Long-term effects of directed forgetting

Illustrations of interactions needed when investigating sleep using a type of AM-PM PM-AM design

Sleep has long been thought of and promoted to be beneficial for memory. Some claims that sleep aids memory have been made in the absence of a critical interaction. This condition is necessary when using a commonly-used experimental design (a type of AM-PM PM-AM design). We propose that a sleep effect exists only if there is an interaction between groups (experimental and time-of-day controls) and the time of test or study (morning and evening). We show different patterns of results that would and would not support a sleep effect with empirical and model-generated data from recognition memory experiments and hypothetical data. While we use these data to make our point, our suggestions apply to any memory and non-memory-related investigation (e.g., emotional memory, false memory susceptibility, language learning, problem-solving). Testing for and finding the proper interaction will add to the evidence that sleep boosts performance.

Separable neural mechanisms support intentional forgetting and thought substitution

Psychological and neuroscientific experiments have established that people can intentionally forget information via different strategies: direct suppression and thought substitution. However, few studies have directly compared the effectiveness of these strategies in forgetting specific items, and it remains an open question if the neural mechanisms supporting these strategies differ. Here, we developed a novel item-method directed forgetting paradigm with Remember, Forget, and Imagine cues, and recorded EEG to directly compare these strategies. Behaviorally, Forget and Imagine cues produced similar forgetting compared to Remember cues, but through separable neural processes; Forget cues elicited frontal oscillatory power changes that were predictive of future forgetting, whereas item-cue representational similarity was predictive of later accuracy for Imagine cues. These results suggest that both strategies can lead to intentional forgetting, but directed forgetting may rely on frontally-mediated suppression, while thought substitution may lead to contextual shifting, impairing successful retrieval.

List-method directed forgetting: Do critical findings generalize from short to long retention intervals?

People can purposefully forget information that has become irrelevant, as is demonstrated in list-method directed forgetting (LMDF). In this task, participants are cued to intentionally forget an already studied list (list 1) before encoding a second list (list 2); this induces forgetting of the first-list items. Most research on LMDF has been conducted with short retention intervals, but very recent studies indicate that such directed forgetting can be lasting. We examined in two experiments whether core findings in the LMDF literature generalize from short to long retention intervals. The focus of Experiment 1 was on the previous finding that, with short retention interval, list-2 encoding is necessary for list-1 forgetting to arise. Experiment 1 replicated the finding after a short delay of 3 min between study and test and extended it to a longer delay of 20 min. The focus of Experiment 1 was on the absence of list-1 forgetting in item recognition, previously observed after short retention interval. Experiment 1 replicated the finding after a short delay of 3 min between study and test and extended it to longer delays of 20 min and 24 h. Implications of the results for theoretical explanations of LMDF are discussed.

Does Sleep Selectively Strengthen Certain Memories Over Others Based on Emotion and Perceived Future Relevance?

Sleep has been found to have a beneficial effect on memory consolidation. It has furthermore frequently been suggested that sleep does not strengthen all memories equally. The first aim of this review paper was to examine whether sleep selectively strengthens emotional declarative memories more than neutral ones. We examined this first by reviewing the literature focusing on sleep/wake contrasts, and then the literature on whether any specific factors during sleep preferentially benefit emotional memories, with a special focus on the often-suggested claim that rapid eye movement sleep primarily consolidates emotional memories. A second aim was to examine if sleep preferentially benefits memories based on other cues of future relevance such as reward, test-expectancy or different instructions during encoding. Once again, we first focused on studies comparing sleep and wake groups, and then on studies examining the contributions of specific factors during sleep (for each future relevance paradigm, respectively). The review revealed that although some support exists that sleep is more beneficial for certain kinds of memories based on emotion or other cues of future relevance, the majority of studies does not support such an effect. Regarding specific factors during sleep, our review revealed that no sleep variable has reliably been found to be specifically associated with the consolidation of certain kinds of memories over others based on emotion or other cues of future relevance.