Search

Retrieval-induced forgetting is the phenomenon that retrieving information can lead to forgetting of related information (e.g., Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994). Retrieval-induced forgetting is studied using the retrieval practice paradigm. In the study phase, a list of category-exemplar pairs (e.g., FRUIT-apple, FRUITbanana, ANIMAL-caf) is studied. During the subsequent retrievalpractice phase, half of the items from half of the studied categories receive retrieval practice in the form of category-plus-stem cued recall (e.g., FRUIT-ap_). The practiced items are called Rp + items and the nonpracticed items from these categories are called Rp- items. Categories from which none of the items are practiced (e.g., ANIMAL-caf) are called Nrp categories and are used as a baseline. In the final test phase, all items are presented for cued recall (e.g., FRUIT-a_). As one would expect, retrieval practice improves recall for Rp+ items relative to Nrp baseline items. More surprisingly, performing retrieval practice with Rp+ items impairs recall for Rp- items relative to Nrp items. Thus, performing retrieval practice on exemplars from a particular category decreases recall for other exemplars from the same category.The dominant account of retrieval-induced forgetting in the literature is the inhibition account (e.g., Anderson, 2003; Anderson et al., 1994; Anderson & Spellman, 1995; Storm & Levy, 2012). According this account, when retrieval practice is performed (e.g., FRUIT-ap_) several items that are associated with the cue compete for retrieval (e.g., apple, banana). For the correct answer to be retrieved, the remaining, competing items need to be inhibited. This inhibition process then makes the competing items less available, so that the target can be retrieved more easily.Anderson (2003) discusses a number of properties of retrievalinduced forgetting that provide evidence in favour of the inhibition account. Although these properties have been extensively investigated, some controversy still exists whether they provide sufficient evidence in support of the inhibition theory as opposed to interference-based accounts or to a context-based account (see Anderson, 2003; Jonker, Seli, & MacLeod, 2013; Raaijmakers & Jakab, 2013; Storm & Levy, 2012; Verde, 2012, for reviews).The aim of the current study was to further investigate one of these properties: competition dependence. The inhibition account of forgetting predicts that competition between responses at retrieval practice is necessary for retrieval-induced forgetting to occur. This competition is presumably resolved by inhibitory processes, so that the target response is eventually retrieved (Anderson, 2003). It follows that practicing with Rp+ items in a way that causes no competition should not induce forgetting according to the inhibition account, because there is no need for suppression.Several studies have investigated this prediction. The general finding from at least seven studies is that noncompetitive retrieval practice or restudy of the items leads to an increase in recall for Rp+ items, but not to forgetting of Rp- items. Forgetting is only found in these studies when competitive retrieval is required (e.g., Anderson & Bell, 2001; Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 2000; Ciranni & Shimamura, 1999; see Raaijmakers & Jakab, 2013, for an overview). However, three recent studies have provided evidence that competitive retrieval may not be the crucial factor underlying the results of these studies. Raaijmakers and Jakab (2012) showed that a noncompetitive retrieval practice task previously used by Anderson et al. (2000) (recalling the category when the exemplar is given as cue: FR_-orange) could induce forgetting when the task was made more challenging. By grouping exemplars by properties (e.g., ROUND-button), using low-frequency items and giving feedback after each retrieval practice trial, Raaijmakers and Jakab (2012) optimized strengthening of the category-exemplar association and did find a forgetting effect. …

In eyewitness situations, questioning can be seen as a form of retrieval practice that may have detrimental effects on eyewitness memory. Memory research has demonstrated that retrieval practice may not only enhance memory for practiced information but also induce forgetting of related information. The present study examined the effect of retrieval practice on forgetting in eyewitness memory. First, we investigated whether asking questions about particular offender characteristics can induce forgetting of other offender characteristics. Second, we examined whether this forgetting effect is limited to information from the practiced offender or may also influence memory for characteristics of others present in the crime scene. Third, we studied whether forgetting of eyewitness information occurs in the absence of output interference effects. We found that questioning induced forgetting of offender characteristics. Moreover, the forgetting effect was not limited to information about the practiced offender. Finally, forgetting was found even when output order was experimentally controlled.

The ability to monitor understanding of texts, usually referred to as metacomprehension accuracy, is typically quite poor in adult learners: however, recently interventions have been developed to improve accuracy. In two experiments, we evaluated whether generating delayed keywords prior to judging comprehension improved metacomprehension accuracy for children. For sixth and seventh graders, metacomprehension accuracy was greater when generating keywords. By contrast, for fourth graders, metacomprehension accuracy did not differ across conditions. Improved metacomprehension accuracy led to improved regulation of study. The delayed keyword effect in children reported here is discussed in terms of situation model activation.

The independent cue technique has been developed to test traditional interference theories against inhibition theories of forgetting. In the present study, the authors tested the critical criterion for the independence of independent cues: Studied cues not presented during test (and unrelated to test cues) should not contribute to the retrieval process. Participants first studied a subset of cues (e.g., rope) that were subsequently studied together with a target in a 2nd study phase (e.g., rope-sailing, sunflower-yellow). In the test phase, an extralist category cue (e.g., sports, color) was presented, and participants were instructed to recall an item from the study list that was a member of the category (e.g., sailing, yellow). The experiments showed that previous study of the paired-associate word (e.g., rope) enhanced category cued recall even though this word was not presented at test. This experimental demonstration of covert cuing has important implications for the effectiveness of the independent cue technique.

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 investigated for both studied and unstudied semantically related items. Retrieval-induced forgetting was not found using item-specific independent cues for either studied or unstudied items. However, forgetting was found for both item types when studied categories were used as cues. These results are not in line with a general inhibitory account, because this account predicts retrieval-induced forgetting with independent cues. Interference and context-specific inhibition are discussed as possible explanations for the data.

The testing effect is the phenomenon that retrieval practice of learning material after studying enhances long-term retention more than restudying. We examined retrieval practice in primary school vocabulary learning in two experiments. Nine-year-old children studied word definitions and completed exercises according to three learning conditions: pure restudy, elaborative restudy or retrieval practice. Children in the pure restudy condition reread and partly copied the definitions. In the elaborative restudy condition children reread the definitions and connected semantically related words to the target words. Children in the retrieval practice condition recalled the words based on their definitions. Overall, on the fill-in-the-blank test after one week children in the retrieval practice condition outperformed children in the other conditions, but on the multiple-choice test there were no differences. Retrieval practice may be effective for primary school vocabulary learning, but there is uncertainty about the practical value and the magnitude of the retrieval practice effect.

In his response to criticisms Ericsson argues that conclusions about expertise development cannot be drawn from studies in the general population, and that it is possible that, in chess, intelligence and expertise are uniformly related across development. We respond here that if we want to study the development of expertise across the lifespan, research needs to take into account samples from the general population, such as novices. Moreover, studies in the general population are needed to study a factor that might have troubled previous research in the field and therefore might have implications for current theories of expertise development, which is a possible restriction of range in crucial variables such as intelligence. We argue for a longitudinal, multifaceted approach to study expertise development, starting with unselected samples of novices and taking into account practice, intelligence and motivation simultaneously, to prevent restriction of range and allow for further and stronger conclusions on the relation between intelligence and chess expertise.

The spacing effect refers to the frequently observed finding that distributing learning across time leads to better retention than massing it into one single study session. In the present study, we examined whether the spacing effect generalises to primary school vocabulary learning. To this aim, children from Grade 3 were taught the meaning of 15 new words using a massed procedure and 15 other new words using a spaced procedure. The 15 words in the massed condition were divided into three sets of five words, and each set was taught three times in one of three learning sessions. In the spaced condition, learning was distributed across the three sessions: All 15 words were practised once in each of the three learning sessions. At the retention tests after 1 week and after 5 weeks we observed that the meaning of spaced words was remembered better than the meaning of massed words.

Taking a memory test after an initial study phase produces better long-term retention than restudying the items, a phenomenon known as the testing effect. We propose that this effect emerges because testing strengthens semantic features of items’ memory traces, whereas restudying strengthens surface features of items’ memory traces. This novel account predicts that a testing effect should be observed even after a short retention interval when a language switch occurs between the learning phase and the final test phase. We assessed this prediction with Dutch-English bilinguals who learned Dutch Deese-Roediger-McDermott word lists through restudying or through testing (retrieval practice). Five minutes after this learning phase, they took a recognition test in Dutch (within-language condition) or in English (across-language condition). We observed a testing effect in the across-language condition, but not in the within-language condition. These findings corroborate our novel account of the testing effect.

Retrieval practice with particular items in memory may result in decreased recall of different, semantically related, items. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been demonstrated in studies using explicit memory tests. Anderson and Spellman (1995) have attributed retrieval-induced forgetting to inhibitory mechanisms. This hypothesis predicts similar effects in implicit memory tasks. In our first experiment, using Anderson and Spellman’s original paradigm, retrieval-induced forgetting was found using an explicit memory test with independent extralist retrieval cues. In our second experiment, using the same materials, retrieval-induced forgetting was also found using an implicit memory test with independent extralist retrieval cues, but only for participants who were aware of the relationship between the study and practice phase on the one hand, and the test phase of the experiment on the other. Thus, test awareness seems to mediate retrieval-induced forgetting in implicit memory tasks.

The differential effects of goal specificity on maze learning among 40 young adults and 40 old adults were investigated. Participants had to navigate through a computerized training-maze task. The finish point of the maze could be presented either as a specific location or in more general terms. After solving the maze problem, participants were required to solve the same problem again, either by moving from start to finish or backward from finish to start. The hypotheses that the presence or absence of a specific goal would disproportionately compromise or enhance, respectively, elderly people's performance were confirmed. Although young adults outperformed old participants in all conditions, these differences were much smaller in the nonspecific goal conditions. These results suggest that instruction based on cognitive load theory (J. Sweller, J.J.G. Van Merrienboer, & F. Paas, 1998) can compensate for age-related cognitive declines. Sweller and his colleagues (e.g., Bobis, Sweller, & Cooper, 1994; Owen & Sweller, 1985; Sweller & Levine, 1982) have provided evidence that the extent to which a goal is clearly specified to a problem solver as a problem state affects the problem-solving strategy used. In their experiments, Sweller and Levine (1982) used maze-tracing and numerical problems in which the finish point could be presented either as a specific location or in more general terms. These transformation problems are characterized by an initial problem state, a goal state, and a set of operators to transform the initial state into the goal state. The major mechanism used by problem solvers faced with transformation problems is means-ends analysis. The use of means-ends analysis and learning, that is, the construction of a cognitive schema of the underlying spatial structure of the maze, were independent. Under goal-specific conditions that facilitated the use of means-ends analysis, knowledge of the goal location was the primary factor controlling problem solvers' moves. This rendered the problem insoluble, and problem solvers were prevented from abstracting from the solutions the general rules used in problem solving. The nonspecific goal prevented the use of conventional means-ends analysis and resulted in fewer errors and more rapid learning of the structure of the problem. Sweller and Levine argued that in the absence of a goal, other aspects of the problem structure control moves. Under nonspecific goal conditions, the location of choice