Skip to main content
Log in

Testing can counteract proactive interference by integrating competing information

  • Published:
Memory & Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Testing initially learned information before presenting new information has been shown to counteract the deleterious effects of proactive interference by segregating competing sources of information. The present experiments were conducted to demonstrate that testing can also have its effects in part by integrating competing information. Variations of classic A–B, A–D paired-associate learning paradigms were employed that included two lists of word pairs and a cued-recall test. Repeated pairs appeared in both lists (A–B, A–B), control pairs appeared in List 2 only (A–B, C–D), and changed pairs appeared with the same cue in both lists but with different responses (A–B, A–D). The critical manipulation was whether pairs were tested or restudied in an interpolated phase that occurred between Lists 1 and 2. On a final cued-recall test, participants recalled List 2 responses and then indicated when they recollected that responses had earlier changed between lists. The change recollection measure indexed the extent to which competing responses were integrated during List 2. Change was recollected more often for tested than for restudied pairs. Proactive facilitation was obtained in cued recall when change was recollected, whereas proactive interference was obtained when change was not recollected. These results provide evidence that testing counteracted proactive interference in part by making List 1 responses more accessible during List 2, thus promoting integration and increasing later recollection of change. These results have theoretical implications because they show that testing can counteract proactive interference by integrating or segregating competing information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, M. C., & McCulloch, K. C. (1999). Integration as a general boundary condition on retrieval-induced forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 608–629. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.3.608

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. C., & Neely, J. H. (1996). Interference and inhibition in memory retrieval. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Memory (Handbook of Perception and Cognition) (2nd ed., pp. 237–313). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, J. M., & Underwood, B. J. (1959). “Fate” of first-list associations in transfer theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 97–105. doi:10.1037/h0047507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. C. (2010). Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1118–1133. doi:10.1037/a0019902

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2008). Correcting a metacognitive error: Feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 918–928. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.918

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2008). Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 604–616. doi:10.3758/MC.36.3.604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. K. (2012). Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 279–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J. C. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2006). Retrieval induced facilitation: Initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 553–571. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowder, R. G. (1976). Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darley, C. F., & Murdock, B. B., Jr. (1971). Effects of prior free recall testing on final recall and recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 91, 66–73. doi:10.1037/h0031836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hintzman, D. L. (2010). How does repetition affect memory? Evidence from judgments of recency. Memory & Cognition, 38, 102–115. doi:10.3758/MC.38.1.102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L. (1974). The role of mental contiguity in memory: Registration and retrieval effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 483–496. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80001-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 513–541. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(91)90025-F

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L. (1999). Ironic effects of repetition: Measuring age-related differences in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 3–22. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.1.3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Wahlheim, C. N. (2013). On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall. Memory & Cognition, 41, 625–637. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0298-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Wahlheim, C. N. (2014). Memory consequences of looking back: Noticing and recollecting change. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Coane, J. H. (2010). Test-enhanced learning of natural concepts: Effects on recognition memory, classification, and metacognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1441–1451.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2013). The role of detection and recollection of change in list discrimination. Memory & Cognition, 41, 638–649. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0313-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, Y., & Huber, D. E. (2008). Context retrieval and context change in free recall: Recalling from long-term memory drives list isolation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 112–127. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.112

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. H. K., McDaniel, M. A., & Pashler, H. (2011). Effects of testing on learning functions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 998–1005. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0113-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 704–719. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Fisher, R. P. (1991). Tests and test feedback as learning sources. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 192–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, S. M., Arnold, K. M., Gilmore, A. W., & McDermott, K. B. (2013). Neural signatures of test-potentiated learning in parietal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 11754–11762.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms [Database]. Retrieved from http://w3.usf.edu/FreeAssociation/

  • Nunes, L. D., & Weinstein, Y. (2012). Testing improves true recall and protects against the build-up of proactive interference without increasing false recall. Memory, 20, 138–154.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Otero, J., & Kintsch, W. (1992). Failures to detect contradictions in a text: What readers believe versus what they read. Psychological Science, 3, 229–235. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00034.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastötter, B., Schicker, S., Niedernhuber, J., & Bäuml, K.-H. T. (2011). Retrieval during learning facilitates subsequent memory encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 287–297. doi:10.1037/a0021801

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Postman, L., & Underwood, B. J. (1973). Critical issues in interference theory. Memory & Cognition, 1, 19–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, A. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Jacoby, L. L. (2014). Memory for flip-flopping: Detection and recollection of political contradictions. Memory & Cognition. doi:10.3758/s13421-014-0419-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Radvansky, G. A., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Mental models and the fan effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 940–953. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.17.5.940

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III, & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 20–27. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006a). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006b). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Szpunar, K. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2008). Testing during study insulates against the buildup of proactive interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1392–1399. doi:10.1037/a0013082

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E., & Watkins, M. J. (1974). On negative transfer: Effects of testing one list on the recall of another. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 181–193. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80043-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, O. J., & Cotton, B. (1980). A study-phase retrieval model of temporal coding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 705–716. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.6.6.705

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J., & Ekstrand, B. R. (1967). Studies of distributed practice: XXIV. Differentiation and proactive inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 574–580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wahlheim, C. N. (2014). Proactive effects of memory in young and older adults: The role of change recollection. Memory & Cognition, 42, 950–964. doi:10.3758/s13421-014-0411-4

  • Wahlheim, C. N., & Jacoby, L. L. (2013). Remembering change: The critical role of recursive remindings in proactive effects of memory. Memory & Cognition, 41, 1–15. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0246-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahlheim, C. N., Maddox, G. B., & Jacoby, L. L. (2014). The role of reminding in the effects of spaced repetitions on cued recall: Sufficient but not necessary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 94–105. doi:10.1037/a0034055

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101, 34–52. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, Y., Gilmore, A. W., Szpunar, K. K., & McDermott, K. B. (2014). The role of test expectancy in the build-up of proactive interference in long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1039–1048. doi:10.1037/a0036164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, E., & Soloway, R. M. (1985). Reminding as a basis for temporal judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 262–271. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.2.262

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wissman, K. T., Rawson, K. A., & Pyc, M. A. (2011). The interim test effect: Testing prior material can facilitate the learning of new material. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1140–1147. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0140-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author Note

This research was supported by a Collaborative Activity Award from the James S. McDonnell Foundation awarded to Larry Jacoby, and by Grant No. 5T32AG000030-38 from the National Institute on Aging. Thanks to Larry Jacoby for his substantial contributions to the ideas presented here, Ashley Bartels for her assistance with manuscript preparation and data collection, and Heather Bartels and Kara Golebiowski for their assistance with data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher N. Wahlheim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wahlheim, C.N. Testing can counteract proactive interference by integrating competing information. Mem Cogn 43, 27–38 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0455-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0455-5

Keywords

Navigation