Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32096069›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2020

Recognition and rejection each induce forgetting.

Keisuke Fukuda, Shawal Pall, Erica Chen, Ashleigh M Maxcey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. What do laboratory-forgetting paradigms tell us about use-inspired forgetting?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
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

4 authors.

Keisuke FukudaDepartment of Psychology, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Rd North, Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada. keisuke.fukuda@utoronto.ca.
Shawal PallFairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ, USA.
Erica ChenCarleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Ashleigh M MaxceyVanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recognition-induced forgetting, whereby the recognition of targeted memories induces the forgetting of related memories, results from the recognition of old objects and rejection of new objects. Here we asked whether both these tasks are necessary to induce forgetting. Our unique design allowed us to isolate the recognition of old objects from the rejection of new objects by presenting subjects with only new objects, only old objects, and a mixture of both in separate conditions of an old-new recognition task. In all three conditions, we successfully induced forgetting. The magnitude of forgetting was statistically indistinguishable across all three conditions, showing that recognition of old objects and rejection of new objects are each building blocks of forgetting. These findings pinpoint both recognition and rejection as mechanisms underlying recognition-induced forgetting and demonstrate the ubiquity of this forgetting effect.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleMental RecallPattern Recognition, VisualRecognition, PsychologyYoung AdultLong-term memoryRecognition-induced forgettingRecognition memoryRetrieval-induced forgettingVisual long-term memory

Identifiers

PMID32096069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.