In Experiment 3, the reminder × interference interaction on story recall was significant but no pairwise comparison survived Bonferroni correction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 A significant reminder × interference interaction on recall accuracy emerged, but simple-effect comparisons did not survive Bonferroni correction. → Michael Batashvili 2022 q2 i? Recognition accuracy in Experiment 3 showed no significant reminder, interference, or interaction effects. → 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 3 (48 participants) used three facts as reminders and an emphasized-title interference story. Simple effects showed significant differences only between the reminder condition and all other conditions, but "after applying the Bonferroni correction, none of the compar isons fell below the adjusted alpha".

"However, there was a signi ficant interaction between reminder and interference effects on recall accuracy, F(1,47) = 5.06, p = 0.03, η² = 0.03, BF 10 = 0.15 (see Fig. 4)"

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 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 3 (48 participants) yes/no recognition accuracy ANOVA: no significant reminder, interference, or interaction effects on recognition accuracy. Equivalence was not tested.

"there was no signi ficant main effect of reminder, F(1,47) = 0.02, p = 0.88, η² = <0.001, BF 10 = 0.15, or of interference factors on recognition accuracy, F(1,47) = 1.53, p = 0.22, η² = 0.01, BF10 = 0.38"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In Experiment 2, reminders improved story recall, but interference had no significant effect on recall or recognition — related
• 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