Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31957596›Full record

ArticleMemory (Hove, England)2020

Does retrieving a memory insulate it against memory inhibition? A retroactive interference study.

Justin C Hulbert, Michael C Anderson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory (Hove, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Justin C HulbertPsychology Program, Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2889-0901
Michael C AndersonMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several recent studies suggest that an initial retrieval attempt imbues retrieved memories with special resilience against future interference and other forgetting mechanisms. Here we report two experiments examining whether memories established through initial retrieval remain subject to retrieval-induced forgetting. Using a version of a classical retroactive interference design, we trained participants on a list of A-B pairs via anticipation - constituting a form of retrieval practice. After next training participants on interfering A-C pairs, they performed 0-12 additional A-C anticipation trials. Because these trials required retrieval of A-C pairs, they should function similarly to retrieval practice in paradigms establishing retrieval-induced forgetting. We observed robust evidence that retroactive interference generalises to final memory tests involving novel, independent memory probes. Moreover, in contrast to practising retrieval of A-C items, their extra study failed to induce cue-independent forgetting of the original B items. Together, these findings substantiate the role of retrieval-related inhibitory processes in a traditional retroactive interference design. Importantly, they indicate that an initial retrieval attempt on a competitor does not abolish retrieval-induced forgetting, at least not in the context of this classic design. Although such an attempt may protect against inhibition in some circumstances, the nature of those circumstances remains to be understood.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalPractice, PsychologicalAdultAttentionCuesFemaleHumansMaleMental RecallYoung Adultcue-independent forgettinginhibitory controlRetrieval-induced forgettingretroactive interference

Identifiers

PMID31957596
PMCPMC7114917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.