Abstract
An experiment is reported that examines the role of item strength in output interference. Subjects studied two types of categorized item lists: lists in which each category consisted of strong and moderate items, and lists in which each category consisted of weak and moderate items. Different degrees of item strength were accomplished by varying the items’ taxonomic frequency within a category. The subjects either recalled a category’s strong and weak items before its moderate items, or vice versa. The prior recall of the moderate items impaired the later recall of the strong items, but did not impair the later recall of the weak items. This effect of item strength indicates that output interference is caused by a process of retrieval suppression. It additionally suggests that, in order to minimize output-interference effects in recall, a list’s strong items should be recalled before its weak items.
Article PDF
References
Anderson, M. C., Bjork, R. A., &Bjork, E. L. (1994). Remembering can cause forgetting: Retrieval dynamics in long-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1063–1087.
Anderson, M. C., &Spellman, B. A. (1995). On the status of inhibitory mechanisms in cognition: Memory retrieval as a model case.Psychological Review,102, 68–100.
Battig, W. F., &Montague, W. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms.Journal of Experimental Psychology,80, 1–46.
Bäuml, K.-H. (1996). Revisiting an old issue: Retroactive interference as a function of the degree of original and interpolated learning.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 380–384.
Bäuml, K.-H. (1997). The list-strength effect: Strength-dependent competition or suppression?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 260–264.
Brainerd, C. J., Reyna, V. F., Harnishfeger, K. K., &Howe, M. L. (1993). Is retrievability grouping good for recall?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 249–268.
Brainerd, C. J., Reyna, V. F., Howe, M. L., &Kevershan, J. (1990). The last shall be first: How memory strength affects children’s retrieval.Psychological Science,1, 247–252.
DaPolito, F. J. (1966).Proactive effects with independent retrieval of competing responses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
Mannhaupt, H.-R. (1983). Produktionsnormen für verbale Reaktionen zu 40 geläufigen Kategorien [German category norms for verbal items in 40 categories].Sprache & Kognition,4, 264–278.
Postman, L., Stark, K., &Fraser, J. (1968). Temporal changes in interference.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,7, 672–694.
Raaijmakers, J. G. W., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory.Psychological Review,88, 93–134.
Roediger, H. L., III (1973). Inhibition in recall from cueing with recall targets.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 644–657.
Roediger, H. L., III, &Neely, J. H. (1982). Retrieval blocks in episodic and semantic memory.Canadian Journal of Psychology,36, 213–242.
Roediger, H. L., III, &Schmidt, S. R. (1980). Output interference in the recall of categorized and paired associate lists.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,6, 91–105.
Rundus, D. (1973). Negative effects of using list items as recall cues.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 43–50.
Scheithe, K., &Bäuml, K.-H. (1995). Deutschsprachige Normen für Vertreter von 48 Kategorien [German normative data for representatives of 48 categories].Sprache & Kognition,14, 39–43.
Smith, A. D. (1971). Output interference and organized recall from long-term memory.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,10, 400–408.
Wheeler, M. A. (1995). Improvement in recall over time without repeated testing: Spontaneous recovery revisited.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 173–184.
Wixted, J. T., Ghadisha, H., &Vera, R. (1997). Recall latency following pure- and mixed-strength lists: A direct test of the relative strength model of free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,23, 523–538.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
I thank M. Anderson, H. L. Roediger III, J. Wixted, and one anonymous referee for their comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bäuml, Kh. Strong items get suppressed, weak items do not: The role of item strength in output interference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 5, 459–463 (1998). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208822
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208822