Intentional forgetting of unwanted items is effortful, yet directed forgetting seems to improve when a secondary task is performed. According to the cognitive load hypothesis of directed forgetting, allocating attentional resources to another task improves forgetting by restricting unwanted encoding of to-be-forgotten (TBF) items. Alternatively, it might be that anything that makes studying more difficult will encourage greater effort to perform the task well and therefore lead to improved intentional forgetting. To assess these proposals we imposed data-processing limitations on study words in an item-method directed forgetting paradigm. Across six experiments, the perceptual quality of study words was manipulated by varying: (1) the duration of study word presentation (Experiments 1–4); (2) the contrast of the displayed word against its visual background (Experiment 5); or (3) the amount of visual background noise on which the word was presented (Experiment 6). In Experiments 4–6, a lexical decision task corroborated the difficulty of study word processing. Despite evidence that relatively low visual contrast and relatively high visual background noise, in particular, create challenging conditions, we found no evidence that perceptual quality impacts the magnitude of the directed forgetting effect. This work suggests that data limitations have no discernible effect on forgetting and corroborate that only attentional resource limitations improve directed forgetting.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Lavie’s experimental approach to demonstrate the attentional effects of perceptual load has come under scrutiny (e.g., Benoni & Tsal, 2010; Tsal & Benoni, 2010; Wilson, Muroi, & MacLeod, 2011). In a typical perceptual load manipulation (e.g., Lavie & de Fockert, 2003; Lavie, 2005), a target letter is presented amongst perceptually similar (and varied) neutral distractors. Perceptual load is manipulated by varying the set size of the search array (i.e., greater perceptual load implies more distractor items in the search array). A larger (and quite salient) distractor is presented just next to the search array and is either the same (congruent) or different (incongruent) letter as the target. The congruency difference measures interference. Interference is often smaller as perceptual load increases. Proponents of the dilution account suggest that the reduction of interference from the larger (salient) distractor letter is not due to perceptual load per se, but rather due to the dilution of the interference effect from the salient distractor by the neutral distractors in the search array. Adding to the issue, others (e.g., Gaspelin, Ruthruff, & Jung, 2014) have argued that some of the effects attributed to load or dilution may be due to the improper allocation of attention to the salient distractor (attentional “slippage”). Load theory, dilution, and “slippage” accounts are laden with processing assumptions that ought not to be disregarded (see, e.g., Cave & Chen, 2016; Murphy, Groeger, & Greene, 2016). These methodological considerations are important and ultimately will propel the field toward a better understanding of the fundamental mechanisms of attention. Although this is an important debate, it is outside the scope of the current paper as it is difficult to imagine how some of the nuances explicitly apply to directed forgetting. Accordingly, we will focus on the theoretical aspects of load theory rather than the empirical foundations.
A similar finding was reported by Woodward, Bjork, and Jongeward (1973), but is more difficult to interpret because recognition performance was conditionalized on prior recall of each TBR and TBF word.
While false alarm rates are sometimes used in an attempt to correct for guessing by subtracting them from the hit rates, there was a common foil false alarm rate across all levels of the independent variables; this is typical of a directed forgetting task. Because the calculation of a directed forgetting effect across conditions is unchanged by the subtraction of the same false alarm rate from both TBR and TBF item recognition, we have elected to report "uncorrected" hit rates.
This could also account for why the magnitude of the item-method directed forgetting effect does not always vary with overall item memorability in a between-subjects manipulation of stimulus type (e.g., Basden & Basden, 1996) but does in a mixed-block within-subjects manipulation (Quinlan, Taylor, & Fawcett, 2010).
Prior to conducting Experiment 6, two undergraduate projects used similar methods but with different numbers of backgrounds and/or study trial timings. A project conducted by Noha Mohamed used only two levels of background noise, both of which had the appearance of a patterned background: A high-noise background was sampled from a 96% range around midpoint (R = 0.02-0.98, M = 0.50) and a low-noise background was sampled from an 8% range centred on the mid-point (R = 0.46-0.54, M = 0.50). A total of 160 study trials presented the fixation stimulus for 1,000 ms; the study word superimposed on noise background for 500 ms; a blank interval for 800 ms; the TBR or TBF instruction for 500 ms; and a blank interval for 700 ms, for a total trial duration of 3,500 ms. There were a total of 320 recognition trials comprised of the 160 study words and 160 unstudied foil words. The initial sample size was 34 participants. One datafile was corrupt and could not be analyzed and one dataset was excluded due to a high false alarm rate. Recognition hit rates for the remaining 32 participants showed very strong evidence for an effect of memory instruction, consistent with a directed forgetting effect, F(1,31) = 102.60, MSe = 119.33, p < .01, ges = .27, pH1 > .99; weak evidence against an effect of task difficulty, F(1,31) = 3.27, MSe = 60.98, p = .08, ges < .01, pH0 = .53; and positive evidence against an interaction of memory instruction and task difficulty, F < 1, MSe = 28.84, p = .46, ges < .01, pH0 = .81. With the high-noise and low-noise backgrounds, respectively, the TBR item hit rate was 59% and 60% and the TBF hit rate was 38% and 41%.
The second undergraduate project conducted by Jessie Pappin used the same methods described for Experiment 6 except that the memory instruction was presented for 300 ms (instead of 400 ms); total trial duration was 5,700 ms (instead of 5,000 ms); and, there were 33 lexical decision trials (instead of 60), 162 study trials (instead of 144), and 324 test trials (instead of 288). She collected data from 48 participants. Data from two participants were removed due to low lexical decision accuracies and data from another three were removed due to high false alarm rates. The results were very similar to those of Experiment 6. The lexical decision RTs provided strong evidence for task difficulty, F(2,84) = 8.86, MSe = 1209.75, p < .01, ges = .02, pH1 = .98, with positive evidence for slower RTs in the Difficult condition (M = 636 ms) compared to the Moderate condition (M = 619 ms), F(1,42) = 9.09, MSe = 651.47, p < .01, ges = .01, pH1 = .91, but weak evidence against a difference in the speed of responding in the Moderate condition compared to the Easy (M = 604 ms) condition, F(1,42) = 3.05, MSe = 1577.16, p = .09, ges = .01, pH0 = 0.59. There was positive evidence against an overall effect of task difficulty on lexical decision accuracy, F(2,84) = 3.38, MSe = 91.05, p = .04, ges = .03, pH0 = .76: The accuracies were 86% in the Difficult condition, 90% in the Moderate condition, and 91% in the Easy condition. Recognition hit rates showed very strong evidence for an effect of memory instruction, consistent with a directed forgetting effect, F(1,42) = 182.43, MSe = 314.30, p < .01, ges = .48, pH1 > .99; positive evidence against an effect of task difficulty, F(2,84) = 2.56, MSe = 79.53, p = .08, ges = .01, pH0 = .87; and strong evidence against the critical interaction of memory instruction and task difficulty, F(2,84) = 1.09, MSe = 94.78, p = .34, ges < .01, pH0 = .97. Under the Difficult, Moderate, and Easy conditions, respectively, the TBR item hit rate was 72%, 72%, and 73%, and the TBF item hit rate was 39%, 44%, and 44%.
This might be the most important difference between response competition and directed forgetting tasks. Perceptual load effects are only generally observed when there is an array of stimuli. It fits with dilution explanations of perceptual load such that dilution only occurs with a stimulus array. We thank Colin MacLeod, one of our reviewers, for highlighting this issue.
Ahmad, F. N., Tan, P., & Hockley, W. E. (2019). Directed forgetting for categorized pictures: Recognition memory for perceptual details versus gist. Memory, 27(7), 894–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1591456
Anderson, M. C., & Hanslmayr, S. (2014). Neural mechanisms of motivated forgetting. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(6), 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.002
Aron, A. R., Fletcher, P. C., Bullmore, E. T., Sahakian, B. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2003). Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nature Neuroscience, 6(2), 115–116. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1003
Aron, A. R., & Poldrack, R. A. (2006). Cortical and subcortical contributions to stop signal response inhibition: Role of the subthalamic nucleus. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(9), 2424–2433. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4682-05.2006
Aron, A. R., Robbins, T. W., & Poldrack, R. A. (2004). Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(4), 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.02.010
Bancroft, T. D., Hockley, W. E., & Farquhar, R. (2013). The longer we have to forget the more we remember: The ironic effect of postcue duration in item-based directed forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 691–699. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029523
Basden, B. H., & Basden, D. R. (1996). Directed forgetting: Further comparison of item and list methods. Memory, 4(6), 633–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/741941000
Bastin, C., Feyers, D., Majerus, S., Balteau, E., Degueldre, C., Luxen, A., Maquet, P., Salmon, E., & Collette, F. (2012). The neural substrates of memory suppression: a FMRI exploration of directed forgetting. PloS one, 7(1), e29905. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029905
Benoni, H. (2018). Can automaticity be verified utilizing a perceptual load manipulation? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(6), 2037–2046. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1444-7
Benoni, H., & Tsal, Y. (2010). Where have we gone wrong? Perceptual load does not affect selective attention. Vision Research, 50, 1292–1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2010.04.018
Cave, K. R., & Chen, Z. (2016). Identifying visual targets amongst interfering distractors: Sorting out the roles of perceptual load, dilution, and attentional zoom. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(7), 1822-1838. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1149-9
Cheng, S., Liu, I., Lee, J. R., Hung D. L., & Tzeng, O. J-L. (2012). Intentional forgetting might be more effortful than remembering: An ERP study of item-method directed forgetting. Biological Psychology, 89, 283–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.10.019
Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257–271. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204507
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748108400805
Davis, J. C., & Okada, R. (1971). Recognition and recall of positively forgotten items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89(1), 181–186. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031183
Fawcett, J. M., Lawrence, M. A., & Taylor, T. L. (2016). The representational consequences of intentional forgetting: Impairments to both the probability and fidelity of long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145 (1), 56–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000128
Fawcett, J. M., & Taylor, T. L. (2008). Forgetting is effortful: Evidence from reaction time probes in an item-method directed forgetting task. Memory & Cognition, 6, 1168–1181. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.6.1168
Fawcett, J. M., & Taylor, T. L. (2010). Directed forgetting shares mechanisms with attentional withdrawal but not with stop-signal inhibition. Memory & Cognition, 38(6), 797–808. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.6.797
Fawcett, J. M., & Taylor, T. L. (2012). The control of working memory resources in intentional forgetting: Evidence from incidental probe word recognition. Acta Psychologica, 139, 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.10.001
Fawcett, J. M., Taylor, T. L., & Nadel, L. (2013a). Event-method directed forgetting: Forgetting a video segment is more effortful than remembering it. Acta Psychologica, 144, 332–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.07.005
Fawcett, J. M., Taylor, T. L., & Nadel, L. (2013b). Intentional forgetting diminishes memory for continuous events. Memory, 21(6), 675–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2012.748078
Gao, H., Cao, B., Zhang, Q., Qi, M., Li, F., & Li, H. (2016). Intending to forget is not easy: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 104, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2016.03.007
Gao, H., Qi, M., & Zhang, Q. (2019). Forgetting cues are ineffective in promoting forgetting in the item-method directed forgetting paradigm. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 144, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2019.07.004
Gardiner, J. M., Gawlik, B., & Richardson-Klavehn, A. (1994). Maintenance rehearsal affects knowing, not remembering; elaborative rehearsal affects remembering, not knowing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(1), 107–110. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200764
Gaspelin, N., Ruthruff, E., & Jung, K. (2014). Slippage theory and the flanker paradigm: An early-selection account of selective attention failures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(3), 1257-1273. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036179
Hauk, O., Davis, M. H., Ford, M., Pulvermüller, F., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2006). The time course of visual word recognition as revealed by linear regression analysis of ERP data. Neuroimage, 30(4), 1383–1400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.11.048
Hockley, W. E., Ahmad, F. H., & Nicholson, R. (2016). Intentional and incidental encoding of item and associative information in the directed forgetting procedure. Memory & Cognition, 44, 220–228. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-015-0557-8
Hourihan, K. L., & Taylor, T. L. (2006). Cease remembering: Executive control processes in directed forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 1354–1365. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-15220.127.116.114
Hsieh, L. T., Hung, D. L., Tzeng, O. J. L., Lee, J. R., & Cheng, S. K. (2009). An event-related potential investigation of the processing of Remember/Forget cues and item encoding in item-method directed forgetting. Brain Research, 1250, 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.11.016
Jing, J., Qi, M., Gao, H., & Zhang, Q. (2019). The role of forgetting cues in directed forgetting: Ceasing maintenance rehearsal. Acta Psychologica, 199, 102922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102922
Khetrapal, N. (2010). Load theory of selective attention and the role of perceptual load: Is it time for revision? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22(1), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102922
Kruschke, J. K., & Liddell, T. M. (2017). The Bayesian New Statistics: Hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1221-4
Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004
Lavie, N. (2010). Attention, distraction, and cognitive control under load. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(3), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410370295
Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. W. (2003). Contrasting effects of sensory limits and capacity limits in visual selective attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(2), 202–212. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194795
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J.W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354
Lawrence, M. A. (2016). ez: Easy Analysis and Visualization of Factorial Experiment. Package version 4.4-0. https://CRAN.R-pro9ject.org/package=ez
Lee, Y. S. (2012). Cognitive load hypothesis of item-method directed forgetting. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(6), 1110–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.644303
Lee, Y. S. (2013). Costs and benefits in item-method directed forgetting: Differential effects of encoding and retrieval. The Journal of General Psychology, 140(3), 159-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2012.750591
Lee, Y. S. (2018). Withdrawal of spatial overt attention following intentional forgetting: Evidence from eye movements. Memory, 26(4), 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2017.1378360
Lee, Y. S., & Hsu, Y. (2012). How do we forget negative events? The role of attentional, cognitive, and metacognitive control. Cognition & Emotion, 27(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.713326
Lee, Y. S., & Lee, H. M. (2011). Divided attention facilitates intentional forgetting: Evidence from item-method directed forgetting. Consciousness & Cognition, 20(3), 618-626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2010.09.008
Lee, Y., Lee, H., & Tsai, S. (2007). Effects of post-cue interval on intentional forgetting. British Journal of Psychology, 98(2), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712606X120410
MacLeod, C. M. (1998). Directed forgetting. In J. M. Golding & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), Intentional Forgetting: Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 1–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Marevic, I., & Rummel, J. (2020). Retrieval-mediated directed forgetting in the item-method paradigm: The effect of semantic cues. Psychological research, 84(3), 685–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1085-5
Masson, M. E. (2011). A tutorial on a practical Bayesian alternative to null-hypothesis significance testing. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 679–690. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-010-0049-5
Montagliani, A., & Hockley, W. E. (2019). Item-based directed forgetting for categorized lists: Forgetting of words that were not presented. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(3). 135–143. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/cep0000177
Murphy, G., Groeger, J. A., & Greene, C. M. (2016). Twenty years of load theory — Where are we now, and where should we go next? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(5), 1316–1340. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0982-5
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3
Paller, K. A. (1990). Recall and stem-completion priming have different electrophysiological correlates and are modified differentially by directed forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1021–1032. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1681
Paz-Caballero, M. D., Menor, J., & Jiménez, J. M. (2004). Predictive validity of event-related potentials (ERPs) in relation to the directed forgetting effects. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115(2), 369–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2003.09.011
Popov, V., Marevic, I., Rummel, J., & Reder, L. M. (2019). Forgetting is a feature, not a bug: Intentionally forgetting some things helps us remember others by freeing up working memory resources. Psychological Science, 30(9), 1303–1317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619859531
Quinlan, C. K., Taylor, T. L., & Fawcett, J. M. (2010). Directed forgetting: Comparing pictures and words. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016569
R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.
Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–164.
Rizio, A. A., & Dennis, N. A. (2013). The neural correlates of cognitive control: Successful remembering and intentional forgetting. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00310
Rubinfeld, L. M., Taylor, T. L., & Hamm, J. P. (2019). Selection for encoding: No evidence of better endogenous orienting following forget than following remember instructions. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 237–252. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1587-7
Sahakyan, L., & Foster, N. L. (2009). Intentional forgetting of actions: Comparison of list-method and item-method directed forgetting. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(1), 134-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.02.006
Scholz, S., & Dutke, S. (2019). Investigating intentional forgetting using pupillometry: No evidence for the ongoing allocation of cognitive resources during forgetting. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 31(4), 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2019.1622548
Tan, P., Ensor, T. M., Hockley, W. E., Harrison, G. W., & Wilson, D. E. (2020). In support of selective rehearsal: Double-item presentation in item-method directed forgetting. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27, 529–535. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01723-w
Taylor, T. L. (2005). Inhibition of return following instructions to remember and forget. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 613 – 629 (Erratum in 58A, 1343). 10.1080/02724980443000115
Taylor, T. L. (2018). Remember to blink: Reduced attentional blink following instructions to forget. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(6), 1489–1503. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1528-5
Taylor, T. L., & Hamm, J. P. (2016). Selection for encoding: No evidence of greater attentional capture following forget than remember instructions. Attention, Perception, & Performance, 78, 168–186. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0984-4
Taylor, T. L., & Hamm, J. P. (In Press). Intention matters more than attention: Item-method directed forgetting of items at attended and unattended locations. Attention, Perception, and Pychophysics.
Taylor, T. L., & Fawcett, J. M. (2011). Larger IOR effects following forget than following remember instructions depend on exogenous attentional withdrawal and target localization. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 1790–1814. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0146-2
Thompson, K. M., & Taylor, T. L. (2015). Memory instruction interacts with both visual and motoric inhibition of return. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(3), 804–818. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0820-2
Thompson, K. M., Fawcett, J. M., & Taylor, T. L. (2011). Tag you’re it: Tagging as an alternative to yes/no recognition in item method directed forgetting. Acta Psychologica, 138(1), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.06.001
Thompson, K. M., Hamm, J. P., & Taylor, T. L. (2014). Effects of memory instruction on attention and information processing: Further investigation of inhibition of return in item-method directed forgetting. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 322–334. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0584-0
Taylor, T. L., Quinlan, C. K., & Vullings, K. C. (2018). Decomposing item-method directed forgetting of emotional pictures: Equivalent costs and no benefits. Memory & Cognition, 46(1), 132-147. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0751-y
Tsal, Y., & Benoni, H. (2010). Diluting the burden of load: Perceptual load effects are simply dilution effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1645–1656. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018172
van Hooff, J. C., & Ford, R. M. (2011). Remember to forget: ERP evidence for inhibition in an item-method directed forgetting paradigm. Brain Research, 1392, 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2011.04.004
Wang, T. H., Placek, K., & Lewis-Peacock, J. A. (2019). More is less: Increased processing of unwanted memories facilitates forgetting. Journal of Neuroscience, 39(18), 3551–3560. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2033-18.2019
Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101(1), 34–52. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.34
Wickham, H. (2009). ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer New York. http://had.co.nz/ggplot2/book
Wickham, H. (2011). plyr: The split-apply-combine strategy for data analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 40, 1–29. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v40/i01/.
Wickham, H., & Henry, L. (2019). tidyr: Tidy Messy Data. R package version 1.0.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tidyr
Wickham, H. (2019). stringr: Simple, Consistent Wrappers for Common String Operations. Package version 1.4.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=stringr
Wickham, H. & Francois, R. (2019). dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. R package version 0.8.3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr
Wilson, M. D. (1988). The MRC Psycholinguistic database: Machine readable dictionary, version 2. Behavioural Research Methods, 20(1), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202594
Wilson, D. E., Muroi, M., & MacLeod, C. M. (2011). Dilution, not load, affects distractor processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 37, 319–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021433
Woodward Jr, A. E., Bjork, R. A., & Jongeward Jr, R. H. (1973). Recall and recognition as a function of primary rehearsal. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12(6), 608–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(73)80040-4
Wylie, G. R., Foxe, J. J., & Taylor, T. L. (2008). Forgetting as an active process: An fMRI investigation of item-method directed forgetting. Cerebral Cortex, 18, 670–682. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhm101
Xie, H., Chen, Y., Lin, Y., Hu, X., & Zhang, D. (2020). Can’t forget: disruption of the right prefrontal cortex impairs voluntary forgetting in a recognition test. Memory, 28(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.1681456
Yeshrun, Y., & Marciano, H. (2013). Degraded stimulus visibility and the effects of perceptual load on distractor interference. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00289
Zwissler, B., Schindler, S., Fischer, H., Plewnia, C., & Kissler, J. M. (2015). ‘Forget me (not)?’–remembering forget-items versus un-cued items in directed forgetting. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1741. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01741
Authorship order is arbitrary; equal contributions were made by both authors. Thanks to Dr. Jonathan Fawcett for providing the custom software used to randomise and distribute the word stimuli to different lists; Laura Cutmore and Colin McCormick for collecting data; Dr. Charles Collin for providing code to create the visual noise images used in Experiment 6; to students Noha Mohamed and Jessie Pappin for collecting data in earlier versions of Experiment 6; and, to participants for volunteering their time and effort to contribute data toward this project. Project funding was provided by an NSERC Discovery Grant awarded to TLT.
Open Practices Statement
The data and word lists for all experiments are available from the first author upon request.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Taylor, T.L., Ivanoff, J. Forgetting under difficult conditions: Item-method directed forgetting under perceptual processing constraints. Mem Cogn (2021). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01149-2
- Item-method directed forgetting
- Intentional forgetting
- Data-processing limitations
- Cognitive load