No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account.

  title={No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account.},
  author={Gino Camp and Diane Pecher and Henk G. Schmidt},
  journal={Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition},
  volume={33 5},
Retrieval practice with particular items from memory can impair the recall of related items on a later memory test. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been ascribed to inhibitory processes (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995). A critical finding that distinguishes inhibitory from interference explanations is that forgetting is found with independent (or extralist) cues. In 4 experiments, the authors tested whether the forgetting effect is cue-independent. Forgetting was… 

Figures from this paper

Less we forget: Retrieval cues and release from retrieval-induced forgetting
The results challenge the inhibition account’s fundamental assumption of cue independence but are consistent with a cue-based interference account.
Evidence against associative blocking as a cause of cue-independent retrieval-induced forgetting.
It is demonstrated that cue-independent RIF is unrelated to the strengthening of practiced items, and thereby fail to support a key prediction of the covert-cueing hypothesis, which favors a role of inhibition in resolving retrieval interference.
Successful inhibition, unsuccessful retrieval: Manipulating time and success during retrieval practice
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.
On the status of cue independence as a criterion for memory inhibition: evidence against the covert blocking hypothesis.
This work replicated cue-independent RIF and documented how access to the original study cues influences this effect, and found that overtly providing category cues on independent probe tests never increased RIF.
Evidence Against Associative 5 Blocking as a Cause 6 of Cue-Independent Retrieval-7 Induced Forgetting 8
11 Abstract. Selectively retrieving an item from long-term memory reduces the accessibility of competing traces, a phenomenon known as retrieval12 induced forgetting (RIF). RIF exhibits cue
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
Contextual match and cue-independence of retrieval-induced forgetting: Testing the prediction of the model by Norman, Newman, and Detre (2007).
Although RIF was present when the same cues were used during retrieval practice and a final test, contrary to the prediction formulated by Norman et al., RIF failed to emerge when episodic associates were employed as independent cues.
Forgetting as a consequence of retrieval: a meta-analytic review of retrieval-induced forgetting.
The first major meta-analysis of retrieval-induced forgetting is conducted, quantitatively evaluating the multitude of findings used to contrast these 2 theoretical viewpoints, and the results largely supported inhibition accounts but also provided some challenging evidence.


Retrieval-induced forgetting in implicit memory tests: The role of test awareness
Test awareness seems to mediate retrieval-induced forgetting in implicit memory tasks, and this hypothesis predicts similar effects in implicitMemory tasks.
Retrieval-induced forgetting occurs in tests of item recognition
These results conceptually replicate those of previous retrievalinduced forgetting studies done with cued recall and are inconsistent with the hypothesis that item-specific cues during retrieval will eliminate retrieval interference in the retrieval-practice paradigm.
Retrieval-induced forgetting: Evidence for a recall-specific mechanism
These findings argue that retrieval-induced forgetting is not caused by increased competition arising from the strengthening of practiced items, but by inhibitory processes specific to the situation of recall.
Integration as a general boundary condition on retrieval-induced forgetting
When people form connections between several memories that share a common retrieval cue, the tendency for those memories to interfere with one another during later retrieval attempts is often
The Role of Inhibitory Control in Forgetting Semantic Knowledge
The findings show that inhibitory control processes overcome interference during semantic retrieval and that recruitment of these processes may contribute to semantic forgetting.
Assessing the inhibitory account of retrieval-induced forgetting with implicit-memory tests.
Across the 5 experiments poorer performance for unpracticed items was seen in conceptual implicit memory but not in perceptual implicit memory (stem completion, perceptual identification).
Episodic generation can cause semantic forgetting: Retrieval-induced forgetting of false memories
The results are consistent with the claim that semantically activated critical themes interfere with the episodic retrieval of list words and that inhibition decreases the activation level of these interfering memory representations during retrieval practice.
Remembering can cause inhibition: retrieval-induced inhibition as cue independent process.
This study showed for the 1st time that retrieval-induced forgetting was demonstrated on an implicit test of memory, and measured this inhibition in a more direct way using recall as a dependent measure.
Remembering can cause forgetting: retrieval dynamics in long-term memory.
A critical role for suppression in models of retrieval inhibition and a retrieval-induced forgetting that implicate the retrieval process itself in everyday forgetting are suggested.