Literature DB >> 2287345

The development of forgetting and reminiscence.

C J Brainerd1, V F Reyna, M L Howe, J Kingma.   

Abstract

Many theoretical positions on memory development anticipate that forgetting rates should vary substantially with age. The nature of these age variations is also relevant to many applied questions about child development that have major social policy implications, such as the veracity of children's eyewitness testimony and the long-term effectiveness of classroom instruction. Surprisingly, developmental studies of long-term retention have repeatedly produced the puzzling finding that forgetting rates are age invariant. It now seems, however, that these null age trends may have been artifacts of variables such as measurement insensitivity, floor effects, and stages-of-learning confounds. Assuming, as some later studies suggest, that forgetting rates vary with age when these factors are controlled, there are three overriding questions that must be dealt with in the developmental analysis of forgetting: the relative importance of storage failure versus retrieval failure, the relative importance of true forgetting processes versus test-induced processes, and the relative importance of storage-based reminiscence versus retrieval-based reminiscence. We describe a framework (disintegration/redintegation theory) that provides a conceptual environment within which research on these questions can progress. This framework, which evolved from fuzzy-trace theory, reinterprets processes such as storage failure, retrieval failure, restorage, and retrieval relearning in terms of levels of featural integration in traces (i.e., the extent to which contextual information is integrated with core semantic gist to produce a coherent representation). The theory is implemented in a mathematical model (the trace-integrity model) whose parameters deliver measurements of relevant memory processes on a common ratio scale. In a series of experiments, the model was used to study the theory's predictions about the contributions of these memory processes to long-term retention in subjects between the ages of 7 and 70. All the experiments were standard long-term retention designs (an initial acquisition session, followed by a 1-2-week forgetting interval, followed by a series of retention tests).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2287345

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Monogr Soc Res Child Dev        ISSN: 0037-976X


  16 in total

1.  How events are reviewed matters: effects of varied focus on eyewitness suggestibility.

Authors:  S M Lane; M Mather; D Villa; S K Morita
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-10

2.  Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling.

Authors:  W H Batchelder; D M Riefer
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-03

3.  Development of Dual-Retrieval Processes in Recall: Learning, Forgetting, and Reminiscence.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; C Aydin; V F Reyna
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  Remembering the news: modeling retention data from a study with 14,000 participants.

Authors:  M Meeter; J M J Murre; S M J Janssen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-07

5.  Age differences in encoding and retrieving details of a pediatric examination.

Authors:  R H Bender; T S Wallsten; P A Ornstein
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-06

6.  Inoculating against eyewitness suggestibility via interpolated verbatim vs. gist testing.

Authors:  Ainat Pansky; Einat Tenenboim
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-01

7.  Development of episodic and autobiographical memory: The importance of remembering forgetting.

Authors:  Patricia J Bauer
Journal:  Dev Rev       Date:  2015-12-01

8.  Markovian Interpretations of Dual Retrieval Processes.

Authors:  C F A Gomes; C J Brainerd; K Nakamura; V F Reyna
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.223

9.  Statistics learned are statistics forgotten: Children's retention and retrieval of cross-situational word learning.

Authors:  Haley A Vlach; Catherine A DeBrock
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  Memory suppression is an active process that improves over childhood.

Authors:  Pedro M Paz-Alonso; Simona Ghetti; Bryan J Matlen; Michael C Anderson; Silvia A Bunge
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2009-09-21       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.