RESUMEN
Retrieval Induced Forgetting (RIF) demonstrates that retrieval of information can lead to forgetting of related information. The standard RIF paradigm involves studying a certain number of category-exemplar pairs; thereafter, half of the exemplars from half of the categories are retrieved. Finally, all studied pairs are recalled. RIF is revealed when unretrieved exemplars from the retrieved categories are more poorly recalled than exemplars from the unretrieved categories. One explanation for RIF asserts that inhibition prevents interference from the exemplars of the same category during the interpolated retrieval practice phase, which leads to forgetting of these items at final recall. An ongoing debate concerns whether this inhibition requires executive control or whether it is automatic. If inhibition in RIF involves executive control, then a task that will exhaust this limited capacity should reduce or eliminate the RIF effect. The effects of concurrent tasks during the retrieval practice phase have been shown to reduce or eliminate RIF, however, to our knowledge, the effects of prior tasks on RIF has not been investigated. In the present study, in one condition, we conducted an exhaustive inhibition task before the retrieval practice phase and compared this condition to the one in which the prior task was non-exhaustive. Results showed that the RIF effect was eliminated when the prior task was exhaustive. The results supported the executive control view for the inhibition mechanism behind RIF and further showed that exhaustion of the executive control capacity can impair inhibition in subsequent tasks.
Asunto(s)
Función Ejecutiva , Recuerdo Mental , Humanos , Inhibición Psicológica , Conocimiento , Recuerdo Mental/fisiologíaRESUMEN
The goal of the study was to investigate temporal dynamics of excessive violent game playing. We compared behavioral data and event-related potentials (ERPs) of excessive video game players (EVGPs, n = 21) and non-players (NPs, n = 21) using a classical learning, cued recall and recognition paradigm, featuring violent and non-violent words. During the recognition phase, EVGPs performed better for violent words, but worse for non-violent words compared to NPs. Also, EVGPs showed slower reaction times than NPs when responding to new violent words. We found significant group differences in parietal P300 and FN400 amplitudes. The EVGP group showed larger P300 amplitudes for violent words, and more negative FN400 amplitudes for new violent words compared to NPs. The results imply that EVGPs differ from NPs in their cognitive and ERP responses to violent and non-violent verbal stimuli. The cognitive processes of EVGPs are consistent with a model of attention and memory bias rather than with desensitization to violence.