Forgetting as a consequence of retrieval: a meta-analytic review of retrieval-induced forgetting.

@article{Murayama2014ForgettingAA,
  title={Forgetting as a consequence of retrieval: a meta-analytic review of retrieval-induced forgetting.},
  author={Kou Murayama and Toshiya Miyatsu and Dorothy R. Buchli and Benjamin C Storm},
  journal={Psychological bulletin},
  year={2014},
  volume={140 5},
  pages={
          1383-409
        }
}
Retrieving a subset of items can cause the forgetting of other items, a phenomenon referred to as retrieval-induced forgetting. According to some theorists, retrieval-induced forgetting is the consequence of an inhibitory mechanism that acts to reduce the accessibility of nontarget items that interfere with the retrieval of target items. Other theorists argue that inhibition is unnecessary to account for retrieval-induced forgetting, contending instead that the phenomenon can be best explained… 

Figures and Tables from this paper

Relearning can eliminate the effect of retrieval-induced forgetting.
TLDR
Results suggest that retrieval-induced forgetting can be eliminated by restudy, even when the forgetting effect was produced by three rounds of retrieval practice instead of one round of retrieved items.
Retrieval induces forgetting, but only when nontested items compete for retrieval: Implication for interference, inhibition, and context reinstatement.
The mechanism responsible for retrieval-induced forgetting has been the subject of rigorous theoretical debate, with some researchers postulating that retrieval-induced forgetting can be explained by
Explaining retrieval-induced forgetting: A change in mental context between the study and restudy practice phases is not sufficient to cause forgetting
TLDR
The present research sought to replicate the finding that even restudy practice—which is assumed by the inhibitory account to be insufficient to cause forgetting (i.e., retrieval-specificity)—can cause forgetting when a mental context change is inserted between study and restUDy, and tested the possibility that a far mental contextChange would cause more forgetting than a near mental contextchange.
Retrieval-induced versus context-induced forgetting: Does retrieval-induced forgetting depend on context shifts?
TLDR
The results are most consistent with an inhibitory account of RIF, and refute arguments about the potential inadequacy of the context shifts that could be used to explain either result alone.
Feedback increases benefits but not costs of retrieval practice: Retrieval-induced forgetting is strength independent
We examined how the provision of feedback affected two separate effects of retrieval practice: strengthening of practiced information and forgetting of related, unpracticed information. Feedback
Retrieval-induced forgetting with novel visual stimuli is retrieval-specific and strength- independent
ABSTRACT Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) is the phenomenon whereby remembering a subset of learned items can reduce memory for other related items. There are two main explanations for this effect:
Retrieval-Induced Forgetting and Context
Retrieving information can result in the forgetting of related information, a phenomenon referred to as retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF). To date, the dominant explanation of RIF has been an
Low involvement of preexisting associations makes retrieval-induced forgetting long lasting
TLDR
The results suggest that forgetting lasts longer when the degree of preexisting associations among targets and competitors is low, and that discrepancies in the durability of RIF may be due to variations in the type of relationships between items associated with a given cue.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 254 REFERENCES
A strategy disruption component to retrieval-induced forgetting
TLDR
Across three experiments, which manipulate which items individuals are cued to recall during retrieval practice and demonstrate that retrievalinduced forgetting can be neutralized when those items do not interfere with the individual's retrieval strategy, results are inconsistent with a purely inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting.
Accelerated relearning after retrieval-induced forgetting: the benefit of being forgotten.
TLDR
Of most interest, and very surprising from a common-sense standpoint, items that were relearned benefited more from that relearning if they had previously been forgotten.
Retrieval-induced forgetting without competition: Testing the retrieval specificity assumption of the inhibition theory
TLDR
In contrast to the expectations of the inhibition theory, retrieval-induced forgetting occurred even without competition, and thus the present study does not support the retrieval specificity assumption.
Putting retrieval-induced forgetting in context: an inhibition-free, context-based account.
TLDR
A new theoretical account of retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) is presented together with new experimental evidence that fits this account and challenges the dominant inhibition account, and the role of context in remembering is emphasized.
Successful inhibition, unsuccessful retrieval: Manipulating time and success during retrieval practice
TLDR
Results support the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting and offer insight into the dynamics of how and when inhibition plays a role in retrieval.
Overcoming Fixation
TLDR
If inhibition underlies retrieval-induced forgetting, and if inhibition functions to resolve competition, then individuals who demonstrate more retrieval- induced forgetting in the retrieval-practice paradigm should also demonstrate a superior ability to overcome fixation in the RAT.
A progress report on the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting
TLDR
The goal of the present progress report is to critically review the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting and to provide direction so that future research can have a more meaningful impact on the understanding of human memory.
No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account.
TLDR
Results are not in line with a general inhibitory account, because this account predicts retrieval-induced forgetting with independent cues, but forgetting was found for both item types when studied categories were used as cues.
Retrieval-induced forgetting in item recognition: evidence for a reduction in general memory strength.
  • B. Spitzer, K. Bäuml
  • Psychology
    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition
  • 2007
TLDR
The authors argue that retrieval-induced forgetting in item recognition is caused by a reduction in general memory strength, which is consistent with prior work on free recall, cued recall, associative recognition, and response latencies and agrees with the inhibitory account of retrieved forgetting.
...
...