Removing information from working memory with a delay: Effective but not beneficial.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Hannah Dames, Chenyu Li, Gidon T Frischkorn, Klaus Oberauer
{"title":"Removing information from working memory with a delay: Effective but not beneficial.","authors":"Hannah Dames, Chenyu Li, Gidon T Frischkorn, Klaus Oberauer","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02550-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ideally, removing outdated information from working memory (WM) should have two consequences: The removed content should be less accessible (removal costs), and other WM content should benefit from the freeing up of WM capacity (removal benefits). Robust removal benefits and removal costs have been demonstrated when people are told to forget items shortly after they were encoded (immediate removal). However, other studies suggest that people might be unable to selectively remove items from an already encoded set of items (delayed removal). In two experiments (n = 219; n = 241), we investigated the effectiveness and consequences of delayed removal by combining a modified version of Ecker's et al. (Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 77-90, 2014) letter updating task with a directed-forgetting in WM paradigm. We found that while delayed removal resulted in reduced memory for the to-be-forgotten item-location relations (removal costs), it failed to enhance performance for existing WM content. This contrasts sharply with immediate removal, where removal benefits can be observed. A fine-grained analysis of removal benefits shows that removal from WM proactively facilitates the subsequent encoding of new information but does not retroactively aid stored WM content.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02550-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ideally, removing outdated information from working memory (WM) should have two consequences: The removed content should be less accessible (removal costs), and other WM content should benefit from the freeing up of WM capacity (removal benefits). Robust removal benefits and removal costs have been demonstrated when people are told to forget items shortly after they were encoded (immediate removal). However, other studies suggest that people might be unable to selectively remove items from an already encoded set of items (delayed removal). In two experiments (n = 219; n = 241), we investigated the effectiveness and consequences of delayed removal by combining a modified version of Ecker's et al. (Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 77-90, 2014) letter updating task with a directed-forgetting in WM paradigm. We found that while delayed removal resulted in reduced memory for the to-be-forgotten item-location relations (removal costs), it failed to enhance performance for existing WM content. This contrasts sharply with immediate removal, where removal benefits can be observed. A fine-grained analysis of removal benefits shows that removal from WM proactively facilitates the subsequent encoding of new information but does not retroactively aid stored WM content.

Abstract Image

延迟从工作记忆中删除信息:有效但无益
理想情况下,从工作记忆(WM)中移除过时信息会产生两种结果:被移除的内容应该更难获取(移除成本),而其他工作记忆内容应该从释放的工作记忆容量中获益(移除收益)。当人们被告知遗忘编码后不久的项目(立即删除)时,已经证明了强大的删除收益和删除成本。然而,其他研究表明,人们可能无法从已经编码的项目集中选择性地删除项目(延迟删除)。在两项实验(n = 219;n = 241)中,我们将 Ecker 等人(《记忆与语言杂志》,74, 77-90, 2014 年)的字母更新任务与定向遗忘 WM 范式相结合,研究了延迟移除的效果和后果。我们发现,虽然延迟删除会导致对即将遗忘的项目-位置关系的记忆减少(删除成本),但却无法提高对现有 WM 内容的记忆效果。这与立即移除形成了鲜明对比,后者可以观察到移除的益处。对移除益处的精细分析表明,从 WM 中移除会主动促进新信息的后续编码,但不会追溯性地帮助存储的 WM 内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信