Under what conditions would we conclude that retrieval-induced forgetting was observed? Note that: RP+ items = practiced items from practiced categories, RP- items = unpracticed items from practiced categories, NRP items = unpracticed items from unpracticed categories

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

To analyze the question, I’ll first recall what retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) means in this paradigm. RP+ items are the practiced items within practiced categories, RP- items are unpracticed items within those practiced categories, and NRP items are unpracticed items from unpracticed categories. RIF is the phenomenon where practicing some items impairs memory for related but unpracticed items (RP-) within the same categories, relative to items from unpracticed categories (NRP).
Option 1: 'If RP- items perform worse than NRP items' — This aligns with the classic index of RIF. When RP- recall is worse than NRP recall, it indicates that retrieval practice selectively weakened related unpracticed items, which is exactly what RIF predicts.
Option 2: 'If RP- items perform worse than RP+ items' — While RP- items are typically weaker than practiced RP+ items, this comparison does not by itself establish RIF. It measures the expected benefit of practice for RP+ and the cost to related items (RP-), but the critical signature of RIF is the impairment of RP- relative to unpracticed items from unpracticed categories (NRP), not just relative to RP+.
Option 3: 'If NRP items perform worse than RP+ items' — This describes a simple effect of practice where practiced items fare better than unpracticed ones from unpracticed categories, which is common but does not demonstrate retrieval-induced forgetting. It doesn’t capture the selective forgetting of RP- items due to retrieval practice within practiced categories.
Option 4: 'If NRP items perform worse than RP- items' — This would imply that items from unpracticed categories are worse than the related unpracticed items from practiced categories, which contradicts the RIF mechanism. If anything, one would expect NRP to be equal or better than RP- if forgetting occurred only within practiced categories; this pattern would not reflect RIF as defined.
In summary, the defining pattern of retrieval-induced forgetting is the relative decline of RP- items compared with NRP items, reflecting the cost of selective retrieval practice on related, unpracticed items from practiced categories. The other options describe plausible effects of practice or general superiority relationships but do not constitute the core signature of RIF.

PSYC20007_2025_SM2 Supplementary or Special Exam: Cognitive Psychology (PSYC20007_2025_SM2)- Requires Respondus LockDown Browser

Under what conditions would we conclude that retrieval-induced forgetting was observed? Note that: RP+ items = practiced items from practiced categories, RP- items = unpracticed items from practiced categories, NRP items = unpracticed items from unpracticed categories

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

Under what conditions would we conclude that retrieval-induced forgetting was observed? Note that: RP+ items = practiced items from practiced categories, RP- items = unpracticed items from practiced categories, NRP items = unpracticed items from unpracticed categories

Which aspect of retrieval-induced forgetting does interference theory have difficulty explaining?

When is retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) evident?

Which aspect of retrieval-induced forgetting does interference theory have difficulty explaining?

When is retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) evident?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单