek, & Eichenbaum, 2000). As highlighted in Section 1.2, a core component of the nonspatial schema literature has been the observation that greater relational integration with a schema is a double-edged sword-increasing a loss of episodic detail and interference and confusability between memories for distinct experiences (indeed, damage to the neural circuitry associated with schema memory has been shown to protect the individual from episodic memory errors, see van Kesteren & Brown, 2014;Warren, Jones, Duff, & Tranel, 2014).…”
Section: Linking Interference and Schematic Integration In Spatial Me...mentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Cognitive mapping benefits from the integration and generalization of memories as is central to schema theory, but in other fields of memory research, a dominant theme for how overlapping memories interact is representational interference. This has been widely observed in perceptual, procedural, semantic, and episodic memory systems (Craig, Dewar, & Sala, 2015;Neath & Surprenant, 2015), and minimizing such interference in declarative memory encoding and retrieval is perhaps a primary function of the hippocampus (e.g., Brown, Ross, Keller, Hasselmo, & Stern, 2010;Chanales et al, 2017;Lacy, Yassa, Stark, Muftuler, & Stark, 2011;LaRocque et al, 2013;Wood, Dudchenko, Robitsek, & Eichenbaum, 2000). As highlighted in Section 1.2, a core component of the nonspatial schema literature has been the observation that greater relational integration with a schema is a double-edged sword-increasing a loss of episodic detail and interference and confusability between memories for distinct experiences (indeed, damage to the neural circuitry associated with schema memory has been shown to protect the individual from episodic memory errors, see van Kesteren & Brown, 2014;Warren, Jones, Duff, & Tranel, 2014).…”
Section: Linking Interference and Schematic Integration In Spatial Me...mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Although both proactive and retroactive memory interference have been extensively studied, particularly in the context of episodes (for reviews, see e.g., Craig et al., 2015; Neath & Surprenant, 2015; Wixted, 2004), there is relatively scant knowledge on individual differences in such “schematization tradeoffs” and how new and old memories interact. One simple prediction is that individual traits and strategies that promote greater integration result in better configural and map‐like knowledge of one's environment, but worse “episodic” route memory interference and errors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Cowan (2001, p. 103) holds that items in the focus of attention “reside in a limited-capacity store, eliminating the retrieval step.” Evidence offered to support these statements is based on failure to observe effects associated with retrieval. Proactive interference (PI) is the finding that old information can interfere with the ability to remember more recent information and is generally considered a retrieval effect (for an overview, see Neath & Surprenant, 2015). A number of researchers found that whereas PI is absent when there are four or fewer items to be remembered and the items are therefore in primary memory or the focus of attention, PI is present when there are more than four items and the capacity of primary memory or the focus of attention is exceeded (e.g., Cowan et al, 2005; Halford et al, 1988; Wickens et al, 1981).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%