The two faces of selective memory retrieval: Recall specificity of the detrimental but not the beneficial effect.

Depending on the degree to which the original study context is accessible, selective memory retrieval can be detrimental or beneficial for the recall of other memories (Bäuml & Samenieh, 2012). Prior work has shown that the detrimental effect of memory retrieval is typically recall specific and does not arise after restudy trials, whereas recall specificity of the beneficial effect has not been examined to date. Addressing the issue, we compared in 2 experiments the effects of retrieval and restudy on recall of other items, when access to the study context was (largely) maintained and when access to the study context was impaired (in Experiment 1 by using the listwise directed-forgetting task, in Experiment 2 by using a prolonged retention interval). In both experiments, selective retrieval but not restudy induced forgetting of other items when context access was maintained, which replicates prior work. In contrast, when context access was impaired, both selective retrieval and restudy induced beneficial effects on other memories. These findings suggest that the detrimental but not the beneficial effect of selective memory retrieval is recall specific. The results are consistent with a recent 2-factor account of selective memory retrieval that attributes the detrimental effect to inhibition or blocking but the beneficial effect to context reactivation processes.