ReviewFrontiers in psychology2017
Long-Term Memory Updating: The Reset-of-Encoding Hypothesis in List-Method Directed Forgetting.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Partner forgetfulness weakens responsible forgetting.Cognitive processing · 2026Article
- Targeting memory of embedded positive verbal content indirectly modulates negative visual memory.iScience · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of Nitric Oxide Synthase Inhibitor on the Learning and Spatial Memory in Rats Subjected to Long-Term Perinatal Administration of Caffeine.Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2022Article
- Can People Intentionally and Selectively Forget Prose Material?Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Indirect modulation of human visual memory.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Retrieval-mediated directed forgetting in the item-method paradigm: the effect of semantic cues.Psychological research · 2020Article
- Does Amount of Pre-cue Encoding Modulate Selective List Method Directed Forgetting?Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Testing enhances motor practice.Memory & cognition · 2019Article
- The Forward Testing Effect is Reliable and Independent of Learners' Working Memory Capacity.Journal of cognition · 2019Article
- The Forward Effect of Testing: Behavioral Evidence for the Reset-of-Encoding Hypothesis Using Serial Position Analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People's memory for new information can be enhanced by cuing them to forget older information, as is shown in list-method directed forgetting (LMDF). In this task, people are cued to forget a previously studied list of items (list 1) and to learn a new list of items (list 2) instead. Such cuing typically enhances memory for the list 2 items and reduces memory for the list 1 items, which reflects effective long-term memory updating. This review focuses on the reset-of-encoding (ROE) hypothesis as a theoretical explanation of the list 2 enhancement effect in LMDF. The ROE hypothesis is based on the finding that encoding efficacy typically decreases with number of encoded items and assumes that providing a forget cue after study of some items (e.g., list 1) resets the encoding process and makes encoding of subsequent items (e.g., early list 2 items) as effective as encoding of previously studied (e.g., early list 1) items. The review provides an overview of current evidence for the ROE hypothesis. The evidence arose from recent behavioral, neuroscientific, and modeling studies that examined LMDF on both an item and a list level basis. The findings support the view that ROE plays a critical role for the list 2 enhancement effect in LMDF. Alternative explanations of the effect and the generalizability of ROE to other experimental tasks are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.