Wessel Ineke, Lehmann Robyn, Wiechert Sera
Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Memory. 2024 Oct 9:1-11. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2024.2412025.
The Think/No-Think (TNT) task examines the effects of attempts at suppressing particular stimuli. First, participants learn cue-target word pairs. Subsequently, they either recall (Think trials) or avoid thinking about targets whatsoever (No-Think trials) in response to cues. The critical finding is that No-Think targets are recalled less well than Baseline items (i.e., Suppression-Induced Forgetting; SIF). Wiechert et al.'s [(2023). Suppression-induced forgetting: A pre-registered replication of the think/no-think paradigm. , 31(7), 989-1002] null-findings in Prolific workers using online video calls casted doubts on the robustness of the effect. We adapted their procedure in two replication studies testing undergraduate psychology students. The first study ( = 54) adapted Wiechert's procedure to an in-person laboratory setting using Same Probe (SP) recall and found evidence for SIF. Hypothesizing that an online test should yield SIF in undergraduates as well, study 2 replicated both the in-person laboratory ( = 54) and online ( = 54) procedures. The results suggested evidence for SIF in the in-lab setting, yet no evidence was observed in the online setting. As exploratory Bayesian analyses showed conclusive evidence for a null effect, this pattern of results does not imply that the in-lab and online settings actually differed. Yet, overall, the results cast doubts on the generalisability of the SIF-effect .
思维/非思维(TNT)任务考察了抑制特定刺激的尝试所产生的影响。首先,参与者学习线索-目标词对。随后,他们根据线索要么回忆(思维试验),要么完全避免思考目标(非思维试验)。关键发现是,非思维目标的回忆效果不如基线项目(即抑制性遗忘;SIF)。维歇特等人[(2023年)。抑制性遗忘:思维/非思维范式的预注册复制。,31(7),989 - 1002]在使用在线视频通话的Prolific工作人员中的零结果对该效应的稳健性提出了质疑。我们在两项针对本科心理学学生的复制研究中采用了他们的程序。第一项研究(n = 54)将维歇特的程序改编为使用相同探针(SP)回忆的面对面实验室设置,并发现了SIF的证据。假设在线测试在本科生中也会产生SIF,研究2重复了面对面实验室(n = 54)和在线(n = 54)程序。结果表明在实验室环境中有SIF的证据,但在在线环境中未观察到证据。由于探索性贝叶斯分析显示了零效应的确凿证据,这种结果模式并不意味着实验室和在线环境实际上存在差异。然而,总体而言,结果对SIF效应的普遍性提出了质疑。