No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Retrieval-induced forgetting and interference between cues: Training a cue–outcome association attenuates retrieval by alternative cues
Abstract
a b s t r a c t Some researchers have attempted to determine whether situations in which a single cue is paired with several outcomes (A–B, A–C interference or interference between outcomes) involve the same learning and retrieval mechanisms as situations in which several cues are paired with a single outcome (A–B, C–B interference or interference between cues). Interestingly, current research on a related effect, which is known as retrieval-induced forgetting, can illuminate this debate. Most retrieval-induced forgetting experiments are based on an experimental design that closely resembles the A–B, A–C interference paradigm. In the present experiment, we found that a similar effect may be observed when items are rearranged such that the general structure of the task more closely resembles the A–B, C–B interference paradigm. This result suggests that, as claimed by other researchers in the area of contingency learning, the two types of interference, namely A–B, A–C and A–B, C–B interference, may share some basic mecha-nisms. Moreover, the type of inhibitory processes assumed to underlie retrieval-induced forgetting may also play a role in these phenomena.
... Retrieval-induced forgetting presents an interesting analogy to other, more extensively studied phenomena that are reported in both the human and animal learning literature. Specifically, the RIF preparation parallels those used to study retroactive associative outcome interference (for reviews of these parallels, see Ortega-Castro and Vadillo, 2013;Vadillo et al., 2013). Retroactive outcome interference is often observed when pairings of X-O1 in Phase 1 are followed by pairings of X-O2 in Phase 2 (where X is a cue and O1 and O2 are two distinctly different outcomes). ...
... Recent research has examined the validity of analogies between RIF and retroactive outcome interference. These studies have suggested that the same or at least similar mechanisms that are responsible for outcome interference may also be responsible for RIF (Ortega-Castro and Vadillo, 2013;Vadillo et al., 2013). Vadillo et al. used an associative outcome interference design in which experimental participants (undergraduates) received X-O1 presentations in Phase 1, X-O2 presentations in Phase 2, and were then tested on the rate of learning of a new Y-O1 association in Phase 3, relative to participants who received control training for outcome interference in which there was no common element across Phases 1 and 2. They found that associative interference between outcomes O1 and O2, based on their mutual associations to X, impaired acquisition (or at least expression) of a new association involving O1 (i.e., Y-O1), presumably because of attenuated activation in Phase 3 of the representation of the target outcome (O1). ...
... The objective of Experiment 1 was to determine whether changing the physical context between Phase 2 and testing would attenuate RIF. The impetus for this study was a growing literature of recent findings suggesting that similar mechanisms may underlie RIF and retroactive associative outcome interference (Ortega-Castro and Vadillo, 2013;Vadillo et al., 2013) and research showing that outcome interference is susceptible to ABA renewal (e.g., Peck and Bouton, 1990;Bouton and Bolles, 1979;Bouton and King, 1983). We expected such an ABA context manipulation applied to the study, retrieval practice, and recall phases of a RIF design, respectively, would induce renewal of Rp− words, thereby attenuating the RIF effect. ...
Recent studies have pursued the nature of inhibition observed in retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) tasks. In a RIF paradigm, participants are trained on category-exemplar pairs in Phase 1. Then, some exemplars from select categories (Rp+ items) receive further practice in Phase 2. At test, impaired recall for non-practiced exemplars of the practiced categories (Rp- items) is observed relative to exemplars from non-practiced categories (Nrp items). This difference constitutes RIF. Prior reports of spontaneous recovery from RIF indicate that RIF represents a lapse rather than a loss of memory. Empirical analogs and theoretical considerations suggest that RIF should also be reversible through a change of context between Phase 2 and testing (i.e., renewal). We conducted two experiments using human participants to evaluate the context dependency of RIF. In both experiments, Phases 1 and 2 occurred in distinctly different contexts with subsequent testing occurring in either the Phase 1 context or the Phase 2 context. RIF was observed in both experiments. Experiment 1 additionally found that the magnitude of RIF was not reduced by testing in the Phase 1 context relative to testing in the Phase 2 context. Experiment 2 further tested context dependency of RIF by 1) increasing the dissimilarity between the two contexts and 2) inserting a retention interval between Phase 2 and test for half of the participants in each test context condition. The data again indicated no effect of the context manipulation. Thus, no renewal from RIF was observed in either experiment; moreover, these null findings were supported by Bayesian analyses. These results are compared with analogous inhibitory processes in the animal memory literature that typically show both physical and temporal context dependency.
... More interestingly, retrieval practice impairs later recall of unpracticed items from practiced categories (CHERRY) relative to baseline items. The finding that selective retrieval impairs the accessibility of related memories, known as retrieval-induced forgetting (Anderson, 2003;see Murayama, Miyatsu, Buchli, & Storm, 2014, for a meta-analysis; Storm & Levy, 2012), generalises to a variety of episodically formed associations (Abel & Bäuml, 2012;Anderson & Bell, 2001;Ciranni & Shimamura, 1999;Ortega-Castro & Vadillo, 2012;Spitzer & Bäuml, 2009), and even affects non-studied semantic competitors (e.g., Johnson & Anderson, 2004). ...
Several recent studies suggest that an initial retrieval attempt imbues retrieved memories with special resilience against future interference and other forgetting mechanisms. Here we report two experiments examining whether memories established through initial retrieval remain subject to retrieval-induced forgetting. Using a version of a classical retroactive interference design, we trained participants on a list of A–B pairs via anticipation – constituting a form of retrieval practice. After next training participants on interfering A–C pairs, they performed 0–12
additional A–C anticipation trials. Because these trials required retrieval of A–C pairs, they should function similarly to retrieval practice in paradigms establishing retrieval-induced forgetting. We observed robust evidence that retroactive interference generalises to final memory tests involving novel, independent memory probes. Moreover, in contrast to practising retrieval of A–C items, their extra study failed to induce cue-independent forgetting of the original B items. Together, these findings substantiate the role of retrieval-related inhibitory processes in a traditional retroactive interference design. Importantly, they indicate that an initial retrieval attempt on a competitor does not abolish retrieval-induced forgetting, at least
not in the context of this classic design. Although such an attempt may protect against
inhibition in some circumstances, the nature of those circumstances remains to be understood.
... For instance, the competition-dependence assumption (as well as retrieval specificity, which is presumably a precursor for competition), has faced some concerns. RIF does not seem to always require competition for retrieval (Jonker & MacLeod, 2012;Jonker et al., 2013;Ortega-Castro & Vadillo, 2013;Raaijmakers & Jakab, 2012), and the nature of competition according to the inhibitory account is rather vague, which makes it difficult for the inhibitory account to make clear predictions. Others have found that observations supporting cue independence are difficult to replicate (Jonker & MacLeod, 2012;Williams & Zacks, 2001). ...
Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) is the observation that retrieval of target information causes forgetting of related nontarget information. A number of accounts of this phenomenon have been proposed, including a context-shift-based account (Jonker, Seli, & Macleod, 2013). This account proposes that RIF occurs as a result of the context shift from study to retrieval practice, provided there is little context shift between retrieval practice and test phases. We tested both claims put forth by this context account. In Experiment 1, we degraded the context shift between study and retrieval practice by implementing a generative study condition that was highly similar to retrieval practice. We observed no degradation of RIF for these generated exemplars relative to a conventional study control. In Experiment 2, we conceptually replicated the finding of RIF following generative study, and tested whether context differences between each of the three phases affected the size of RIF. Our findings were again contrary to the predictions of the context account. Conjointly, the 2 experiments refute arguments about the potential inadequacy of our context shifts that could be used to explain either result alone. Overall, our results are most consistent with an inhibitory account of RIF (e.g., Anderson, 2003). (PsycINFO Database Record
... Clearly, it is the latter mechanism that should prevail in the present experiments, because X and Y were trained independently and had the same outcome. Important for the present research, the Miller and Escobar model accounts for associative interference in terms of the test context not only facilitating the retrieval of associations acquired in that context, but also down-modulating (i.e., inhibiting) the retrieval of all other associations with one, but not both, elements in common with the positively primed associations (a process similar to that applied to the retrieval-induced forgetting phenomenon of Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork [1994], in which retrieval of the subsequent event is impaired, and Ortega-Castro & Vadillo [2013], in which retrieval of the antecedent event is impaired). ...
Retroactive cue interference refers to situations in which a target cue X is paired with an outcome in phase 1 and a nontarget cue Z is paired with the same outcome in phase 2, with less subsequent responding to X being seen as a result of the phase 2 training. Two conditioned suppression experiments with rats were conducted to determine whether retroactive cue interference is similarly modulated by a manipulation that influences retroactive outcome interference (e.g., extinction). Both experiments used an ABC renewal-like design in which phase 1 training, phase 2 training, and testing each occurred in different contexts. Experiment 1 found that training the target association in multiple contexts without altering the number of training trials during phase 1 decreased retroactive cue interference (i.e., increased responding consistent with the target association). Experiment 2 found that training the interfering association in multiple contexts without altering the number of interference trials during phase 2 increased retroactive cue interference (i.e., decreased responding consistent with the target association). The possibility of similar mechanisms underlying cue interference and outcome interference is discussed.
... A related memory phenomenon is retrieval-induced forgetting, which refers to the situation where retrieval of a subset of formerly studied material (e.g., CS+ R – US) causes subsequent forgetting of the non-retrieved material (e.g., CS+ NR – US; Bäuml et al., 2010, p. 1048). In a recent study by Castro and Vadillo (2013) , retrieval-induced forgetting was demonstrated using word pairs, where several cues predicted a common outcome. As such, rehearsal/retrieval of one CS-US-contingency might induce forgetting of the non-rehearsed contingency. ...
Individuals seem to differ in conditionability, i.e., the ease by which the contingent presentation of two stimuli will lead to a conditioned response. In contemporary learning theory, individual differences in the etiology and maintenance of anxiety disorders are, among others, explained by individual differences in temperamental variables (Mineka & Zinbarg, 2006). One such individual difference variable is how people process a learning experience when the conditioning stimuli are no longer present. Repeatedly thinking about the conditioning experience, as in worry or rumination, might prolong the initial (fear) reactions and as such, might leave certain individuals more vulnerable to developing an anxiety disorder. However, in human conditioning research, relatively little attention has been devoted to the processing of a memory trace after its initial acquisition, despite its potential influences on subsequent performance. Post-acquisition processing can be induced by mental reiteration of a CS-US-contingency. Using a human conditioned suppression paradigm, we investigated the effect of repeated activations of a CS-US-contingency memory on the level of conditioned responding at a later test. Results of three experiments showed more sustained responding to a ‘rehearsed’ CS+ as compared to a ‘non-rehearsed’ CS+. Moreover, the second experiment showed no effect of rehearsal when only the CS was rehearsed instead of the CS-US-contingency. The third experiment demonstrated that mental CS-US-rehearsal has the same effect regardless of whether it was cued by the CS and a verbal reference to the US or by a neutral signal, making the rehearsal ‘purely mental’. In sum, it was demonstrated that post-acquisition activation of a CS-US-contingency memory can impact conditioned responding, underlining the importance of post-acquisition processes in conditioning. This might indicate that individuals who are more prone to mentally rehearse information condition more easily.
Blocking (i.e., reduced responding to cue X following YX-outcome pairings in Phase 2 as a consequence of cue Y having been paired with the outcome in Phase 1) is one of the signature phenomena in Pavlovian conditioning. Its discovery promoted the development of multiple associative models, most of which viewed blocking as an instance of pure cue competition (i.e., a decrease in responding attributable to training two conditioned stimuli in compound). Two experiments are reported in which rats were examined in a fear conditioning paradigm (i.e., lick suppression), and context dependency of retrieval at test was used as an index of associative cue interference (i.e., a decrease in responding to a target cue as a result of training a second cue with the same outcome but without concurrent presentation of the two cues). Specifically, we observed renewal of forward-blocking which parallels renewal of proactive interference, and renewal of backward-blocking which parallels renewal of retroactive interference. Thus, both backward-blocking (Experiment 1, embedded in a sensory preconditioning design) and forward-blocking (Experiment 2, conducted in first-order conditioning) appear to be influenced by retroactive and proactive interference, respectively, as well as cue competition. Consequently, blocking, long regarded as a benchmark example of pure cue competition, is sometimes a hybrid of cue competition and associative interference. Finally, the Discussion considers whether stimulus competition and associative interference are two independent phenomena or products of a single underlying process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Retrieval practice of previously studied material can impair subsequent memory for related unpracticed material. An emerging view holds that such retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) may affect episodic recollection, but not the context-free familiarity of the affected items. Here, a survey of accruing recent findings of RIF in recognition tests shows that the impairment of unpracticed material depends vitally on baseline memory strength. Therein, the absence of RIF under specific conditions, previously taken as evidence for the immunity of familiarity, can be predicted on grounds of exceedingly low baseline levels. Similarly, differential RIF effects on the parameters of dual-process recognition models can be explained by baseline differences, suggesting that RIF might impair any sub-process that substantially contributes to overall recognition accuracy. By contrast, the strengthening of practiced material appears independent of baseline levels and does not predict the magnitude of RIF, in accordance with an inhibitory causation of the forgetting. In summary, the inventory presents RIF in recognition as a subtle proportional impairment, future illumination of which may demand increased attention to baseline memory levels.
Most associative theories have assumed that stimulus competition occurs only between conditioned stimuli (CSs) that are trained
in compound. The present research investigated the possibility of competition between two CSs that were individually paired
to the same unconditioned stimulus (US). We used human subjects in an anticipatory suppression analogue to Pavlovian conditioning.
Experiment 1 showed that X+ training followed by A+ training resulted in impaired responding to X. This did not occur when
A+ training preceded X+ training. Experiment 2 replicated the basic effect and showed that it did not occur when the Phase
2 training consisted of A− instead of A+ nor when the A+ pairings occurred in a second context. Experiment 3 showed that A+
pairings occurring in a second context could still produce the effect when X was tested in the context in which the A+ pairings
had occurred, but not when X was tested in a context different from that used for A+ training. Collectively, these results
suggest that individually trained CSs may compete with each other when one of those CSs is more strongly activated by the
test context than the other one.
Backward blocking (BB) and interference between cues (IbC) are cue competition effects produced by very similar manipulations. In a standard BB design both effects might occur simultaneously, which implies a potential problem to study BB. In the present study with humans, the magnitude of both effects was compared using a non causal scenario and a within subjects design. Previous studies have made this comparison using learning tasks framed within causal scenarios. This posits a limit to generalizing their findings to non-causal learning situations because there is ample evidence showing that participants engage in causal reasoning when tasks are causally framed. The results obtained showed BB and IbC effects of the same magnitude in a non causal framed task. This highlights the methodological need for an IbC control in BB experiments.
Interference provides an account of one of the most basic problems in the science of memory: forgetting. Historically, theories of this process were shaped by models of associative learning prevalent when interference research began. In this article, I argue that we should reconsider the long-standing conceptualization of interference as a learning phenomenon and reframe interference as arising from systems that achieve mental and behavioral control. Specifically, it is argued that forgetting is not a passive side effect of storing new memories, but results from inhibitory control mechanisms recruited to override prepotent responses. In support of this idea, I discuss two control situations in which response override is necessary—selection and stopping—and show how these situations have direct parallels in retrieval. I then review evidence that in both of these situations, the need to override prepotent, distracting memories is supported by inhibitory mechanisms that ultimately cause forgetting. The theoretical properties of these inhibitory effects are outlined, along with critical factors known to modulate or mask inhibition. The relation between this executive control theory of forgetting and classical accounts of interference is discussed.
Research has shown that automatic evaluations can be highly robust and difficult to change, highly malleable and easy to change, and highly context dependent. We tested a representational account of these disparate findings, which specifies the conditions under which automatic evaluations reflect (a) initially acquired information, (b) subsequently acquired, counterattitudinal information, or (c) a mixture of both. The account postulates that attention to contextual cues during the encoding of evaluative information determines whether this information is stored in a context-free representation or a contextualized representation. To the extent that attention to context cues is low during the encoding of initial information but is enhanced by exposure to expectancy-violating counterattitudinal information, initial experiences are stored in context-free representations, whereas counterattitudinal experiences are stored in contextualized representations. Hence, automatic evaluations tend to reflect the valence of counterattitudinal information only in the context in which this information was learned (occasion setting) and the valence of initial experiences in any other context (renewal effect). Four experiments confirmed these predictions, additionally showing that (a) the impact of initial experiences was reduced for automatic evaluations in novel contexts when context salience during the encoding of initial information was enhanced, (b) context effects were eliminated altogether when context salience during the encoding of counterattitudinal information was reduced, and (c) enhanced context salience during the encoding of counterattitudinal information produced context-dependent automatic evaluations even when there was no contingency between valence and contextual cues. Implications for automatic evaluation, learning theory, and interventions in applied settings are discussed.
Theories of cognition frequently assume the existence of inhibitory mechanisms that deactivate mental representations. Justifying this assumption is difficult because cognitive effects thought to reflect inhibition can often be explained without recourse to inhibitory processes. This article addresses the uncertain status of cognitive inhibitory mechanisms, focusing on their function in memory retrieval. On the basis of a novel form of forgetting reported herein, it is shown that classical associative theories of interference are insufficient as accounts of forgetting and that inhibitory processes must be at work. It is argued that inhibitory processes are used to resolve computational problems of selection common to memory retrieval and selective attention and that retrieval is best regarded as conceptually focused selective attention.
Three studies show that the retrieval process itself causes long-lasting forgetting. Ss studied 8 categories (e.g., Fruit). Half the members of half the categories were then repeatedly practiced through retrieval tests (e.g., Fruit Or_____). Category-cued recall of unpracticed members of practiced categories was impaired on a delayed test. Experiments 2 and 3 identified 2 significant features of this retrieval-induced forgetting: The impairment remains when output interference is controlled, suggesting a retrieval-based suppression that endures for 20 min or more, and the impairment appears restricted to high-frequency members. Low-frequency members show little impairment, even in the presence of strong, practiced competitors that might be expected to block access to those items. These findings suggest a critical role for suppression in models of retrieval inhibition and implicate the retrieval process itself in everyday forgetting.
Seven experiments are reported that show that retrieving facts from long-term memory is accomplished, in part, by inhibitory processes that suppress interfering facts. When asked to repeatedly retrieve a recently learned proposition (e.g., recalling The actor is looking at the tulip, given cues such as Actor looking t__), subjects experienced a recall deficit for related facts (e.g., The actor is looking at the violin) on a recall test administered 15 min later. Importantly, this retrieval-induced forgetting was shown to generalize to other facts in which the inhibited concepts took part (e.g., The teacher is lifting the violin), replicating a finding observed by M. C. Anderson and B. A. Spellman (1995) with categorical stimuli. These findings suggest a critical role for suppression in models of propositional retrieval and implicate the mere retrieval of what we know as a source of forgetting of factual knowledge.
Retrieval of a target association (A-B) is often impaired if training of a similar association is interpolated between target training and testing; this is known as retroactive interference. Two experiments, in which rats were used as subjects in a sensory preconditioning preparation, studied the associative nature of retroactive interference between antecedent events (i.e., A and C in the A-B, C-B paradigm) and between subsequent events (i.e., B and C in the A-B, A-C paradigm). With the present preparation, retroactive interference was equally strong between antecedent events and between subsequent events. Moreover, interference occurred only if (1) an association was trained in the interpolated phase and (2) the target and interpolated associations had a common element in a common temporal location.
In recent years, 'stimulus competition' in the study of acquired behavior has referred exclusively to (a) associative competition between cues trained in compound (e.g. overshadowing and blocking). Rarely cited are older experiments cast in the verbal learning tradition, now complemented with data from humans and rats in Pavlovian preparations, that demonstrate (b) competition between cues separately trained with a common outcome (i.e. proactive and retroactive interference). Similarly neglected are numerous examples of (c) competition between outcomes separately trained with a common cue within the verbal learning literature (also proactive and retroactive interference) as well as within the Pavlovian literature (i.e. counterconditioning). Recent data demonstrate (d) competition between outcomes trained in compound, thereby completing the four cells of a 2x2 matrix (competing stimuli trained together vs. trained apart and the competing stimuli being cues or outcomes) which highlights the ubiquitous nature of associative stimulus interference/competition. Most contemporary theories of acquired behavior can account for the phenomena in one or at most two cells of this matrix. Whether a common mechanism underlies the phenomena in all four cells of the matrix is currently unclear, but until such time as data preclude a common mechanism, parsimony encourages efforts to develop a model that encompasses all four cells. Here we offer a tentative model that addresses all four cells, albeit with two processes.
Extending recent work that has demonstrated that the act of remembering can result in the inhibition of related items in memory, the present research examined whether retrieval-induced forgetting could provide a mechanism for explaining misinformation effects. Specifically, the authors found in their first study that the inhibition of critical items rendered the recollection of postevent information more likely in a subsequent test of memory. The authors established in their second study that when guided retrieval practice and final recall tests were separated by 24 hr, retrieval-induced forgetting failed to emerge and misinformation effects were absent. In contrast, a delay of 24 hr between initial encoding and guided retrieval practice produced not only retrieval-induced forgetting but also misinformation effects.
Part-list cuing--the detrimental effect of the presentation of a subset of learned items on recall of the remaining items--was examined in amnesic patients and healthy control subjects. Subjects studied two types of categorized item lists: lists in which each category consisted of strong and moderate items and lists in which each category consisted of weak and moderate items. The subjects recalled a category's strong and weak items in either the presence of or absence of the moderate items serving as retrieval cues. In healthy subjects, part-list cuing impaired recall of the strong items but not of the weak items; in amnesics, part-list cuing impaired recall of both types of items. Part-list cuing is often attributed to a change in the retrieval process from a more effective one when cues are absent to a less effective one when they are present. On the basis of this view, our results indicate that part-list cuing causes a stronger retrieval inefficiency in amnesic patients than in healthy people.
When CS and US were presented on the same side of the animal a partial inhibition resulted with a pre-exposed CS as compared to a novel CS. It was suggested that this might be produced because pre-exposure had paired the CS with an incompatible response. An attempt was made to identify this with increased extensor tonus in the leg as flexion was the CR. It was hypothesized that placing the CS and US on opposite sides of the animal would result in facilitation after pre-exposure, but, again, inhibition resulted. "The implications of latent inhibition for experiments employing latent-learning and sensory-preconditioning designs were discussed." From Psyc Abstracts 36:02:2EL15L.
Over a century ago, Freud proposed that unwanted memories can be excluded from awareness, a process called repression. It is unknown, however, how repression occurs in the brain. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to identify the neural systems involved in keeping unwanted memories out of awareness. Controlling unwanted memories was associated with increased dorsolateral prefrontal activation, reduced hippocampal activation, and impaired retention of those memories. Both prefrontal cortical and right hippocampal activations predicted the magnitude of forgetting. These results confirm the existence of an active forgetting process and establish a neurobiological model for guiding inquiry into motivated forgetting.
Theories of cognition frequently assume the existence of inhibitory mechanisms that deactivate mental representations. Justifying this assumption is difficult because cognitive effects thought to reflect inhibition can often be explained without recourse to inhibitory processes. This article addresses the uncertain status of cognitive inhibitory mechanisms, focusing on their function in memory retrieval. On the basis of a novel form of forgetting reported herein, it is shown that classical associative theories of interference are insufficient as accounts of forgetting and that inhibitory processes must be at work. It is argued that inhibitory processes are used to resolve computational problems of selection common to memory retrieval and selective attention and that retrieval is best regarded as conceptually focused selective attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Critical issues in the theoretical and experimental analysis of interference processes in retention are reviewed. The evolution of classical two-factor theory is traced, and the strengths and weaknesses of the contemporary version of this p6sition are examined. Recent critiques of Current interference theories by Martin (1971a) and Greeno, James, and Da Polito (1971) are reviewed and examind. New conceptualizations of interference proposed by these authors, which place major emphasis on retrieval dependencies and on the role of encoding and retrieval processes, are considered and evaluated.
All studies dealing with the retroactive inhibition (RI) and proactive inhibition (PI) of verbal learning from 1941 to 1959 are discussed under the general headings: Degree of Acquisition, Similarity of Materials, Extrinsic Factors, Temporal Effects, and Major Theoretical Positions. Relatively little change has occurred in the theoretical approaches to RI within the last 10 years. Research interest in PI in general has been lower than that for RI, thus leaving many questions unanswered. Some 18 pressing problems are enumerated. (110-item bibliogr.)
College students rated the causal efficacy of Elements X, A, and B of food compounds AX and BX in producing the allergic reaction of a hypothetical patient. The results of a 16-day allergy test were presented to subjects in a serial, trial-by-trial manner. The response format used was a running estimate, in which subjects were asked to rate all of the three foods after each of the 16 trials. Ratings of distinctive Elements A and B diverged and ratings of common Element X decreased as the difference in the correlation of AX and BX with the occurrence and nonoccurrence of the allergic reaction increased. These human causal judgments closely correspond with stimulus selection effects observed in the conditioned responses of animals in associative learning studies. The experiment also directly demonstrated the fact that significant changes in the causal ratings of a stimulus occur on trials in which the cue is not presented. Associative theories such as that of Rescorla and Wagner (1972) predict changes in associative strength only for those stimulus elements that are presented on a particular trial. A modification of the Rescorla-Wagner model is described that correctly predicts immediate changes in the associative strengths of all relevant cues on each trial—whether presented or not.
In this article I review research and theory on the "interference paradigms" in Pavlovian learning. In these situations (e.g., extinction, counterconditioning, and latent inhibition), a conditioned stimulus (CS) is associated with different unconditioned stimuli (USs) or outcomes in different phases of the experiment; retroactive interference, proactive interference, or both are often observed. In all of the paradigms, contextual stimuli influence performance, and when information is available, so does the passage of time. Memories of both phases are retained, and performance may depend on which is retrieved. Despite the similarity of the paradigms, conditioning theories tend to explain them with separate mechanisms. They also do not provide an adequate account of the context's role, fail to predict the effects of time, and overemphasize the role of learning or storage deficits. By accepting 4 propositions about animal memory (i.e., contextual stimuli guide retrieval, time is a context, different memories are differentially dependent on context, and interference occurs at performance output), a memory retrieval framework can provide an integrated account of context, time, and performance in the various paradigms.
Current associative theories of contingency learning assume that inhibitory learning plays a part in the interference between outcomes. However, it is unclear whether this inhibitory learning results in the inhibition of the outcome representation or whether it simply counteracts previous excitatory learning so that the outcome representation is neither activated nor inhibited. Additionally, these models tend to conceptualize inhibition as a relatively transient and cue-dependent state. However, research on retrieval-induced forgetting suggests that the inhibition of representations is a real process that can be relatively independent of the retrieval cue used to access the inhibited information. Consistent with this alternative view, we found that interference between outcomes reduces the retrievability of the target outcome even when the outcome is associated with a novel (non-inhibitory) cue. This result has important theoretical implications for associative models of interference and shows that the empirical facts and theories developed in studies of retrieval-induced forgetting might be relevant in contingency learning and vice versa.
present the history of one idea in animal learning and cognition from the 1970s, a distinction R. C. Bolles made between cues that signal whether an event will occur vs those that signal when it will occur / in the author's view, the "whether-when" distinction anticipated current research on the role of context, occasion setting, and timing processes in animal learning, and it still provides a framework for understanding how they interrelate / present the original distinction, and then focus on how "whether" signals might actually operate / present a model of context in extinction / the model describes a hypothetical memory structure that results from extinction and embodies the idea that extinction is essentially a retrieval problem
topics discussed include: the whether-vs-when distinction (contextual control of extinction), relevant aspects of contextual control (the renewal effect, reinstatement), and inhibition switching in occasion setting (the feature-negative discrimination, context effects in negative occasion setting) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The past half-century has seen a dramatic shift in the biobehavioral study of learning and motivation. Fifty years ago, theory was dominated by mechanistic ideas about drive, reinforcement, and temporal contiguity. Now ethological and cognitive themes have become part of the lexicon. Robert C. Bolles was at the forefront of this emerging school of thought, advocating a new blend of psychology and ethology. The volume reflects his influential scholarship and shares the same themes that guided his thinking: behavior and function.
In this volume, Bolles's former students, contemporaries, and colleagues continue his legacy in writing upon these themes. The volume beings with a section on evolution, ontogeny, and phylogeny that emphasizes the functional aspects of behavior. The 2nd section describes the interaction of learning with regulatory physiology. Learned food preferences and aversions are the subject of the 3rd section. Next, the book pays tribute to Bolles's work on the problems of aversively motivated behavior, specifically defensive behavior. The final section of the book addresses cognitive processes in animals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
In an interference-between-cues design (IbC), the expression of a learned Cue A–Outcome 1 association has been shown to be impaired if another cue, B, is separately paired with the same outcome in a second learning phase. The present study examined whether IbC could be caused by associative mechanisms independent of causal reasoning processes. This was achieved by testing participants in two different learning situations. In the Causal Scenario condition, participants learned in a diagnostic situation in which a common cause (Outcome 1) caused two disjoint effects, namely Cues A and B. In the Non-Causal Scenario condition, the same IbC design and stimulus conditions were used. However, instructions provided no causal frame to make sense of how cues and outcomes were related. IbC was only found in the Causal Scenario condition. This result is consistent with Causal Reasoning Models of causal learning and raises important difficulties for associative explanations of IbC.
The present series of experiments explores the interaction between retroactive interference and cue competition in human contingency learning. The results of two experiments show that a cue that has been exposed to a cue competition treatment (overshadowing) loses part of its ability to retroactively interfere with responding to a different cue that was paired with the same outcome. These results pose problems for associative models of contingency learning and are also difficult to explain in terms of current theories of causal reasoning. Additionally, it is proposed that in light of the interaction between interference and cue competition, interference could be used as an indirect measure for the study of cue competition effects.
Matute and Pineño (1998a) showed evidence of interference between elementally trained cues and suggested that this effect occurs when the interfering association is more strongly activated than the target association at the time of testing. The present experiments tested directly the role of the relative activation of the associations in the effect of interference between elementally trained cues. In three human experiments we manipulated the relative activation of the interfering and target associations in three different ways: (a) introducing a retention interval between training of the interfering association and the test trial (Experiment 1); (b) training the target and the interfering associations in a single phase, instead of training them in separate phases (Experiment 2); and (c) introducing, just before testing, a novel cue which, like the retention interval used in Experiment 1, had the purpose of separating the interfering trials from the test trial (Experiment 3). All three manipulations led to an enhancement of responding to the target association at testing, suggesting that they were effective in preventing the interfering association from being the most strongly activated one at the time of testing. Taken together, these results add further evidence on how the relative activation of associations modulates interference between elementally trained cues.
Retroactive interference between cues of the same outcome (i.e., IbC) occurs when the behavioral expression of an association between a cue and an outcome (e.g., A-->O1) is reduced due to the later acquisition of an association between a different cue and the same outcome (e.g., B-->O1). Though this interference effect has been traditionally explained within an associative framework, there is recent evidence showing that IbC effect may be better understood in terms of the operation of higher order causal reasoning processes. The results from Experiments 1 and 2 showed an IbC effect in a learning task within a game scenario suggesting non-causal relationships between events. Thus, these results showed that IbC may have a diverse origin, one of them being of an associative nature.
In this article I review research and theory on the "interference paradigms" in Pavlovian learning. In these situations (e.g., extinction, counterconditioning, and latent inhibition), a conditioned stimulus (CS) is associated with different unconditioned stimuli (USs) or outcomes in different phases of the experiment; retroactive interference, proactive interference, or both are often observed. In all of the paradigms, contextual stimuli influence performance, and when information is available, so does the passage of time. Memories of both phases are retained, and performance may depend on which is retrieved. Despite the similarity of the paradigms, conditioning theories tend to explain them with separate mechanisms. They also do not provide an adequate account of the context's role, fail to predict the effects of time, and overemphasize the role of learning or storage deficits. By accepting 4 propositions about animal memory (i.e., contextual stimuli guide retrieval, time is a context, different memories are differentially dependent on context, and interference occurs at performance output), a memory retrieval framework can provide an integrated account of context, time, and performance in the various paradigms.
The role of within-compound associations in the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements was investigated in a two-stage procedure in which the subjects were asked to learn whether or not different food stimuli caused an allergic reaction in hypothetical patients. In the compound-cue stage a number of compound cues, each consisting of a competing stimulus and a target stimulus, were associated with the reaction across a series of trials, whereas in the single-cue stage the subjects had the opportunity to learn which of the competing cues, when presented alone, caused the reaction. Each target stimulus was presented with the same competing cue across all compound trials in the consistent condition, but with a different competing cue on each trial in the varied condition. In a forward procedure, in which the single-cue stage preceded compound cue training, judgements of the causal effectiveness of the target stimuli were reduced or blocked by training them in compound with a competing cue that had been previously paired with the reaction. Moreover, the magnitude of this reduction was comparable in the consistent and varied conditions. This was not true, however, when the single- and compound-cue stages were reversed in the backward procedure. Judgements for target cues compounded with competing cues that were subsequently paired with the reaction were reduced only in the consistent condition. If it is assumed that stronger associations were formed between the competing and target stimuli during the compound-cue stage in the consistent condition than in the varied condition, this pattern suggests that the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements can be mediated by the formation of within-compound associations.
Participants learned the locations of 12 stimuli that were uniquely colored but could be grouped by shape (4 circles, 4 triangles, 4 crosses). Following the study, a retrieval-practice phase required participants to recall the colors of a subset of the stimuli (i.e., 2 circles, 2 triangles) using shape and location as cues. In a final test, participants recalled the colors of all 12 stimuli. Compared with the control set of stimuli (i.e., 4 crosses), memory was facilitated for practiced items but impaired for related items, which were not practiced but shared the same shape group. Across experiments, retrieval-induced forgetting was observed for different perceptual groupings and for different cuing procedures. The effect, however, required retrieval of information during the interpolated phase. Providing extra presentations did not disrupt memory for related items.
Recent research has demonstrated that the act of remembering can prompt temporary forgetting or, more specifically, the inhibition of particular items in memory. Extending work of this kind, the present research investigated some possible boundary conditions of retrieval-induced forgetting. As expected, a critical determinant of temporary forgetting was the interval between guided retrieval practice and a final recall test. When these two phases were separated by 24 hr, retrieval-induced forgetting failed to emerge. When they occurred in the same testing session, however, retrieval practice prompted the inhibition of related items in memory (i.e., Experiment 1). A delay of 24 hr between the encoding of material and guided retrieval practice reduced but did not eliminate retrieval-induced forgetting (i.e., Experiment 2). These findings are considered in the wider context of adaptive forgetting.
Three experiments investigated memory performance in the retrieval practice paradigm (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994; Anderson & Spellman, 1995). This paradigm produces a retrieval-induced forgetting effect, wherein practicing some members of a studied category decreases the recall of other members of that category relative to a baseline. Our findings indicate that the retrieval-induced forgetting effect is replicable but that previous findings supporting an inhibitory account of this phenomenon may not be.
Using the retrieval-practice paradigm (Anderson, R. A. Bjork, & E. L. Bjork, 1994), we tested whether or not retrieval-induced forgetting could be found in item recognition tests. In Experiment 1, retrieval practice on items from semantic categories depressed recognition of nonpracticed items from the same categories. Similar results were found in Experiment 2 in a more stringent source test for practiced, nonpracticed, and new items. These results conceptually replicate those of previous retrieval-induced forgetting studies done with cued recall (e.g., Anderson et al., 1994). Our findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis that item-specific cues during retrieval will eliminate retrieval interference in the retrieval-practice paradigm (Butler, Williams, Zacks, & Maki, 2001). We discuss our results in relation to other retrieval interference and inhibition effects in recall and recognition.
In three experiments, we assessed the effects of type of relation and memory test on retrieval-induced forgetting of facts. In Experiments 1 and 2, eight sets of four shared-subject sentences were presented for study. They were constructed so that half were thematically related and half were unrelated. A retrieval practice phase required participants to recall a subset of the studied sentences. In the final test, the participants were prompted to recall all the sentences (character cued in Experiment 1 and character plus stem cued in Experiment 2). The results showed that the retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) effect was similar for thematically related and unrelated sentences, indicating that the presence of episodic relations among the sentences was sufficient to produce the effect. In Experiment 3, a recognition task was introduced and the RIF effect emerged in accuracy as well as in latency measures. The presence of this effect with item-specific cues is difficult to accommodate for noninhibitory theories of retrieval.
Recent data (T. J. Perfect, C. J. A. Moulin, M. A. Conway, & E. Perry, 2002) have suggested that retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) depends on conceptual memory because the effect is not found in perceptually driven tasks. In 3 experiments, the authors aimed to show that the presence of RIF depends on whether the procedure induces appropriate transfer between representations and competition rather than on the nature of the final test. The authors adapted the standard paradigm to introduce lexical categories (words that shared the first 2 letters) at study and practice. Direct and indirect fragment completion tests were used at retrieval. The results showed significant RIF effects in perceptually driven tasks. Furthermore, they indicated that the presence of RIF effects depended on using adequate cuing to induce competition during the retrieval practice and on the final memory test tapping the inhibited representation.
In an interference-between-cues design, the expression of a learned Cue A --> Outcome 1 association has been shown to be impaired if another cue, B, is separately paired with the same outcome in a second learning phase. In the present study, we assessed whether this interference effect is mediated by participants' previous causal knowledge. This was achieved by having participants learn in a diagnostic situation in Experiment 1a, and then by manipulating the causal order of the learning task in Experiments 1b and 2. If participants use their previous causal knowledge during the learning process, interference should only be observed in the diagnostic situation because only there we have a common cause (Outcome 1) of two disjoint effects, namely cues A and B. Consistent with this prediction, interference between cues was only found in Experiment 1a and in the diagnostic conditions of Experiments 1b and 2.
Most theoretical accounts of backward blocking place heavy stress on the necessity of the target cue having been trained in compound with the competing cue to produce a decrement in responding. Yet, other evidence suggests that a similar reduction in responding to the target cue can be observed when the outcome is later paired with a novel cue never trained in compound with the target cue (interference between cues trained apart). The present experiment shows that pairing another nonassociated cue with the same outcome may be sufficient to produce a decremental effect on the target cue, but the presence of a within-compound association between the target and the competing cue adds to this effect. Thus, both interference between cues trained apart and within-compound associations independently contribute to backward blocking.