Mulligan Neil W, Buchin Zachary L, West John T
Department of Psychology and Neuroscience.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2022 Dec;48(12):1905-1922. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001097. Epub 2021 Oct 28.
Memory retrieval affects subsequent memory in ways both positive (e.g., the testing effect) and negative (e.g., retrieval-induced forgetting, RIF). The changes to memory that retrieval produces can be thought of as the encoding consequences of retrieval, examined here with respect to attention. In three experiments, participants first studied category-example word pairs, and then practiced retrieval for half the pairs from one-third of the categories (the R + items) and restudied half the pairs from a different third of the categories (the S + items), while the final third of the categories were in the nonpracticed control condition (the Np items). This was followed in turn by a final test over all categories and examples, including the unpracticed examples from the retrieval-practice and restudied categories (the R- and S- items, respectively). The middle phase (of retrieval practice and restudy) was conducted under full attention (FA) or under divided attention (DA) in which participants also performed a distracting secondary task. DA had little effect on final recall in the retrieval practice (R +) condition but significantly reduced final recall of the restudied (S +) items, producing a net increase in the testing effect relative to the FA condition. RIF (measured as the difference between the R- and Np items) was substantial in the FA condition but was eliminated by DA. This occurred because the final recall of R- items significantly increased in the DA compared to FA condition, a highly unusual result in which distraction actually improved an aspect of memory performance. In sum, DA during retrieval practice dissociated the positive and negative effects of retrieval on subsequent memory, increasing the positive effect, embodied by the testing effect, but decreasing the negative effect, embodied by RIF. The theoretical implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
记忆提取对后续记忆的影响既有积极的一面（如测试效应），也有消极的一面（如提取诱发遗忘，RIF）。提取所产生的记忆变化可被视为提取的编码结果，本文将从注意力的角度对此进行研究。在三个实验中，参与者首先学习类别-示例单词对，然后对三分之一类别的一半对进行提取练习（R+项目），对另一不同三分之一类别的一半对进行重新学习（S+项目），而最后三分之一类别的处于未练习的控制条件（Np项目）。接下来依次对所有类别和示例进行最终测试，包括来自提取练习和重新学习类别的未练习示例（分别为R-和S-项目）。中间阶段（提取练习和重新学习阶段）在全神贯注（FA）或注意力分散（DA）的条件下进行，在注意力分散条件下，参与者还需执行一项干扰性的次要任务。注意力分散对提取练习（R+）条件下的最终回忆影响不大，但显著降低了重新学习（S+）项目的最终回忆，相对于全神贯注条件，产生了测试效应的净增加。在全神贯注条件下，提取诱发遗忘（以R-和Np项目之间的差异衡量）很显著，但在注意力分散条件下被消除了。之所以会这样，是因为与全神贯注条件相比，在注意力分散条件下，R-项目的最终回忆显著增加，这是一个非常不寻常的结果，即分心实际上改善了记忆表现的一个方面。总之，提取练习期间的注意力分散分离了提取对后续记忆的积极和消极影响，增加了以测试效应体现的积极影响，但减少了以提取诱发遗忘体现的消极影响。本文讨论了其理论意义。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2023美国心理学会，保留所有权利）
