Sometimes we're more likely to remember words that we were instructed to forget, while being more likely to forget words that we were instructed to remember. How can this be?
Fifty-six students were presented with four words from two different categories, (e.g. flower: lily; country: Russia; flower: tulip; country: Sweden). Crucially, half the students were told to remember these words, whereas the other students were told to forget them.
Next the students were asked to generate four novel examples from one of the previous categories (e.g. Flowers). To help, they were given the first two letters of a new example (e.g. Pa_ for pansy).
This whole process was repeated several times with different starting word pairings and categories. After a five-minute irrelevant distractor task, there was a final big recall test, in which the students were asked to recall as many of the original word pairings as possible. As you'd expect, overall, the students told to remember the original word pairings, did indeed remember more of them. But there is a twist.
For the students told to remember the original word pairings, generating novel word examples for a given category caused them to forget original words belonging to that same category. (They remembered 16 per cent fewer original words from categories for which new examples had to be generated). By contrast, the students told to forget the original words were not affected in this way.
The net result is that compared to the students told to remember, the students told to forget the initial word pairings actually remembered slightly more of the original words from categories for which new examples had to be generated.
A possible explanation is the students told to remember the original words, had mentally to inhibit these words when it came to generating fresh examples for a given category. This inhibition process affected their memory for these original words. By contrast, it seems students told to forget the original words didn't need to inhibit them during the word generation task – in a sense the original words had been protected from the inhibition process, making them more likely to be remembered later.
“Ironically, therefore, whereas the intention to remember may lead one to forget, the intention to forget, may lead one to remember,” the researchers said.
_________________________________
Storm, B.C., Bjork, E.L. &
Bjork, R.A. (2007).
When intended remembering leads to unintended forgetting. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 909-915.
Link to new research taking a biological approach to this idea.
You have read this article Cognition /
Memory
with the title June 2007. You can bookmark this page URL https://psychiatryfun.blogspot.com/2007/06/how-remembering-can-lead-to-forgetting.html. Thanks!
Hello Digest Readers. I'm going on holiday, so there will be a break in posting to the blog. Normal service will resume in about two and a half weeks.
Would you say a sportswoman is more or less likely than usual to win her next game if she won her last game? What about if she had won her last two games? If, like most people, you think her chances of future success are greater following a series of wins, you're demonstrating your belief in 'psychological momentum' – the idea of being on a roll, or on song. Now Keith Markman and colleagues have shown the way we think about psychological momentum is akin to the way we think about the physical momentum of objects.
Stigma and mental illness (International Review of Psychiatry).
For when you've had enough of journal articles:
Studies that didn't make the final cut this fortnight:
Sometimes we're more likely to remember words that we were instructed to forget, while being more likely to forget words that we were instructed to remember. How can this be?
It's well established that talking on a mobile phone while driving is distracting and dangerous. But what about talking on a mobile phone while walking? After all, pedestrians can often be seen marching about town, phone clutched to their ear, blissfully disengaged from their surroundings. According to Jack Nasar and colleagues, this mobile phone induced disengagement can put pedestrians at risk when they're crossing the road, in a way that other devices, such as i-pods, do not.
When it comes to psychologists identifying people's earliest memories, the approach they take matters a lot. That's according to New Zealand psychologists Fiona Jack and Harlene Hayne who say their finding helps explain some of the mixed opinion in this area of study.
We've all run upstairs to get something, only to arrive and realise we've forgotten what we went up there for. But just how common are these moments of absent-mindedness? According to a new study by Icelandic psychologists, healthy people commit an average of 6.4 such lapses or “action slips” a week.
The skies are crowded with planes, our sclerotic roads clogged with millions of cars – when will we wake up to the urgency of climate change?
Do you eat a piece of fruit on the way to work or school everyday without even thinking about it? Perhaps that is the full extent of your fruit eating? If so you're just the kind of person who won't be helped by public health information campaigns seeking to increase our fruit eating. That's according to a new study that suggests people who already eat fruit (though not enough) habitually are more likely to benefit from interventions that make fruit more easily available.
Nick Yee of Stanford University, with the fourth article in our series of guest features.
Infant observation: contributions from Italy (Infant Observation).
Do teenage friends share similar body image and eating problems?
Times newspaper special on depression.
Stop slouching! Sitting with an upright posture can have a positive effect on your mood and improve your performance at a maths test, but only if you are male. That's the implication of a study by Tomi-Ann Roberts and Yousef Arefi-Afshar at Colorado College in America.
If I presented you with a silent video of someone speaking – do you think that you'd be able to tell if they switched from English to French? Remarkably, between the ages of four and six months, babies can tell. However, it's a skill they lose by the age of eight months, unless they are raised in a bilingual environment.
