Retrieval-induced forgetting in perceptually driven memory tests.

Bajo, M. Teresa; Gómez‐Ariza, Carlos J.; Fernández, Ángel; Marful, Alejandra

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1185

Cited by 48 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cue-independent retrieval-induced forgetting has now been observed in numerous studies (e.g., M. C. Anderson & Bell, 2001; M. C. Anderson, Green, & McCulloch, 2000;Aslan et al, 2007;Bajo et al, 2006;Camp, Pecher, & Schmidt, 2005;Johnson & Anderson, 2004;Levy et al, 2007;M. D. MacLeod & Saunders, 2005;Radvansky, 1999;Saunders & MacLeod, 2006), providing evidence that is particularly difficult to explain by means of existing noninhibitory accounts.…”

Section: Trajectorymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For example, studies have employed category-plus-one-letter-stem retrieval cues (e.g., fruitl_____) to control the order in which items are tested and to ensure that Rp+ items are not recalled before Rp-items (e.g., M. C. Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 2000;; M. C. Anderson & McCulloch, 1999;Aslan, Bäuml, & Pastötter, 2007;Bäuml, 2002;Bäuml & Hartinger, 2002;Johansson, Aslan, Bäuml, Gäbel, & Mecklinger, 2007;Storm, Bjork, & Bjork, 2007Storm, Bjork, Bjork, & Nestojko, 2006;Storm & Nestojko, 2010). Forgetting has also been observed with materials other than the standard category exemplars when item-specific cues are used to control output order: proposition-plus-letter-stem cues (M. C. Anderson & Bell, 2001;Gómez-Ariza et al, 2005), semantic-associate-plus-letter-stem cues (Kuhl, Dudukovic, Khan, & Wagner, 2007), extralist-semantic-associate-plus-letter-stem cues (M. C. Anderson, Green, & McCulloch, 2000;Johnson & Anderson, 2004;Levy et al, 2007), and letter-stem cues in isolation (Bajo et al, 2006).…”

Section: Trajectorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Trajectorymentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Trajectorymentioning

confidence: 99%

A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Third, the conclusion that item-specific cuing is a boundary condition on RIF has received little support in previous and subsequent work, which has provided many demonstrations of RIF on item-specific cuing tests including category-plus-letter stem cues (e.g., Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 2000;Anderson et al, 1994;Anderson & McCulloch, 1999;Aslan, Bäuml, & Pastotter, 2007;Bäuml, 2002;Bäuml & Hartinger, 2002;Johansson, Aslan, Bäuml, Gabel, & Mecklinger, 2007;Storm, Bjork, & Bjork, 2007, 2008Storm et al, 2006;), propositional-plus-unique-letter stem cues (Anderson & Bell, 2001;Gómez-Ariza et al, 2005), associate-plus-stem cued recall (Kuhl, Dudukovic, Khan, & Wagner, 2007), extralist semantic cues plus unique letter stems (Anderson, Green, & McCulloch, 2000;Johnson & Anderson, 2004;Levy et al, 2007), and letter stem cues in isolation (Bajo, Gómez-Ariza, Fernandez, & Marful, 2006). Nevertheless, Butler et al clearly failed to find RIF, creating a genuine puzzle.…”

Section: Experiments 4: Semantic Integration Effects Using Butler Et Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic integration as a boundary condition on inhibitory processes in episodic retrieval.

Goodmon

Anderson

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recalling an experience often impairs the later retention of related traces, a phenomenon known as retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). Research has shown that episodic associations protect competing memories from RIF (Anderson & McCulloch, 1999). We report 4 experiments that examined whether semantic associations also protect against RIF. In all experiments, robust RIF occurred when there were few associations between practiced and nonpracticed sets, but RIF was abolished when there were many. The benefits of semantic integration were independent of episodic integration strategies and were not mediated by intentional use of the associations. Rather, these results establish a new boundary condition on RIF-semantic integration-that has a potent impact on the magnitude of RIF and may explain variability in the RIF phenomenon.

show abstract

“…RIF has been studied with different types of materials involving both semantic, preexisting associations and newly constructed, episodic associations (e.g., Anderson, E. L. Bjork, & R. A. Bjork, 2000;Bajo, Gómez-Ariza, Fernandez, & Marful, 2006;Ciranni & Shimamura, 1999;Gómez-Ariza, Lechuga, Pelegrina, & Bajo, 2005). However, the impairment observed during RP procedures has always been tested on the items' central attributes, and there is no information on whether inhibition (like activation) also extends to peripheral features of the events in which the items are embedded.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, the exemplars belonging to a particular category did so only by virtue of the orthographic overlap between them: They shared the first two letters and were not semantically related. In Experiment 1, participants studied cue-target pairs from different orthographic categories [e.g., PE-Pedazo ("piece"); PE-Pelota ("ball"); CA-Cabello ("hair"); CA-Canario ("canary")], a type of material previously shown to produce robust RIF effects (Bajo et al, 2006). During study, items that would later be Rp+ and Rp-from the same orthographic category appeared in different locations and in different colors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidental retrieval-induced forgetting of location information

2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) has been studied with different types of tests and materials. However, RIF has always been tested on the items' central features, and there is no information on whether inhibition also extends to peripheral features of the events in which the items are embedded. In two experiments, we specifically tested the presence of RIF in a task in which recall of peripheral information was required. After a standard retrieval practice task oriented to item identity, participants were cued with colors (Exp. 1) or with the items themselves (Exp. 2) and asked to recall the screen locations where the items had been displayed during the study phase. RIF for locations was observed after retrieval practice, an effect that was not present when participants were asked to read instead of retrieving the items. Our findings provide evidence that peripheral location information associated with an item during study can be also inhibited when the retrieval conditions promote the inhibition of more central, item identity information.Keywords Retrieval-induced forgetting . Inhibition . Memory for location . Covert cuing Our memories are assumed to consist of multimodal attributes of the entities that we experienced in the past, including contextual information of various kinds (Barsalou, 1999). Thus, when we recall a past experience, we not only retrieve individual entities such as objects, people, or words, but also peripheral information associated with the particular experience with that entity. Thus, if we think of the last class we taught, we may recall the question that a particular student asked, but also the place where this student sat in the class or the fact that it was early in the afternoon. A general conception of how the memory system is able to automatically encode spatial, temporal, and frequency information was advanced by Hasher and Zacks (1979), and subsequent studies have provided more specific corroborating evidence, particularly in regard to the encoding of location information. For example, Köhler, Moscovitch, and Melo (2001), in an incidental-learning task for object locations, found that making judgments on attributes related to object identity enhanced memory performance not only when the identity of the objects was tested, but also when the retrieval task tested memory for the object locations. Similarly, Lachmair, Dudschig, De Fillippis, de la Vega, and Kaup (2011) showed that location information was activated when processing words. They asked their participants to perform lexical tasks on concepts that referred to entities associated with an up or down location (e.g., ROOF and ROOT). The results showed that responding was faster when the responses (e.g., the positions of the response keys) were congruent with the locations on the object to which they were related (e.g., ROOF above ROOT). This suggests that spatial location is automatically bound to item identity and is accessed when retrieving words and objects.In the present article, we aim to further illuminate...

show abstract

Retrieval-induced forgetting in perceptually driven memory tests.

Cited by 48 publications

References 36 publications

A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting

Semantic integration as a boundary condition on inhibitory processes in episodic retrieval.

Incidental retrieval-induced forgetting of location information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About