Similarly, Garcia-Gutierrez & Rosas (2003c) found that a change in the context between the interference treatment and the test led to attenuation of retroactive interference.
With respect to the cue that received sequential training with two different outcomes this context switch reduced the difference between the ratings given to the relationship between Cue X and each of the outcomes, caused by a non significant increase in retrieval of the first-learned relationship (X- O1) combined with a marginally significant increase en performance according to the relationship learned during the retroactive interference training (X-O2).
in performance on the Star Discrimeter as a function of amount of interpolated learning.
Likewise, several rereadings of the passage about direct current (cited above) completely eliminated the retroactive interference
that normally comes about as a result of reading the passage about alternating current.
Although extensive research has been conducted on the effect of retroactive interference between cues trained apart (e.
The only exception to this was provided by Escobar and Miller (2003, Experiment 3), who showed that retroactive interference between cues trained apart is stronger as the temporal duration of the outcomes trained with the target and interfering cues is more similar.
If retroactive interference between cues trained apart is determined by the target and interfering associations sharing an identical outcome, then interference should only occur in group IO (i.
The increase in percentage of response observed with the 48-hr retention interval suggests that the passage of time leads to a decrease in retroactive interference similar to the one previously found with other procedures in animals (e.
Thus, changing the context produced a decrease in retroactive interference independently of whether this change placed participants in the acquisition context, of took them to a different context.
These results replicate previous results in humans where retroactive interference decreased when the context was changed before the test (Rosas et al.
Subsequently, the cue was followed by a different incompatible outcome (A*), so that by the end of training participants would end judging that the cue was a better predictor of the second outcome than the first one, showing a retroactive interference effect.
The aim of the experiments reported on this paper was to find a technique that would allow for studying retroactive interference in a situation where multiple cues and outcomes were used.