Riccio D C, Richardson R, Ebner D L
Department of Psychology, Kent State University, Ohio 44242, USA.
Psychol Bull. 1999 Mar;125(2):187-9. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.187.
According to the contextual change theory of memory loss, spontaneous forgetting reflects a retrieval impairment due to subtle and unprogrammed shifts in environmental cues over a retention interval. However, Riccio, Richardson, and Ebner (1984) noted an apparent paradox in this model; specifically, laboratory studies inducing explicit shifts in contextual cues found less disruption of performance as retention intervals increased. Bouton, Nelson, and Rosas (1999) critiqued several of the claims made by Riccio et al. and concluded that the contextual cue theory is still a valid account of spontaneous forgetting. In this comment, the authors address the 3 major criticisms offered by Bouton et al., point out an inconsistency in their argument, and conclude that the original paradox still poses problems for the contextual change theory of forgetting.
根据记忆丧失的情境变化理论,自发遗忘反映了由于在保持间隔期间环境线索的细微且未编程的变化而导致的提取障碍。然而,里乔、理查森和埃布纳(1984年)指出了该模型中一个明显的悖论;具体而言,在实验室研究中,诱导情境线索发生明确变化时,随着保持间隔的增加,发现行为表现受到的干扰较小。布顿、尼尔森和罗萨斯(1999年)对里乔等人提出的几项主张进行了批判,并得出结论认为情境线索理论仍然是对自发遗忘的有效解释。在这篇评论中,作者回应了布顿等人提出的三大批评,指出了他们论点中的一个不一致之处,并得出结论认为最初的悖论仍然给遗忘的情境变化理论带来问题。