↓ Skip to main content

Can We Retrieve the Information Which Was Intentionally Forgotten? Electrophysiological Correlates of Strategic Retrieval in Directed Forgetting

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Can We Retrieve the Information Which Was Intentionally Forgotten? Electrophysiological Correlates of Strategic Retrieval in Directed Forgetting
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01480
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xinrui Mao, Mengxi Tian, Yi Liu, Bingcan Li, Yan Jin, Yanhong Wu, Chunyan Guo

Abstract

Retrieval inhibition hypothesis of directed forgetting effects assumed TBF (to-be-forgotten) items were not retrieved intentionally, while selective rehearsal hypothesis assumed the memory representation of retrieved TBF (to-be-forgotten) items was weaker than TBR (to-be-remembered) items. Previous studies indicated that directed forgetting effects of item-cueing method resulted from selective rehearsal at encoding, but the mechanism of retrieval inhibition that affected directed forgetting of TBF (to-be-forgotten) items was not clear. Strategic retrieval is a control process allowing the selective retrieval of target information, which includes retrieval orientation and strategic recollection. Retrieval orientation via the comparison of tasks refers to the specific form of processing resulted by retrieval efforts. Strategic recollection is the type of strategies to recollect studied items for the retrieval success of targets. Using a "directed forgetting" paradigm combined with a memory exclusion task, our investigation of strategic retrieval in directed forgetting assisted to explore how retrieval inhibition played a role on directed forgetting effects. When TBF items were targeted, retrieval orientation showed more positive ERPs to new items, indicating that TBF items demanded more retrieval efforts. The results of strategic recollection indicated that: (a) when TBR items were retrieval targets, late parietal old/new effects were only evoked by TBR items but not TBF items, indicating the retrieval inhibition of TBF items; (b) when TBF items were retrieval targets, the late parietal old/new effect were evoked by both TBR items and TBF items, indicating that strategic retrieval could overcome retrieval inhibition of TBF items. These findings suggested the modulation of strategic retrieval on retrieval inhibition of directed forgetting, supporting that directed forgetting effects were not only caused by selective rehearsal, but also retrieval inhibition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 54%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#18,567,744
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,454
of 30,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,237
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#493
of 594 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 315,948 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 594 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.