Abstract
It is assumed that the difference between voluntary and involuntary autobiographical memories lies in the intentionality to retrieve a memory assigned by the experimenter. Memories that are retrieved when people are instructed to do so in response to cues are considered voluntary (VAMs), those that pop up spontaneously are considered involuntary (IAMs). VAMs and IAMs so classified are also found to differ in terms of phenomenological characteristics, such as perceived accessibility, vividness etc. These differences are assumed to be due to differences in intentionality and the different retrieval processes at play. It is possible, however, that these differences (which are subjective attributions of phenomenological characteristics) are the result of metacognitive beliefs of what IAMs and VAMs should be. In two experiments, we investigated the possible role of these metacognitive beliefs. Participants rated IAMs and VAMs on a number of phenomenological characteristics in two conditions, when these memories were presented in blocks that specified whether they were retrieved in a voluntary or involuntary task, or when presented in a mixed list with no information provided. If metacognitive beliefs influence the reporting of memory properties, then the block presentation would increase the differences between the characteristics of the two types of memories. The results showed that, besides replicating the characteristics of IAMs and VAMs already observed in the literature, there were almost no differences between the blocked and the mixed lists. We discuss the results as supporting the idea that the difference in characteristics attributed to IAMs and VAMs reflect a genuine difference in the nature of the retrieval and is not the result of pre-existing metacognitive belief on what a voluntary and an involuntary memory should be.
Highlights
When studying autobiographical memory, two types of retrieval are considered, voluntary and involuntary
Each time we try to recall something from our past, we retrieve voluntary autobiographical memories, while involuntary memories pop into our mind without any preceding intention to retrieve
4 Importantly, as Zedelius et al (2020) highlighted the differences between metacognitive beliefs about a given phenomenon in general and an individual assessment of one’s own abilities, in the present study when discussing the metacognitive beliefs we need to clarify that we address the former ones, namely, people’s understanding of the IAMs and voluntary memories (VAMs) phenomena in general
Summary
When studying autobiographical memory (people’s memories of their personal past, see Conway & Pleydell-Pearce, 2000; Berntsen & Rubin, 2012), two types of retrieval are considered, voluntary and involuntary. While the former is the result of an intention to retrieve a given memory and typically For several years there was a strong distinction in the memory literature between involuntary and voluntary memories in terms of both retrieval intentionality and/or retrieval effort, recent studies have challenged this position Retrieval intentionality (typically decided by the experimental instructions) seems to remain the main factor responsible for the distinction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
