Psychological Research

, Volume 70, Issue 3, pp 193–199

Unlearning a stimulus–response association

Original Article


After a response has been associated with a particular stimulus, would this association be “unlearned” when the circumstances call for a new response to be made to that stimulus? This question was investigated in the present study with a negative priming (NP) paradigm developed by Shiu and Kornblum (1996). In the study, participants first practiced with a particular pairing of stimuli and responses in a four-choice reaction time (RT) task. Then, in the transfer phase, they switched to a different pairing of the same set of stimuli and responses. The results showed that a transfer response was slow if this response and the stimulus in the preceding trial had been paired in the training phase. Such NP effects persisted even after extended practice with the new pairing, suggesting that the “old” stimulus–response (SR) associations remain despite acquisition of some “new” associations.


  1. Anderson, M. C. (2003). Rethinking interference theory: Executive control and the mechanisms of forgetting. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 415–445.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. C., Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (1994). Remembering can cause forgetting: Retrieval dynamics in long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 1063–1087.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, M. C., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2000). Retrieval-induced forgetting: Evidence for a recall-specific mechanism. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 522–530.Google Scholar
  4. Barnes, J. M., & Underwood, B. J. (1959) “Fate” of first-list associations in transfer theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 97–105.Google Scholar
  5. Bäuml K.-H. (1996) Revisiting an old issue: Retroactive interference as a function of the degree of original and interpolated learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 380–384.Google Scholar
  6. Blaxton T. A. (1992). Dissociations among memory measures in memory impaired subjects: Evidence for a processing account of memory. Memory & Cognition, 20, 549–562.Google Scholar
  7. Bower, G. H., Thompson-Schill, S., & Tulving, E. (1994). Reducing retroactive interference: An interference analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 51–66.Google Scholar
  8. Graf, P., Squire, L., Mander, G. (1984). The information that amnesic patients do not forget. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 164–178.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, S. K., Anderson, M. C. (2004). The role of inhibitory control in forgetting semantic knowledge. Psychological Science, 15, 448–453.Google Scholar
  10. Kane, M. J., May, C. P., Hasher, L., Rahhal, T., & Stolzfus, E. R. (1997). Dual mechanisms of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 632–650.Google Scholar
  11. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility—a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.Google Scholar
  12. Light, L. L., & Albertson, S. A. (1989). Direct and indirect tests of memory for category exemplars in young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 4, 487–492.Google Scholar
  13. MacDonald, P. A., & Joordens, S. (2000). Investigation of a memory-based account of negative priming: Support for selection-feature mismatch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1478–1496.Google Scholar
  14. MacLeod, C. M., (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychological Review,109, 163–203.Google Scholar
  15. McGeoch, J. A. (1932). Forgetting and the law of disuse. Psychological Review, 39, 352–370.Google Scholar
  16. McGovern, J. B. (1964). Extinction of associations in four transfer paradigms. Psychological Monographs, 78Google Scholar
  17. Melton, A. W., & Irwin, J. M. (1940). The influence of degree of interpolated learning on retroactive inhibition and the overt transfer of specific responses. American Journal of Psychology, 53, 173–203.Google Scholar
  18. Neill, W. T. (1977). Inhibitory and facilitatory processes in selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 444–450.Google Scholar
  19. Postman, L. (1962). Transfer of training as a function of experimental paradigm and degree of first-list learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1, 109–118.Google Scholar
  20. Postman, L., Keppel, G. (1967). Retroactive inhibition in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 203–211.Google Scholar
  21. Reisberg, D., Baron, J., & Kemler, D. G. (1980). Overcoming Stroop interference: The effects of practice on distractor potency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 140–150.Google Scholar
  22. Roediger, H. L. III. (1974). Inhibiting effects of recall. Memory & Cognition, 2, 261–269.Google Scholar
  23. Roediger, H. L. III, & McDermott, K. B. (1993). Implicit memory in normal human subjects. In Boller F., Grafman J. (Eds.) Handbook of neuropsychology (pp. 63–131). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  24. Schacter D. L. (1987). Implicit memory history and current status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 13, 501–518.Google Scholar
  25. Shimamura, A. P. (1986). Priming effects in amnesia: Evidence for a dissociable memory function. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A, 619–644.Google Scholar
  26. Shiu, L. P., & Kornblum, S. (1996). Negative priming and stimulus-response compatibility. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 510–514.Google Scholar
  27. Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology,54A, 321–343.Google Scholar
  28. Tipper, S. P., & Cranston, M. (1985). Selective attention and priming: Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of ignored primes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 591–611.Google Scholar
  29. Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 381–391.Google Scholar
  30. Underwood, B. J., Runquist, W. N., Schulz, R. W. (1959). Response learning in paired-associate lists as a function of intralist similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 70–78.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyChinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations