↓ Skip to main content

Retrieval Practice Fails to Insulate Episodic Memories against Interference after Stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Retrieval Practice Fails to Insulate Episodic Memories against Interference after Stroke
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernhard Pastötter, Hanna Eberle, Ingo Aue, Karl-Heinz T. Bäuml

Abstract

Recent work in cognitive psychology showed that retrieval practice of previously studied information can insulate this information against retroactive interference from subsequently studied other information in healthy individuals. The present study examined whether this beneficial effect of interference reduction is also present in patients with stroke. Twenty-two patients with stroke, 4.6 months post injury on average, and 22 healthy controls participated in the experiment. In each of two experimental sessions, participants first studied a list of items (list 1) and then underwent a practice phase in which the list 1 items were either restudied or retrieval practiced. Participants then either studied a second list of items (list 2) or fulfilled an unrelated distractor task. Recall of the two lists' items was assessed in a final criterion test. Results showed that, in healthy controls, additional study of list 2 items impaired final recall of list 1 items in the restudy condition but not in the retrieval practice condition. In contrast, in patients with stroke, list 2 learning impaired final list 1 recall in both conditions. The results indicate that retrieval practice insulated the tested information against retroactive interference in healthy controls, but failed to do so in patients with stroke. Possible implications of the findings for the understanding of long-term memory impairment after stroke are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Researcher 2 11%
Librarian 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 7 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Computer Science 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,972,481
of 25,758,695 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#25,723
of 34,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,944
of 329,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#517
of 612 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,695 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,777 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 612 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.