Loading…
Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach
Intentional forgetting of previously learned information is an adaptive cognitive capability of humans but its cognitive underpinnings are not yet well understood. It has been argued that it strongly depends on the presentation method whether forgetting instructions alter storage or retrieval stages...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2016-10, Vol.42 (10), p.1526-1543 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a403t-9b4df07c81898ac82e8bb50be8abe583f5c1dfc8cca034267f27cd3a06b691633 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 1543 |
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1526 |
container_title | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition |
container_volume | 42 |
creator | Rummel, Jan Marevic, Ivan Kuhlmann, Beatrice G |
description | Intentional forgetting of previously learned information is an adaptive cognitive capability of humans but its cognitive underpinnings are not yet well understood. It has been argued that it strongly depends on the presentation method whether forgetting instructions alter storage or retrieval stages (Basden, Basden, & Gargano, 1993). In Experiment 1, we compared the processes underlying the directed-forgetting effect in 2 mosts widely used presentation methods, namely the list-method and the item-method, and also differentiated between costs (i.e., poorer memory for to-be-forgotten information) and benefits (i.e., better memory for to-be-remembered information) of directed forgetting within both methods. Using a multinomial modeling approach (Riefer & Rouder, 1992; Rouder & Batchelder, 1998), our results showed that directed-forgetting benefits were due to better storage of to-be-remembered information in both methods. In line with current theorizing, list-method directed-forgetting costs occurred due to reduced retrieval of to-be-forgotten information. Item-method costs, however, occurred not only due to reduced storage, which is the dominant current view, but also due to reduced retrieval. In Experiment 2, we replicated the novel finding that retrieval processes contribute to item-method directed forgetting independent of recall-output order. Implications of these findings for current directed-forgetting theories are discussed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1037/xlm0000266 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1826665834</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1115987</ericid><sourcerecordid>1826665834</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a403t-9b4df07c81898ac82e8bb50be8abe583f5c1dfc8cca034267f27cd3a06b691633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS1ERaeFTfdFlthUSAE_4he7ofSFWrUqsKsUOc7NkCoTB9up6L_H6ZRWYoE3XpzvnmPfg9AeJR8o4erj735N8mFSvkALargpKNPiJVoQpnShuOHbaCfG2xkiXL9C20waQUpDF-jmbLiDmLqVTd2wwt-SD3YF2A4NvoYUOrizPb4K3kGMELFv8ZcugEvQ4GMfVpDmsU94iS98A33x2casLMcxeOt-vkZbre0jvHm8d9GP46Pvh6fF-eXJ2eHyvLAl4akwddm0RDlNtdHWaQa6rgWpQdsahOatcLRpnXbOEl4yqVqmXMMtkbU0VHK-iw42vjn215S_U6276KDv7QB-ihXVeTcyO5UZffcPeuunMOTXzZSWSnAj_kspRUshmJm93m8oF3yMAdpqDN3ahvuKkmpupnpuJsNvHy2neg3NE_q3igzsbwAInXuSj75SSoXRKuvFRrejrcZ472xIneshuikEGNIcVpXsIVswyf8AG9-hDw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1771455294</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach</title><source>PsycArticles (EBSCO)</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>Rummel, Jan ; Marevic, Ivan ; Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</creator><contributor>Greene, Robert L</contributor><creatorcontrib>Rummel, Jan ; Marevic, Ivan ; Kuhlmann, Beatrice G ; Greene, Robert L</creatorcontrib><description>Intentional forgetting of previously learned information is an adaptive cognitive capability of humans but its cognitive underpinnings are not yet well understood. It has been argued that it strongly depends on the presentation method whether forgetting instructions alter storage or retrieval stages (Basden, Basden, & Gargano, 1993). In Experiment 1, we compared the processes underlying the directed-forgetting effect in 2 mosts widely used presentation methods, namely the list-method and the item-method, and also differentiated between costs (i.e., poorer memory for to-be-forgotten information) and benefits (i.e., better memory for to-be-remembered information) of directed forgetting within both methods. Using a multinomial modeling approach (Riefer & Rouder, 1992; Rouder & Batchelder, 1998), our results showed that directed-forgetting benefits were due to better storage of to-be-remembered information in both methods. In line with current theorizing, list-method directed-forgetting costs occurred due to reduced retrieval of to-be-forgotten information. Item-method costs, however, occurred not only due to reduced storage, which is the dominant current view, but also due to reduced retrieval. In Experiment 2, we replicated the novel finding that retrieval processes contribute to item-method directed forgetting independent of recall-output order. Implications of these findings for current directed-forgetting theories are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0278-7393</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1285</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000266</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26950491</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Cognitive ability ; Cognitive Processes ; College Students ; Comparative Analysis ; Control Groups ; Cues ; Experimental Groups ; Experimental psychology ; Female ; Foreign Countries ; Forgetting ; Germany ; Human ; Human Information Storage ; Humans ; Information Retrieval ; Information Storage ; Intentional Learning ; Interference (Learning) ; Language ; Male ; Memory ; Models, Psychological ; Probability ; Psychological Tests ; Recall ; Recall (Psychology) ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Retention ; Statistical Analysis ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2016-10, Vol.42 (10), p.1526-1543</ispartof><rights>2016 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>(c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).</rights><rights>2016, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Oct 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a403t-9b4df07c81898ac82e8bb50be8abe583f5c1dfc8cca034267f27cd3a06b691633</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-0443-1743 ; 0000-0002-3235-5717</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1115987$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26950491$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Greene, Robert L</contributor><creatorcontrib>Rummel, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marevic, Ivan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</creatorcontrib><title>Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><description>Intentional forgetting of previously learned information is an adaptive cognitive capability of humans but its cognitive underpinnings are not yet well understood. It has been argued that it strongly depends on the presentation method whether forgetting instructions alter storage or retrieval stages (Basden, Basden, & Gargano, 1993). In Experiment 1, we compared the processes underlying the directed-forgetting effect in 2 mosts widely used presentation methods, namely the list-method and the item-method, and also differentiated between costs (i.e., poorer memory for to-be-forgotten information) and benefits (i.e., better memory for to-be-remembered information) of directed forgetting within both methods. Using a multinomial modeling approach (Riefer & Rouder, 1992; Rouder & Batchelder, 1998), our results showed that directed-forgetting benefits were due to better storage of to-be-remembered information in both methods. In line with current theorizing, list-method directed-forgetting costs occurred due to reduced retrieval of to-be-forgotten information. Item-method costs, however, occurred not only due to reduced storage, which is the dominant current view, but also due to reduced retrieval. In Experiment 2, we replicated the novel finding that retrieval processes contribute to item-method directed forgetting independent of recall-output order. Implications of these findings for current directed-forgetting theories are discussed.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Control Groups</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Experimental Groups</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Forgetting</subject><subject>Germany</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Human Information Storage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information Retrieval</subject><subject>Information Storage</subject><subject>Intentional Learning</subject><subject>Interference (Learning)</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Models, Psychological</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Psychological Tests</subject><subject>Recall</subject><subject>Recall (Psychology)</subject><subject>Recognition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Retention</subject><subject>Statistical Analysis</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0278-7393</issn><issn>1939-1285</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS1ERaeFTfdFlthUSAE_4he7ofSFWrUqsKsUOc7NkCoTB9up6L_H6ZRWYoE3XpzvnmPfg9AeJR8o4erj735N8mFSvkALargpKNPiJVoQpnShuOHbaCfG2xkiXL9C20waQUpDF-jmbLiDmLqVTd2wwt-SD3YF2A4NvoYUOrizPb4K3kGMELFv8ZcugEvQ4GMfVpDmsU94iS98A33x2casLMcxeOt-vkZbre0jvHm8d9GP46Pvh6fF-eXJ2eHyvLAl4akwddm0RDlNtdHWaQa6rgWpQdsahOatcLRpnXbOEl4yqVqmXMMtkbU0VHK-iw42vjn215S_U6276KDv7QB-ihXVeTcyO5UZffcPeuunMOTXzZSWSnAj_kspRUshmJm93m8oF3yMAdpqDN3ahvuKkmpupnpuJsNvHy2neg3NE_q3igzsbwAInXuSj75SSoXRKuvFRrejrcZ472xIneshuikEGNIcVpXsIVswyf8AG9-hDw</recordid><startdate>201610</startdate><enddate>201610</enddate><creator>Rummel, Jan</creator><creator>Marevic, Ivan</creator><creator>Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0443-1743</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3235-5717</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201610</creationdate><title>Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach</title><author>Rummel, Jan ; Marevic, Ivan ; Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a403t-9b4df07c81898ac82e8bb50be8abe583f5c1dfc8cca034267f27cd3a06b691633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Control Groups</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Experimental Groups</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Forgetting</topic><topic>Germany</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Human Information Storage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information Retrieval</topic><topic>Information Storage</topic><topic>Intentional Learning</topic><topic>Interference (Learning)</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Models, Psychological</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Psychological Tests</topic><topic>Recall</topic><topic>Recall (Psychology)</topic><topic>Recognition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Retention</topic><topic>Statistical Analysis</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rummel, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marevic, Ivan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rummel, Jan</au><au>Marevic, Ivan</au><au>Kuhlmann, Beatrice G</au><au>Greene, Robert L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1115987</ericid><atitle>Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><date>2016-10</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1526</spage><epage>1543</epage><pages>1526-1543</pages><issn>0278-7393</issn><eissn>1939-1285</eissn><abstract>Intentional forgetting of previously learned information is an adaptive cognitive capability of humans but its cognitive underpinnings are not yet well understood. It has been argued that it strongly depends on the presentation method whether forgetting instructions alter storage or retrieval stages (Basden, Basden, & Gargano, 1993). In Experiment 1, we compared the processes underlying the directed-forgetting effect in 2 mosts widely used presentation methods, namely the list-method and the item-method, and also differentiated between costs (i.e., poorer memory for to-be-forgotten information) and benefits (i.e., better memory for to-be-remembered information) of directed forgetting within both methods. Using a multinomial modeling approach (Riefer & Rouder, 1992; Rouder & Batchelder, 1998), our results showed that directed-forgetting benefits were due to better storage of to-be-remembered information in both methods. In line with current theorizing, list-method directed-forgetting costs occurred due to reduced retrieval of to-be-forgotten information. Item-method costs, however, occurred not only due to reduced storage, which is the dominant current view, but also due to reduced retrieval. In Experiment 2, we replicated the novel finding that retrieval processes contribute to item-method directed forgetting independent of recall-output order. Implications of these findings for current directed-forgetting theories are discussed.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>26950491</pmid><doi>10.1037/xlm0000266</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0443-1743</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3235-5717</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0278-7393 |
ispartof | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2016-10, Vol.42 (10), p.1526-1543 |
issn | 0278-7393 1939-1285 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1826665834 |
source | PsycArticles (EBSCO); ERIC |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Analysis of Variance Cognitive ability Cognitive Processes College Students Comparative Analysis Control Groups Cues Experimental Groups Experimental psychology Female Foreign Countries Forgetting Germany Human Human Information Storage Humans Information Retrieval Information Storage Intentional Learning Interference (Learning) Language Male Memory Models, Psychological Probability Psychological Tests Recall Recall (Psychology) Recognition (Psychology) Retention Statistical Analysis Young Adult |
title | Investigating Storage and Retrieval Processes of Directed Forgetting: A Model-Based Approach |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T18%3A07%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Investigating%20Storage%20and%20Retrieval%20Processes%20of%20Directed%20Forgetting:%20A%20Model-Based%20Approach&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20Learning,%20memory,%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Rummel,%20Jan&rft.date=2016-10&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1526&rft.epage=1543&rft.pages=1526-1543&rft.issn=0278-7393&rft.eissn=1939-1285&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/xlm0000266&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1826665834%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a403t-9b4df07c81898ac82e8bb50be8abe583f5c1dfc8cca034267f27cd3a06b691633%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1771455294&rft_id=info:pmid/26950491&rft_ericid=EJ1115987&rfr_iscdi=true |