Directed Forgetting in Preschoolers:
Comparisons between retrieval inhibition and context change models
Victoria Shiebler, Advisor: Almut Hupbach
Department of Psychology, Lehigh University
Design
Introduction
• One way to change memory is through the
method of directed forgetting which may be
explained by two competing theories: retrieval
inhibition (e.g., Bjork, 1972) and the context
change model (Sahaykyan and Kelley , 2002)
Forget/
Remember
List 2
Recall
List 1
List 2
DIRECTED FORGETTING IN CHILDREN?
• Harnishfeger and Pope (1996) failed to show the costs or benefits of directed
forgetting in kindergarteners. Overall recall for the word lists was very low.
Researchers have hypothesized that the lack of DF effects in young children
may be due to later-developing brain processes essential for inhibitory
processes or a production deficiency stage.
• The present study aimed to examine if preschoolers can in fact show
directed forgetting effects using concrete objects and clear instructions.
Retrieval Inhibition vs. Context Change
Manipulations that cause
forgetting/mental context
change
Instruction to forget
Imagine being invisible
L1
L2
Retrieval
Daydreaming
Retrieval of prior List
• If DF is due to inhibition, then
young children should not show DF
effects due to the late development
of inhibitory processes (prefrontal
cortex).
PART 1
CUE
PART 2
80
Chatting, wiping computer
monitor
Mechanistic
Forget Cue
N=17
4&5-yr-olds
Context Change
N=18
4&5-yr-olds
Remember
N=15
4&5-yr-olds
Memory Performance
PART 3
List 1
• Previous directed forgetting studies have shown that adults display robust
directed forgetting effects: impaired recall for list 1 (costs) and enhanced
recall for list 2 (benefits) (e.g., Bjork, 1989).
• If the context change theory
explains
directed
forgetting,
children should have no problem
intentionally forgetting objects
through a mental context change.
Experimental
Group
Please empty your brain to
make space for the second
set of objects.
Learn
Set 1
Please describe your favorite
toy in detail
Both sets of objects will be
important for the end of the
memory game
Learn
Set 2,
distract
task
Recall task of all 16
objects
Percent objects recalled
• Memory is not only forgotten unintentionally, but can also be intentionally
forgotten.
Results
Recall Set 1 (Costs)
70
Recall Set 2 (Benefits)
60
50
40
30
20
10
Animal Name
Memory Task
Directed
Forgetting
Paradigm
Distractor Task: What is your favorite food/ what are you having for lunch today?
Animal Name Working Memory Task:
 Repeat increasing number of animal name spans
 Children given points for each correct span
References
•Aslan, A., & Bäuml, K. (2008). Memorial consequences of imagination of children and adults. Psychodynamic Bulletin and Review,
15(4), 833-837.
•Aslan, A., Zellner, M., & Bäuml, K. (2010). Working memory capacity predicts listwise directed forgetting in adults and children.
Psychology Press, 18(4), 442-450.
•Basden, B., & Basden, D. (1996). Directed forgetting: Further comparison of the item and list methods. Memory, 6(4), 633-653.
•Bjork, R. A. (1989). Retrieval inhibition as an adaptive mechanism in human memory. In H. L.Roediger III & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.),
Varieties of memory & consciousness.
•Harnishfeger, K., & Pope, R. (1996). Intending to forget: The development of cognitive inhibition in directed forgetting. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 62, 292-315.
•Howe, M. (2005). Children (but not adults) can inhibit false memories. Psychological Science, 16(12), 927-931.
•Sahakyan, L., & Kelley, C. (2002). A contextual change account of the directed forgetting effect. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 28(6), 1064-1072.
0
forget
context change
Condition
remember
• Children in both, the forget cue and the context change group
showed both costs and benefits of directed forgetting.
• Impaired Recall of Set 1
• Enhanced Recall of Set 2
• Memory performance for sets of objects was not related to working
memory task.
Discussion
• Preschoolers ages 4 and 5 can in fact display directed forgetting effects.
• Concrete objects and clear instructions improved baseline memory for
objects, which allowed us to properly assess directed forgetting costs and
benefits.
• Regardless of instruction, children remembered list 2 items better than list 1
items due to a recency effect, which could be eliminated in future studies
with a longer experiment period.
• Directed forgetting is mediated by context change because preschoolers
displayed effects although their memory suppressing mechanisms are not
fully developed.
• Both the forget in instruction as well as the context change instruction
induced a mental context change, which created a mismatch between list 1
learning and recall (Sahakyan and Kelley, 2002).
• Since working memory and directed forgetting effects were not correlated
in this study, directed forgetting does not rely on working memory brain
structures. This provides more evidence for the fact that directed forgetting
is mediated by a mental context change.