Intentional forgetting of actions: Comparison of list-method and item-method directed forgetting

2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lili Sahakyan ◽  
Nathaniel L. Foster
Author(s):  
Lili Sahakyan ◽  
Nathaniel L. Foster

Theories of metamemory are primarily concerned with mechanisms that improve memory; they do not account for processes that reduce accessibility of unwanted information, as in intentional forgetting. The chapter proposes that introducing separate terms like metaremembering and metaforgetting highlights the distinction between remembering and forgetting as different dimensions of memory. It reviews empirical evidence from directed forgetting studies. List-method directed forgetting depends on engaging active forgetting strategies, indicating the importance of control in successful intentional forgetting. The decision to engage in forgetting strategies, in turn, is affected by memory monitoring as evidenced through preexisting confidence about one’s own memory ability, as well as judgments of learning solicited during the task. In item-method directed forgetting, participants control rehearsal by selectively retrieving earlier items believed to be more memorable, even when such beliefs are illusory. The chapter discusses the role of metacognitive monitoring and control in these active forms of forgetting.


2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (5) ◽  
pp. 1070-1080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Marevic ◽  
Nina R Arnold ◽  
Jan Rummel

Intentional forgetting of information that has recently been encoded is regarded an active and adaptive process and is widely studied using the item-method or the list-method directed forgetting (DF) paradigm. In the present research, we tested whether inter-individual differences in working-memory capacity (WMC), that have been identified as a relevant predictor of DF within the list method, are also related to stronger DF effects within the item method. Furthermore, we investigated relationships between WMC and item-method DF at different processing stages by applying the multinomial storage–retrieval model hierarchically to our data. Results showed that individuals with high WMC are better able to store to-be-remembered information than individuals with low WMC, whereas WMC was not related to retrieval of to-be-remembered information or to either storage or retrieval of to-be-forgotten information. Implications for theoretical accounts of item-method DF are discussed.


2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lili Sahakyan ◽  
Emily R. Waldum ◽  
Aaron S. Benjamin

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Destiny Shellhammer ◽  
William Marks ◽  
Xiangen Hu ◽  
Jennifer Crain

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Klein ◽  
Amanda Muruato ◽  
Christopher Fowler

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 464-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Sahakyan ◽  
E. R. Waldum ◽  
A. S. Benjamin ◽  
S. P. Bickett

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document