Recognition-induced forgetting of faces in visual long-term memory

Rugo, Kelsi F.; Tamler, Kendall N.; Woodman, Geoffrey F.; Maxcey, Ashleigh M.

doi:10.3758/s13414-017-1419-1

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Memory for flanking objects (.53) was significantly worse than memory for baseline objects (.69, t(43)=5.72, p<.001, d=.77, scaled JZS 3 =17,889), and memory for target objects (.84) was significantly better than baseline (.69, t(43)=4.94, p<.001, d=.86, scaled JZS=1,624). 4 The significantly lower memory for flanking objects relative to baseline objects is the signature recognition-induced forgetting effect, replicating previous studies using this paradigm (Maxcey, 2016;Maxcey & Bostic, 2015;Maxcey et al, 2016;Maxcey et al, 2017;Maxcey & Woodman, 2014;Rugo et al, 2017). These results mimic the difference-of-Gaussian shape (Fig.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Here we employed the recognition-induced forgetting paradigm (Maxcey, 2016;Maxcey & Bostic, 2015;Maxcey, Bostic, & Maldonado, 2016;Maxcey, Glenn, & Stansberry, 2017;Maxcey & Woodman, 2014;Rugo, Tamler, Woodman, & Maxcey, 2017) to directly test whether the nature of the memoranda determines the forgetting mechanism. This paradigm is divided into three phases (Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modality-specific forgetting

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large body of literature agrees that accessing a target memory appears to trigger a difference-of-Gaussian memory activation pulse under which the target representation is activated and categorically flanking items are suppressed and forgotten. The nature of the underlying forgetting mechanism is far from settled, with support for several theories of forgetting. Here we argue the debate is partly fueled by different forgetting mechanisms underlying the forgetting of different memoranda. We capitalized on the unique aspect of the recognition-induced forgetting paradigm to test forgetting of both pictures and words in identical recognition-practice and restudy tasks. We found that memory for pictures and words followed different patterns of forgetting. Specifically, forgetting was retrieval specific for words, in that forgetting occurred only when words were recognized, and not when words were merely restudied. However, forgetting was not retrieval specific for pictures, in that forgetting occurred both when pictures were recognized as well as restudied. Further, patterns of forgetting operated along different category-level groupings for pictures and words. Words grouped along the superordinate level were susceptible to forgetting but pictures were not. The strength of this design is the ability to directly compare forgetting for different memoranda, establishing that patterns of forgetting are modality specific. These findings demonstrate that the mechanisms underlying forgetting may differ as a function of the particular memoranda, emphasizing the need for examining forgetting in long-term memory across modalities.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modality-specific forgetting

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Memory for baseline and related objects is critical to the signature recognition-induced forgetting effect. Recognition-induced forgetting is when related objects are remembered at reliably worse rates than baseline objects (Maxcey, 2016; Maxcey & Bostic, 2015; Maxcey & Woodman, 2014; Maxcey et al, 2016, 2017; Rugo et al, 2017). The 36 old objects were evenly drawn from the three object types (i.e., practiced, related, and baseline) and the 36 new objects were drawn from corresponding basic-level object categories (e.g., an equal number of telephones).…”

Section: General Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we use unintentional forgetting in reference to the incidental negative consequence of accessing a target memory, the forgetting of related memories (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994; Maxcey & Woodman, 2014). Recognition-induced forgetting is a robust unintentional forgetting effect whereby practice in recognizing an item in memory leads to the forgetting of related items (Maxcey, 2016; Maxcey & Bostic, 2015; Maxcey, Bostic, & Maldonado, 2016; Maxcey, Glenn, & Stansberry, 2017; Rugo, Tamler, Woodman, & Maxcey, 2017). 1 Although this unintentional forgetting may operate in real-world scenarios such as identifying suspects in a lineup or studying for an examination, the ability to exert executive control over this forgetting phenomenon has never been tested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unintentional forgetting is beyond cognitive control

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intentional forgetting refers to the attempt to marshal top-down control to purposefully forget, and has been demonstrated in the laboratory using directed forgetting paradigms. Here, we asked whether the mechanisms of top-down control can run in the opposite direction to prevent the forgetting of information; that is, can we actively resist unintentional forgetting? Recognition-induced forgetting is an unintentional forgetting effect in which accessing one memory leads to the forgetting of related memories. Just as intentional forgetting possesses intuitively appealing control over eliminating undesirable memories, resisting unintentional forgetting over desired memories would improve cognitive performance. We showed subjects a 9-min video to teach them about the recognition-induced forgetting paradigm and how recognition of certain objects unintentionally leads to forgetting of semantically related objects. After testing their comprehension of the video, we conducted a typical recognition-induced forgetting experiment and challenged the subjects to resist this form of unintentional forgetting. Despite their knowledge of the forgetting effect, and the challenge to subjects to resist the forgetting induced by the paradigm, recognition-induced forgetting persisted. These results show that knowledge of this unintentional forgetting phenomenon and the challenge to resist forgetting do not eliminate it, suggesting that it is cognitively impenetrable. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s41235-019-0180-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Here, when different visual stimuli are encoded into long-term memory, practice with a particular subset of those items impairs memory for related but unpracticed items when compared to unrelated baseline stimuli from the same encoding period. Recognition-induced forgetting has been demonstrated for race categories in faces such that rehearsing white faces impairs recognition for unrehearsed white faces but not those in the baseline group (black faces) (Rugo, Tamler, Woodman, & Maxcey, 2017). Future research might examine these factors in short-term incidental memory by balancing categories across the stimulus set.…”

Section: Sustained Conscious Memory For Incidental Probes In Rsvpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustained conscious access to incidental memories in RSVP

Matthews

Corneille

et al. 2018

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In visual search of natural scenes, differentiation of briefly fixated but task-irrelevant distractor items from incidental memory is often comparable to explicit memorization. However, many characteristics of incidental memory remain unclear, including the capacity for its conscious retrieval. Here, we examined incidental memory for faces in either upright or inverted orientation using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP). Subjects were instructed to detect a target face in a sequence of 8-15 faces cropped from natural scene photographs (Experiment 1). If the target face was identified within a brief time window, the subject proceeded to an incidental memory task. Here, subjects used incidental memory to discriminate between a probe face (a distractor in the RSVP stream) and a novel, foil face. In Experiment 2 we reduced scene-related semantic coherency by intermixing faces from multiple scenes and contrasted incidental memory with explicit memory, a condition where subjects actively memorized each face from the sequence without searching for a target. In both experiments, we measured objective performance (Type 1 AUC) and metacognitive accuracy (Type 2 AUC), revealing sustained and consciously accessible incidental memory for upright and inverted faces. In novel analyses of face categories, we examined whether accuracy or metacognitive judgments are affected by shared semantic features (i.e., similarity in gender, race, age). Similarity enhanced the accuracy of incidental memory discriminations but did not influence metacognition. We conclude that incidental memory is sustained and consciously accessible, is not reliant on scene contexts, and is not enhanced by explicit memorization.

show abstract

Recognition-induced forgetting of faces in visual long-term memory

Cited by 22 publications

References 46 publications

Modality-specific forgetting

Modality-specific forgetting

Unintentional forgetting is beyond cognitive control

Sustained conscious access to incidental memories in RSVP

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About