Retrieval-mediated directed forgetting in the item-method paradigm: the effect of semantic cues

Abstract

Item-method directed forgetting is widely considered a storage phenomenon. However, by applying a multinomial model, which separates storage and retrieval effect components, Rummel et al. (J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 42(10):1526-1543, 2016) recently provided evidence that item-method directed forgetting effects are reflected by both storage and retrieval changes. The current investigation demonstrates that supposedly intentionally forgotten information can still be retrieved to some extent when semantic cuing facilitates retrieval of this information. Participants studied word pairs, with some pairs being followed by a "forget" and others by a "remember" instruction. A subset of items shared the same superordinate semantic category. In Experiment 1, a sub-portion of to-be-forgotten items was semantically related and less forgetting occurred selectively for these items when the category was reinstated during test. This finding was replicated and extended to reinstatement effects for to-be-remembered items in Experiment 2. The application of the storage-retrieval model confirmed that providing a category cue facilitates retrieval of to-be-forgotten as well as to-be-remembered information. The results are discussed in light of existing theories of directed forgetting.

Directed forgetting in associative memory: Dissociating item and associative impairment.

“…Nevertheless, our findings go well with recent advances in multinomial modeling that disentangle encoding and retrieval components of memory effects. A series of studies deploying multinomial modeling have consistently demonstrated that impaired memory of F-cued items is driven by impaired retrieval (in addition to impaired encoding of F-cued items), thereby suggesting that DF does not merely reflect a failure to encode information, but that it is also driven by retrieval factors (Marevic & Rummel, 2020; Marevic et al, 2018; Rummel et al, 2016). Whereas a number of studies have shown context reinstatement to be of equivalent magnitude between R-cued and F-cued words (Burgess et al, 2017; Taylor & Hamm, 2018), Hourihan et al (2007) observed an effect of context reinstatement for F-cued, but not R-cued, words, implicating a differential role of context impairment as a result of DF instructions.…”

Selection for encoding: No evidence of better endogenous orienting following forget than following remember instructions

“…When the instructions consisted of a visual onset at center, the IOR difference 1 The effect of selective rehearsal on encoding is what makes the item-method paradigm relevant for our purposes. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that the poorer subsequent memory for forget items than for remember items might not be accounted for entirely by mechanisms that operate at encoding-additional mechanisms may function to reduce forget item retrieval as well (e.g., Marevic & Rummel, 2018;Rummel, Marevic, & Kuhlmann, 2016; although see Taylor, Cutmore, & Pries, 2018). between remember and forget trials was eliminated.…”

Separation of item and context in item-method directed forgetting

“…Using object-scene pairings, Whitlock et al demonstrated that the association between the scenes and the object was impaired by DF instructions, and that it was independent of item impairment, such that participants could recognize the object (i.e., failure of DF despite the F cue), and yet forget which background scene the object was previously paired with. Finally, multinomial modeling analyses that disentangle encoding and retrieval components of memory effects indicate that worse memory of F items is driven not only by impaired encoding of F items, but also by impaired retrieval, which presumably could be voluntarily controlled ( Rummel et al, 2016 ; Marevic and Rummel, 2018 ; Marevic et al, 2018 ).…”