@article{TempelAslanFrings2016, author = {Tempel, Tobias and Aslan, Alp and Frings, Christian}, title = {Competition dependence of retrieval-induced forgetting in motor memory}, series = {Memory \& Cognition volume}, volume = {44}, journal = {Memory \& Cognition volume}, number = {4}, pages = {671 -- 680}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In two experiments, we examined the competition dependence of retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) in motor memory. Participants learned sequential finger movements as responses to letter stimuli. The learning phase comprised two parts. In both parts, half of the motor sequences were to be executed at one of two locations (the left or right side of a keyboard) by pressing the corresponding response keys. Retrieval practice of half of the motor sequences at one location induced forgetting of the nonpracticed motor sequences at that location. However, RIF was prevented in Experiment 1 when retrieval practice took place before the nonpracticed items had even been encoded. In Experiment 2, RIF was prevented by intentionally forgetting the nonpracticed motor sequences prior to retrieval practice. These results suggest that precluding competition by related items during retrieval practice precluded them from being affected by RIF. The present findings support an inhibitory account and speak against the alternative assumptions that associative blocking or a mental context change causes RIF.}, language = {en} } @incollection{BaeumlAslanAbel2017, author = {B{\"a}uml, Karl-Heinz T. and Aslan, Alp and Abel, Magdalena}, title = {Chapter Five - The Two Faces of Selective Memory Retrieval—Cognitive, Developmental, and Social Processes}, series = {Psychology of Learning and Motivation}, booktitle = {Psychology of Learning and Motivation}, editor = {Ross, Brian H.}, publisher = {Academic Press}, address = {London, Oxford, Boston, New York, San Diego}, publisher = {Technische Hochschule Rosenheim}, pages = {167 -- 209}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Numerous studies from the past five decades have shown that selective retrieval of some studied items can impair recall of other items. This chapter reviews more recent work, in which it is demonstrated that selective memory retrieval has two faces and that it can both impair and improve recall of other items. In this recent work, participants' access to study context during selective retrieval was experimentally manipulated and it was examined whether such manipulation influences the effects of selective retrieval. Access to study context was manipulated using listwise directed forgetting, context-dependent forgetting and time-dependent forgetting. The results consistently showed that selective retrieval impairs recall of other memories if access to study context during retrieval is largely maintained, but that selective retrieval can improve recall if study context access is impaired. The findings are explained by a two-factor account, which claims that, in general, selective retrieval does not only trigger inhibition and blocking but also triggers context reactivation processes. The proposal is that primarily inhibition and blocking operate when study context access during selective retrieval is largely maintained, whereas primarily context reactivation processes operate when study context access is impaired. Current findings on the two faces of selective retrieval are well consistent with this theoretical view.}, language = {en} }