Directed Forgetting Effect Research Articles

The Development of Efficient Inhibition: Evidence from Directed-Forgetting Tasks

The purposes of this paper are (1) to end the confusion over the mechanisms producing directed-forgetting effects in the three methods of cuing items in directed-forgetting tasks, (2) to highlight the role of inhibition in blocked and “only” cued directed-forgetting tasks, and (3) to review and reinterpret the developmental directed-forgetting literature within an inhibition framework. We argue that item-by-item cued directed-forgetting tasks manipulate selective rehearsal to produce greater recall of to-be-remembered (TBR) than to-be-forgotten (TBF) items. In contrast, both blocked and “only” cued directed-forgetting tasks manipulate retrieval inhibition, a form of cognitive inhibition, to produce the suppression of TBF items. The current developmental directed-forgetting literature is reviewed and reinterpreted in light of this framework. It is concluded that in item-by-item tasks children can produce directed-forgetting effects using selective rehearsal by second grade. In blocked and “only” cued directed-forgetting tasks children can produce directed-forgetting effects as early as third grade in some instances, but usually not until fifth grade. Future directions for research on cognitive inhibition, especially its role in the investigation of repressed memories, are also discussed.

The Initiation and Release of Retrieval Inhibition

Abstract Subjects free recalled or were cued with either four or eight retrieval cues in a modified directed-forgetting study. A directed-forgetting effect was observed for free but not cued recall. In addition, the same cues that initiated blocking for “remember” words were observed to release the suppression for “forget” words. An explanation of the differential effect of experimenter-provided retrieval cues on the retrieval of remember and forget words is provided.

Recall and stem-completion priming have different electrophysiological correlates and are modified differentially by directed forgetting.

The notion that different aspects of memory are assessed by explicit and implicit memory tests was supported by behavioral and electrophysiological results. In a study-test procedure, 24 subjects were instructed to remember some words and to forget other words. Free recall and cued recall were better for words associated with the remember instruction, whereas directed forgetting did not influence stem completion (an implicit memory test). Event-related brain potentials elicited during study differed as a function of subsequent memory performance for free recall and cued recall, but not for stem completion. These results implicate encoding differences in the distinction between the 2 types of memory test. Factors governing whether explicit retrieval affects performance on an implicit memory test, mechanisms that may underlie directed-forgetting effects, and the importance of electrophysiological correlates of memory are also discussed.