ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2026
Spontaneous Mnemonic Strategy Use Under Proactive Interference Is Related to Better Recall But Does Not Protect from Accumulating Interference.
Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Proactive interference (PI) is a key mechanism in forgetting, making it important to examine factors that may alleviate its detrimental effects. In a preregistered online study with 207 English-speaking 18- to 60-year-old adults, we probed block-by-block spontaneous mnemonic strategy use in a categorised word list recall task with increasing PI, followed by release from PI. Based on the blockwise self-reports, participants were classified as no strategy users, maintenance strategy users (e.g., repetition), or manipulation strategy users (e.g., grouping, creating a story). Strategy users formed a majority and showed better recall than no strategy users, with the highest recall rates in manipulation strategy users. The detrimental effects of PI on word recall were similar in the three subgroups. Self-reports suggested increased shifts of the selected strategy when moving from the last PI block to release from PI. Altogether, the present results indicate that self-generated memory strategies are (a) common in adults, (b) flexibly used when faced with a qualitative change in task demands, (c) associated with better memory performance especially concerning more sophisticated strategies involving mental manipulation of the memoranda, but (d) do not prevent the buildup of PI as they may not provide enough differentiation between current and previous category members.
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.