Feedback increases benefits but not costs of retrieval practice: Retrieval-induced forgetting is strength independent
- 188 Downloads
We examined how the provision of feedback affected two separate effects of retrieval practice: strengthening of practiced information and forgetting of related, unpracticed information. Feedback substantially increased recall of retrieval-practiced items. This unsurprising result shows once again that restudy opportunities boost the benefits of testing. In contrast, retrieval-induced forgetting was unaffected by the manipulation and occurred in equal size with or without feedback. These findings demonstrate strength independence of retrieval-induced forgetting and thus support a theoretical account assuming that an inhibitory mechanism causes retrieval-induced forgetting. According to this theory, inhibition resolves competition that arises during retrieval attempts but is unrelated to the consequences of retrieval practice concerning practiced items. The present results match these assumptions and contradict the theoretical alternative that blocking by strengthened information might explain retrieval-induced forgetting. We discuss our findings against the background of previous studies.
KeywordsInhibition in memory Blocking Forgetting Testing effect
This research was supported by Grant TE 891/3-3 of the German Research Council (DFG).
- Bjork, R. A. (1975). Retrieval as a memory modifier. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 123–144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Carroll, M., Campbell-Ratcliffe, J., Murnane, H., & Perfect, T. (2007). Retrieval-induced forgetting in educational contexts: Monitoring, expertise, text integration, and test format. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 580–606. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440701326071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chan, C. K., Erdman, M. R., & Davis, S. D. (2015). Retrieval induces forgetting, but only when nontested items compete for retrieval: Implication for interference, inhibition, and context reinstatement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 1298–1315. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1683 PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Irtel, H. (2007). PXLab: The Psychological Experiments Laboratory [Online] (Version 2.1.11) [Computer software]. Mannheim, Germany: University of Mannheim. Available from http://www.pxlab.de
- Reppa, I., Worth, E. R., Greville, W. J., & Saunders, J. (2013). The representation of response effector and response location in episodic memory for newly acquired actions: Evidence from retrieval-induced forgetting. Acta Psychologica, 143, 210–217. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.03.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Weller, P., Anderson, M. C., Gómez-Ariza, C. J., & Bajo, T. (2013). On the status of cue independence as a criterion for memory inhibition: Evidence against the covert blocking hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1232–1245. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030335 PubMedGoogle Scholar