‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgetting

dc.contributor.authorZwissler, Bastian
dc.contributor.authorSchindler, Sebastian
dc.contributor.authorFischer, Helena
dc.contributor.authorPlewnia, Christian
dc.contributor.authorKissler, Johanna
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-22T14:59:42Z
dc.date.available2016-03-22T14:59:42Z
dc.date.issued2015eng
dc.description.abstractHumans need to be able to selectively control their memories. This capability is often investigated in directed forgetting (DF) paradigms. In item-method DF, individual items are presented and each is followed by either a forget- or remember-instruction. On a surprise test of all items, memory is then worse for to-be-forgotten items (TBF) compared to to-be-remembered items (TBR). This is thought to result mainly from selective rehearsal of TBR, although inhibitory mechanisms also appear to be recruited by this paradigm. Here, we investigate whether the mnemonic consequences of a forget instruction differ from the ones of incidental encoding, where items are presented without a specific memory instruction. Four experiments were conducted where un-cued items (UI) were interspersed and recognition performance was compared between TBR, TBF, and UI stimuli. Accuracy was encouraged via a performance-dependent monetary bonus. Experiments varied the number of items and their presentation speed and used either letter-cues or symbolic cues. Across all experiments, including perceptually fully counterbalanced variants, memory accuracy for TBF was reduced compared to TBR, but better than for UI. Moreover, participants made consistently fewer false alarms and used a very conservative response criterion when responding to TBF stimuli. Thus, the F-cue results in active processing and reduces false alarm rate, but this does not impair recognition memory beyond an un-cued baseline condition, where only incidental encoding occurs. Theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedeng
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741eng
dc.identifier.ppn462706486
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/33410
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectepisodic memory, item method, selective rehearsal, ironic process, inhibition (psychology), directed forgettingeng
dc.subject.ddc150eng
dc.title‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgettingeng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEeng
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Zwissler2015Forge-33410,
  year={2015},
  doi={10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741},
  title={‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgetting},
  volume={6},
  journal={Frontiers in Psychology},
  author={Zwissler, Bastian and Schindler, Sebastian and Fischer, Helena and Plewnia, Christian and Kissler, Johanna},
  note={Article Number: 1741}
}
kops.citation.iso690ZWISSLER, Bastian, Sebastian SCHINDLER, Helena FISCHER, Christian PLEWNIA, Johanna KISSLER, 2015. ‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgetting. In: Frontiers in Psychology. 2015, 6, 1741. eISSN 1664-1078. Available under: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741deu
kops.citation.iso690ZWISSLER, Bastian, Sebastian SCHINDLER, Helena FISCHER, Christian PLEWNIA, Johanna KISSLER, 2015. ‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgetting. In: Frontiers in Psychology. 2015, 6, 1741. eISSN 1664-1078. Available under: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/33410">
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/33410/3/Zwissler_0-316333.pdf"/>
    <dc:creator>Zwissler, Bastian</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Plewnia, Christian</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Fischer, Helena</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Plewnia, Christian</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-03-22T14:59:42Z</dcterms:available>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Humans need to be able to selectively control their memories. This capability is often investigated in directed forgetting (DF) paradigms. In item-method DF, individual items are presented and each is followed by either a forget- or remember-instruction. On a surprise test of all items, memory is then worse for to-be-forgotten items (TBF) compared to to-be-remembered items (TBR). This is thought to result mainly from selective rehearsal of TBR, although inhibitory mechanisms also appear to be recruited by this paradigm. Here, we investigate whether the mnemonic consequences of a forget instruction differ from the ones of incidental encoding, where items are presented without a specific memory instruction. Four experiments were conducted where un-cued items (UI) were interspersed and recognition performance was compared between TBR, TBF, and UI stimuli. Accuracy was encouraged via a performance-dependent monetary bonus. Experiments varied the number of items and their presentation speed and used either letter-cues or symbolic cues. Across all experiments, including perceptually fully counterbalanced variants, memory accuracy for TBF was reduced compared to TBR, but better than for UI. Moreover, participants made consistently fewer false alarms and used a very conservative response criterion when responding to TBF stimuli. Thus, the F-cue results in active processing and reduces false alarm rate, but this does not impair recognition memory beyond an un-cued baseline condition, where only incidental encoding occurs. Theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:title>‘Forget me (not)?’ : Remembering Forget-Items Versus Un-Cued Items in Directed Forgetting</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2015</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-03-22T14:59:42Z</dc:date>
    <dc:creator>Kissler, Johanna</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Kissler, Johanna</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Schindler, Sebastian</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Fischer, Helena</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Zwissler, Bastian</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/33410/3/Zwissler_0-316333.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Schindler, Sebastian</dc:contributor>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/33410"/>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.description.openAccessopenaccessgoldeng
kops.flag.knbibliographyfalse
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-316333
kops.sourcefieldFrontiers in Psychology. 2015, <b>6</b>, 1741. eISSN 1664-1078. Available under: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741deu
kops.sourcefield.plainFrontiers in Psychology. 2015, 6, 1741. eISSN 1664-1078. Available under: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741deu
kops.sourcefield.plainFrontiers in Psychology. 2015, 6, 1741. eISSN 1664-1078. Available under: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741eng
relation.isAuthorOfPublication706234f4-70e6-42f2-b086-de7eb5c49369
relation.isAuthorOfPublication1f28c224-1f9f-4a5a-890c-099f86097a2e
relation.isAuthorOfPublication6620d869-d716-4ddc-ba74-390fa0731268
relation.isAuthorOfPublication70eec352-d5c2-4b81-b290-41e904f5298b
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery706234f4-70e6-42f2-b086-de7eb5c49369
source.bibliographicInfo.articleNumber1741eng
source.bibliographicInfo.volume6eng
source.identifier.eissn1664-1078eng
source.periodicalTitleFrontiers in Psychologyeng

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
Zwissler_0-316333.pdf
Größe:
2.44 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Beschreibung:
Zwissler_0-316333.pdf
Zwissler_0-316333.pdfGröße: 2.44 MBDownloads: 456

Lizenzbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
license.txt
Größe:
3.88 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Beschreibung:
license.txt
license.txtGröße: 3.88 KBDownloads: 0