Retrieval-Induced Forgetting as Motivated Cognition

Pica, Gennaro; Chernikova, Marina; Pierro, Antonio; Giannini, Anna Maria; Kruglanski, Arie W.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02030

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A key question is how to interpret the presence and absence of ethnicity-RIF effects where self-threat was an enabling factor for observing the enhanced ethnicity-RIF effect. Like Pica et al, ( 2018a , 2018b ), we conclude that RIF effects are modified primarily by motivational factors linked to self-protection. In the current design, RIF scores in the critical condition of practicing the out-group target, include orienting to the negative traits of this target, and retaining the positive traits of the Chinese in-group target, to maximise memory performance.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Motivated cognition offers an alternative account for theorizing about RIF effects (see Pica et al, 2018a for discussion, also Pica et al, 2013 , 2014 ; Pica et al, 2018b ). A well-established social motivation is the need for self-enhancement to maintain a positive self-view and encourage higher self-esteem (Sedikides & Gregg, 2008 ; Sedikides & Green, 2009 ; Zhang et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-protecting motivation, indexed by self-threat, modifies retrieval-induced-forgetting and confidence in employment decision bias against out-group targets

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human memory is malleable by both social and motivational factors and holds information relevant to workplace decisions. Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) describes a phenomenon where retrieval practice impairs subsequent memory for related (unpracticed) information. We report two RIF experiments. Chinese participants received a mild self-threat manipulation (Experiment 2) or not (Experiment 1) before an ethnicity-RIF task that involved practicing negative traits of either in-group (Chinese) or an out-group (Japanese) target. After a subsequent memory test, participants selected their preferred applicant for employment. RIF scores correspond to forgetting of unpracticed positive traits of one target (Rp−) relative to the recall of practiced negative traits of the other target (Rp+). Enhanced forgetting of positive traits was found in both experiments for both targets. Across experiments, a significant target by threat interaction showed that target ethnicity modified RIF (an ethnicity-RIF effect). Inducing a self-protecting motivation enhanced RIF effects for the out-group (Japanese) target. In a subsequent employment decision, there was a strong bias to select the in-group target, with the confidence in these decisions being associated with RIF scores. This study suggests that rehearsing negative traits of minority applicants can affect metacognitive aspects of employment decisions, possibly by shaping the schemas available to the majority (in-group) employer. To disrupt systemic racism, recruitment practices should aim to offset a human motivation to protect one-self, when exposed to a relatively mild threat to self-esteem. Discussing the negative traits of minority applicants is a critical, and sensitive, aspect of decision-making that warrants careful practice. These data suggest that recruiting individuals should be reminded of their personal strengths in this context, not their vulnerabilities, to secure their decision-making for fairer recruitment practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-protecting motivation, indexed by self-threat, modifies retrieval-induced-forgetting and confidence in employment decision bias against out-group targets

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding is in line with a previous study ( Battista et al, 2020 , 2021a ) but inconsistent with other studies ( Vieira and Lane, 2013 ; Romeo et al, 2019a ; Otgaar et al, 2020 ). A possible explanation for this discrepancy may be due to the retrieval-induced forgetting effect, which has been widely observed in previous studies ( Racsmany and Keresztes, 2015 ; Pica et al, 2018 ; Abel and Bäuml, 2020 ). More specifically, to give an honest or deceptive response to each question during the interview, truth-telling and mixed lying groups might have needed to retrieve their memory to determine whether the asked-about item was on their shopping list or not and then to give a Yes or No answer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

More Lies Lead to More Memory Impairments in Daily Life

Liu

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have demonstrated that lying can undermine memory and that its memory-undermining effects could be modulated by the cognitive resources required to tell lies. We extended the investigation of the memory-undermining effect by using a daily life setting in which participants were highly involved in a mock shopping task. Participants were randomly assigned to truth-telling, denying or mixed lying conditions. After finishing the shopping task, participants were told that two people wanted to know about their shopping lists and would ask them some questions in an interview. During the interview, participants were asked whether each of ten items were on the shopping list, five of which were randomly selected from the shopping list, while the other five were not sold in the store. In answering the interview questions, the truth-telling group was asked to respond honestly, the denying group was asked to give denial responses, and the mixed lying group was asked to respond deceptively. Thus, the denying group told five lies and the mixed lying group told ten lies in the interview. The item memory test, source memory test and destination memory test were given in an orderly manner 48 h after the interview. We found that the mixed lying group, rather than the denying group, forgot the lies they told in the interview and mistakenly believed they had lied about something that they had not lied about. Moreover, the mixed lying group retained fewer memories about the person they responded to than the honest group. In addition, participants in the mixed lying group had more non-believed memories than those in the truth-telling group in both item and source memory tests. We conclude that more lies could result in more memory disruptions in daily life.

show abstract

“…Danner et al (2007) showed that a repeated (but not single) retrieval of target means upon goal activation resulted in the inhibition of competing means for the same goal. For habits, as for all goal-directed actions, the stronger the goal-behavior link, the lesser the likelihood that other alternative behaviors will be enacted to attain the goal (see also research on retrieval-induced forgetting, e.g., Anderson, 2003; Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994; McCulloch et al, 2008; Pica, Chernikova, Pierro, Giannini, & Kruglanski, 2018; Pica, Pierro, Bélanger, & Kruglanski, 2013; Pica, Pierro, & Kruglanski, 2014). In other words, the more often one performs a given behavior, the more likely they are to do so in the future.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitual Behavior Is Goal-Driven

Kruglanski

Szumowska

2020

Perspect Psychol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We address the relation between goal-driven and habitual behaviors. Whereas in recent years the two have been juxtaposed, we suggest that habitual behavior is in fact goal-driven. To support this view, we show that habitual behavior is sensitive to changes in goal properties (reward contingencies), namely goal value and its expectancy of attainment. Whereas adjustment to these properties may be slower for habitual (or overlearned) than for nonhabitual behavior, this is likely due to the routinized (or automatic) nature of such behavior, characterized as it is by reduced attention to its consequences. Furthermore, we show that habitual behavior’s prolonged persistence despite its manifest detachment from the original goal likely stems from its attachment to a different goal. Thus, there is no need to postulate purposeless behavior. The view that habitual behavior is goal-driven offers an integrative account of a considerable body of evidence and is consistent with a functional account of psychological processes.

show abstract

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting as Motivated Cognition

Cited by 9 publications

References 37 publications

Self-protecting motivation, indexed by self-threat, modifies retrieval-induced-forgetting and confidence in employment decision bias against out-group targets

Self-protecting motivation, indexed by self-threat, modifies retrieval-induced-forgetting and confidence in employment decision bias against out-group targets

More Lies Lead to More Memory Impairments in Daily Life

Habitual Behavior Is Goal-Driven

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About