How to Remember Something You Didn't Say

When individuals suppress secret information, they should keep this omission in mind to not let this information slip out in future situations. Following recent findings about automatic memory retrieval of outright lies, we hypothesized that suppression tendencies are also automatically retrieved from memory when being confronted with a question to which one has previously omitted secret information. In an online study, participants first had to withhold information about a fictitious love affair during a simulated chat with their relationship partner. To assess automatic suppression tendencies, we developed an indirect response time measure wherein a key that had previously been established to indicate suppression now had to be pressed in response to word stimuli that were presented in a specific color. We found implicit suppression tendencies for words that had been withheld during the interview if they were presented following the prime that involved the question which the secret answer referred to. The question primes or the secret information alone did not elicit a suppression tendency, indicating that suppression responses were automatically retrieved from memory after re-encountering the combination of the question and the critical answer. The results are discussed regarding the theoretical implications for automatic memory processes.

Unintentional and Intentional Recognition Rely on Dissociable Neurocognitive Mechanisms

Distractibility can lead to accidents and academic failures as well as memory problems. Recent evidence suggests that intentional recognition memory can be biased by unintentional recognition of distracting stimuli in the same environment. It is unknown whether unintentional and intentional recognition depend on the same underlying neurocognitive mechanisms. We assessed whether human participants' recognition of previously seen (old) or not seen (new) target stimuli was affected by whether a to-be-ignored distractor was old or new. ERPs were recorded to investigate the neural correlates of this bias. The results showed that the old/new status of salient distractors had a biasing effect on target recognition accuracy. Both intentional and unintentional recognition elicited early ERP effects that are thought to reflect relatively automatic memory processes. However, only intentional recognition elicited the later ERP marker of conscious recollection, consistent with previous suggestions that recollection is under voluntary control. In contrast, unintentional recognition was associated with an enhanced late posterior negativity, which may reflect monitoring or evaluation of memory signals. The findings suggest that unintentional and intentional recognition involve dissociable memory processes.