Miller R R, Kasprow W J, Schachtman T R
Am J Psychol. 1986 Summer;99(2):145-218.
A memory model that differentiates between active traces (ongoing electrochemical neural transmission) and passive traces (chemical/structural modification of neurons) is briefly outlined. Evidence suggests that new information is initially encoded as a passive representation within a fraction of a second, leaving little opportunity for retroactive interference with storage processes. Instead, it appears that retroactive interference results from disruption of post-acquisition processing which is necessary for subsequent retrieval. Using this hybrid cognitive-physiological framework, we examine possible sources of associative performance deficits. A distinction is made between similarity interference (arising from the content similarity of the target and interfering traces) and processing interference (arising from the competition between the two traces for use of a limited capacity processor). Both types of interference can act proactively or retroactively, and the similarity-processing and proactive-retroactive dimensions are viewed as orthogonal to the question of whether information is permanently lost or merely subject to a reversible retrieval failure. When reminder techniques (pretest cuing) are used, numerous instances of memory failure commonly identified as "acquisition failures" are found to be reversible without the occurrence of relevant new learning. This literature review constitutes the greater part of the paper. It is concluded that many memory failures are due at least in part to retrieval failure. Consideration of potential retrieval processes in light of the studies that are reviewed argues for the expansion of the initial active-passive trace distinction to three types of traces. In addition to active traces, these include two distinct types of passive traces, i.e., a small content-addressable reference catalog with innately defined dimensions that is used to locate more detailed passive traces, and a large capacity store of detailed passive traces that is location-addressable. The latter type of passive trace presumably is laid down almost instantaneously as events occur, i.e., in real time, whereas the reference catalog type of passive trace, which is used to address the detailed traces, is established somewhat after the sequence of events is complete. Hence, the reference catalog trace is more vulnerable and results in retrieval failure when it is disrupted.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
本文简要概述了一种记忆模型，该模型区分了活跃痕迹（正在进行的电化学神经传递）和被动痕迹（神经元的化学/结构修饰）。有证据表明，新信息最初在几分之一秒内被编码为被动表征，几乎没有机会对存储过程产生追溯干扰。相反，追溯干扰似乎是由于获取后处理的中断导致的，而获取后处理对于后续检索是必要的。利用这种混合的认知-生理框架，我们研究了联想性能缺陷的可能来源。区分了相似性干扰（由目标痕迹和干扰痕迹的内容相似性引起）和处理干扰（由两种痕迹竞争使用有限容量处理器引起）。这两种干扰都可以主动或追溯地起作用，并且相似性-处理维度和主动-追溯维度被视为与信息是永久丢失还是仅仅遭受可逆检索失败的问题正交。当使用提醒技术（预测试提示）时，许多通常被识别为“获取失败”的记忆失败实例被发现是可逆的，而无需发生相关的新学习。这篇文献综述构成了论文的大部分内容。得出的结论是，许多记忆失败至少部分是由于检索失败。根据所综述的研究对潜在检索过程的考虑，主张将最初的活跃-被动痕迹区分扩展为三种痕迹类型。除了活跃痕迹之外，还包括两种不同类型的被动痕迹，即一个具有先天定义维度的小内容可寻址参考目录，用于定位更详细的被动痕迹，以及一个大容量的详细被动痕迹存储库，该存储库是位置可寻址的。后一种类型的被动痕迹大概在事件发生时几乎立即形成，即实时形成，而用于寻址详细痕迹的参考目录类型的被动痕迹在事件序列完成后一段时间才建立。因此，参考目录痕迹更易受影响，当它被破坏时会导致检索失败。（摘要截断于400字）
