Forgetting canbe perceived negatively in memory; however, some research suggests thatforgetting can aid remembering. Retrieval induced forgetting is a paradigm inthe memory theory that came to light by Anderson, Bjork & Bjork (1994)’s study.It is an idea that inhibition can help retrieve a target item from memory andwhile the inhibition may aid the retrieval of target items it may also hinderthe retrieval of non-target items.
Retrieval induced forgetting attempts to overpowerirrelevant information to retrieve a target item. Retrieval induced forgetting utilises three phases: study,retrieval practice and test. The study phase consists of participants studyinga series of category-exemplar pairs, for an example, fruit: apple; with eachseries consisting of six exemplars within eight categories.
The retrievalpractice phase follows the study phase; it entails the participants directlyretrieving half of the items from half of the categories. Retrieval is encouragedby presenting a category name along with the first two letters from theexemplar, for an example, fruit; ap___; each one will repeat a few times. Thefinal phase is the test phase; it consists of a category cued-recall test. Participants are given a cuewith each category name and are asked to free recall any exemplars they canremember within that category (Anderson, Bjork, & Bjork, 1994).
Retrieval-practice paradigm itis constructed by three types of items; Rp+ items, Rp- items and NRP items.Exemplars which are in the retrieval practice phase are referred to as Rp+items; the non-practiced exemplars are from practiced categories are Rp-; andthe non-practiced exemplars from non-practiced categories are NRP. Storm et al., (2015) states that Rp+ items are recalledbetter than RP- and NRP items.Majorityof studies investigating retrieval induced forgetting have used words to exploreand examine retrieval induced forgetting; however, various of real world tasksinvolve individuals to store a selection of objects in long-term memory (Maxcey& Woodman, 2014). A study by Maxcey & Woodman (2014), studied forgettinginduced by visual images.
The study used images of everyday objects too testforgetting induced memory. In the study phase, participants were presented witha series of real world objects which belonged to a range diverse semanticcategories for an example, cars, muffins, baskets. In the recognition practicephase the participants were required to recognise half of the objects from halfof the studied categorises by identifying two of the objects which were thefamiliar object rather than the a semantically related bait. During the testphase Maxcey & Woodman (2014), utilised the old versus new judgement totest the participants’ memory for the items shown in the study phase; in whichsome were practised in the recognition practice phase, as well as rejectionrates to novel objects not previously seen. Maxcey & Woodman (2014),utilised real world objects to explore whether this memory impairment spread torepresentations in the same semantic category as the non-practiced item orwhether the benefit of recognition practice spread to representations in thesame semantic category as the presented items. They found no evidence of theinteraction between new exemplars within the same category.