When does intent matter for memory? Bridging perspectives with Craik.

In his commentary, Craik (see record 2023-42323-002) argued that while intentional remembering might be effective for some populations and memory tasks, these are the exception, and that intent will not benefit memory if incidental encoding induces optimal processing. While we agree on many points, we maintain that in most situations the processes induced by the intention to remember are more effective than those induced by deep semantic processing alone. We show that effects of intent appear with a variety of tasks such as free recall, cued recall, source memory, item recognition, in both mixed and pure lists, and when studying individual words, word pairs, or word-image associations. Thus, the beneficial effects of intent generalize over tasks, list-compositions, and study materials. There are also little individual differences in the effect of intent in healthy young adults-most participants (86% out of 336 participants over six experiments) show a beneficial effect. We review evidence that the intent to remember strengthens item-context bindings in episodic memory, but that such effects could be masked and not measurable in subsequent memory tests, unless intrusions are taken into account. We agree that in principle incidental encoding could induce optimal processing, but we do not find the existing evidence convincing. We provide additional novel data that directly addresses Craik's (2023) concerns and we propose ways to further investigate how intention enhances memory. We conclude with a joint statement, coauthored by Craik and ourselves, that synthesizes our converging perspectives and current understanding of the impact of intent on memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).