In Experiment 1, reminder+interference yielded greater recollection strength than interference alone on Remember/Know judgments¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q2·i1–i3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i1 A significant reminder × interference interaction on percent Remember responses showed recollection strength higher in the reminder+interference condition than in the interference-alone condition. → Michael Batashvili 2022
q2 i3 Reminders increased Remember responses (η² = 0.22) and interference decreased them (η² = 0.02). → Michael Batashvili 2022 (2)
Evidence¶
Michael Batashvili 2022¶
Michael Batashvili, Rona Sheaffer, Maya Katz, Yoav Doron, Noam Kempler and Daniel A. Levy. (2022). Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design. npj Science of Learning 7:26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w
q2 · i1 · causal · r2
Experiment 1 (40 participants) Remember/Know judgments analysed with a 2×2 repeated-measures ANOVA; the article reports the interaction as quoted, with recollection strength "in the reminder + interference condition was significantly greater than in the interference-alone condition".
"there was a signi ficant interaction found between reminder and interference conditions, F(1,39) = 9.753, p = 0.003, η² = 0.03, BF10 = 0.36"
Michael Batashvili 2022 (2)¶
Michael Batashvili, Rona Sheaffer, Maya Katz, Yoav Doron, Noam Kempler and Daniel A. Levy. (2022). Behavioural reconsolidation interference not observed in a within-subjects design. npj Science of Learning 7:26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00143-w
q2 · i3 · causal · r2
Main effects in the same ANOVA: reminder, F(1,39) = 30.09, p < 0.001, η² = 0.22; interference, F(1,39) = 35.71, p < 0.001, η² = 0.02, with fewer Remember responses under interference (62.35% vs 69.50%).
"showing that participants gave more “Remember” responses when there was a reminder present (Mean = 74.54%, SD = 18.46%) compared to pairs that had no reminder (Mean = 57.26%, SD = 20.83%)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In Experiment 1, reminder+interference produced better associative recognition than interference alone, contrary to reconsolidation-interference predictions — related
- Across item recognition, associative recognition, and free recall paradigms, reminder-potentiated behavioural interference did not impair declarative memory within-subjects — a broader claim this one bears on
- In Experiment 1, reminders improved associative recognition accuracy for picture pairs (main effect of reminder) — related
- In Experiment 1, reminders speeded and interference slowed recognition response times, with reminder+interference faster than interference alone — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
exp1-remember-know-interaction-opposite-prediction |
title |
In Experiment 1, reminder+interference yielded greater recollection strength than interference alone on Remember/Know judgments |
description |
In Experiment 1, reminder+interference yielded greater recollection strength than interference alone on Remember/Know judgments |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2022 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — michael-batashvili-2022, michael-batashvili-2022-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.