Differences in Intentional Retrieval During Inclusion and Exclusion Tasks

Abstract

The process dissociation approach assumes that intentional retrieval processes operate in the same manner during inclusion and exclusion tasks. The present research shows that this assumption is not always tenable. After completing a word stem according to inclusion or exclusion instructions, subjects were asked whether they had recalled a word presented during study while completing the stem. Stem completion latencies were also recorded. When the exclusion task was described as a creativity test (Experiment 2), subjects recalled almost twice as many words during inclusion than during exclusion trials. Also, completion latencies were longer on inclusion trials, suggesting that on these trials subjects tried hard to remember old words. W hen instructions stressed that recall of old words was as important on exclusion as on inclusion trials (Experiment 1), recall rates did not differ significantly between both kinds of trials. However, completion latencies were significantly longer on inclusion trials, showing that, despite instructions, subjects still invested more effort in trying to remember old words during inclusion trials. The implications of these findings for future process dissociation research are discussed.