The effect of successive interpolations on retroactive and proactive inhibition.

Underwood, Benton J.

doi:10.1037/h0093547

Cited by 139 publications

(153 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This proaction effect proved to be weaker (see Figure 1) than the retroaction, which was also observed [F(1 ,124) = 12.05, p < .001], an outcome consistent with the long-known results for secondary memory (McGeogh & Underwood, 1943;Underwood , 1945 ;Wickelgren, 1966).…”

Section: Interference In Primary Memorysupporting

confidence: 73%

Interference effects in short-term memory as a function of input modality and the linguistic relationship between learned lists

Weiman

Bevan

1980

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Interference In Primary Memorysupporting

confidence: 73%

Interference effects in short-term memory as a function of input modality and the linguistic relationship between learned lists

Weiman

Bevan

1980

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In contrast, list differentiation has traditionally been emphasized as serving to reduce response competition. Underwood (1945Underwood ( , 1949 used the notion of list differentiation to explain results that failed to show a high correlation between overt intrusions and retroactive interference. To explain the lack of correlation, Underwood suggested that participants employed a postretrieval editing process to recognize intrusions as coming from the wrong list, and thereby inhibit their emission.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

Jacoby

Wahlheim

2013

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suppose that you were asked which of two movies you had most recently seen. The results of the experiments reported here suggest that your answer would be more accurate if, when viewing the later movie, you were reminded of the earlier one. In the present experiments, we investigated the role of remindings in recency judgments and cued-recall performance. We did this by presenting a list composed of two instances from each of several different categories and later asking participants to select (Exp. 1) or to recall (Exp. 2) the more recently presented instance. Reminding was manipulated by varying instructions to look back over memory of earlier instances during the presentation of later instances. As compared to a control condition, cued-recall performance revealed facilitation effects when remindings occurred and were later recollected, but interference effects in their absence. The effects of reminding on recency judgments paralleled those on cued recall of more recently presented instances. We interpret these results as showing that reminding produces a recursive representation that embeds memory for an earlier-presented category instance into that of a later-presented one and, thereby, preserves their temporal order. Large individual differences in the probabilities of remindings and of their later recollection were observed. The widespread importance of recursive reminding for theory and for applied purposes is discussed.Keywords Recursive remindings . Recency judgments . Cued recall Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards. -Søren Kierkegaard (1869/1996 Although life must be lived forward, memory can serve as a source of assistance when dealing with the present and planning for the future. As an example, being reminded of a prior event by the occurrence of a later event can influence the encoding and subsequent memory of both the earlier and the later events (e.g., Wahlheim & Jacoby, 2013). However, such reminding is not likely to always be spontaneous, but instead may sometimes rely on purposeful looking back to the past. In the present article, we examine the importance of looking back for judgments of recency and for performance when participants are asked to recall the most recently presented instance of a category. For both types of task, we show that looking back, along with resultant remindings, are important for performance and can be brought under task control.We begin by describing the importance of reminding for a variety of memory tasks, and then consider advantages of bringing remindings under task control as a means of investigating their effects. To anticipate, we show that as compared to a control condition, proactive facilitation is found in cued recall of the most recently presented instance of a category in the presence of recollection of a prior reminding, whereas proactive interference is found in its absence. In the General Discussion, we describe the widespread importance of remindings and discuss results suggestive of large individual difference...

show abstract

“…Different approaches to suggestibility have emphasized different interference mechanisms. Updating (e.g., E. F. Loftus & G. R. Loftus, 1980), accessibility (e.g., Bekerian & Bowers, 1983), and source monitoring have parallels in earlier accounts of forgetting framed in terms of unlearning (Melton & Irwin, 1940), response competition (or the independence hypothesis; McGeoch, 1942), and list differentiation (Abra, 1972;Underwood, 1945;Winograd, 1968), respectively (see, e.g., Crowder, 1976). The newer theoretical terms grow out of current conceptions of memory representations for complex events, but the question of the relative contributions of various potential mechanisms of forgetting has long been a difficult and fundamental issue.…”

Section: Source Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the possibility that eyewitness suggestibility reflects failures of the processes by which people normally discriminate between memories derived from different sources. To test this hypothesis, misled and control subjects were tested either with a yes/no recognition test or with a "source monitoring" test designed to orient subjects to attend to information about the sources of their memories. The results demonstrate that suggestibility effects obtained with a recognition test can be eliminated by orienting subjects toward thinking about the sources of their memories while taking the test. Our findings indicate that although misled subjects are capable of identifying the source of their memories of misleading suggestions, they nonetheless sometimes misidentify them as memories derived from the original event. The extent to which such errors reflect genuine memory confusions (produced, for example, by lax judgment criteria) or conscious misattributions (perhaps due to demand characteristics) remains to be specified.

show abstract

The effect of successive interpolations on retroactive and proactive inhibition.

Cited by 139 publications

References 19 publications

Interference effects in short-term memory as a function of input modality and the linguistic relationship between learned lists

Interference effects in short-term memory as a function of input modality and the linguistic relationship between learned lists

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About