Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Proactive interference, accessibility bias, and process dissociations: valid subjective reports of memory.

L L Jacoby1, J A Debner, J F Hay

  • 1Department of Psychology, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri 63130, USA. lljacoby@artsci.wustl.edu

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
|June 8, 2001
PubMed
Summary

Proactive interference stems from response bias, not impaired memory. This bias affects habit but not recollection, with age impacting recollection ability.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cognitive and neural effects of semantic encoding strategy training in older adults.

Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)·2011
Same author

Physical features vs meaning: A difference in decay.

Memory & cognition·2011
Same author

Challenges in transfusion medicine recruitment and training--a solution.

Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England)·2009
Same author

Isolating the contributions of familiarity and source information to item recognition: a time course analysis.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·1999
Same author

Aging and judgments of duration: effects of task complexity and method of estimation.

Perception & psychophysics·1999
Same author

Separating habit and recollection in young and older adults: effects of elaborative processing and distinctiveness.

Psychology and aging·1999

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Memory
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Proactive interference (PI) is a common memory phenomenon where prior learning hinders new learning.
  • Existing theories debate whether PI arises from response bias or impaired memory processes.
  • The process-dissociation procedure offers a method to disentangle memory components like habit and recollection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the underlying mechanisms of proactive interference using a variant of the process-dissociation procedure.
  • To differentiate the roles of habit (accessibility bias) and recollection (discriminability) in PI.
  • To examine how factors like divided attention, age, study duration, and training probability influence these memory components.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted three cued-recall experiments employing a modified process-dissociation procedure.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Manipulated variables including divided attention, participant age, study duration, and training probability.
  • Measured both objective estimates of recollection and discriminability, and subjective reports of remembering.

    • Main Results:

    • Proactive interference was consistently demonstrated to be an effect of accessibility bias (habit), not a deficit in recollection.
    • Divided attention, age, and study duration selectively impacted the recollection parameter.
    • Training probability selectively influenced the habit parameter, while subjective memory reports strongly correlated with objective recollection estimates.

    Conclusions:

    • The findings support the view that proactive interference is primarily a bias effect, impacting response accessibility rather than true memory recall.
    • Age-related susceptibility to interference may stem from diminished recollection abilities, rather than solely from impaired response inhibition.
    • The process-dissociation procedure provides a valuable tool for dissecting memory components and understanding individual differences in memory performance.