Asymmetry between encoding and retrieval processes: Evidence from divided attention and a calibration analysis

Moshe Naveh‐Benjamin; Craik, Fergus I. M.; Gavrilescu, Dana; Anderson, Nicole D. · 2000 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.3758/bf03209344

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the asymmetry between memory encoding and retrieval processes, specifically examining how divided attention (DA) affects each phase differently. While theories like encoding specificity suggest similarity between encoding and retrieval, prior research indicated that encoding is sensitive to concurrent task demands, whereas retrieval appears largely immune. The authors aimed to determine whether this sensitivity depends on the type of cognitive resources required by the secondary task and whether DA alters the qualitative depth of encoding. Two experiments were conducted using a dual-task paradigm. Participants performed a cued recall memory task (auditory word pairs) while simultaneously performing a visual choice reaction time (CRT) secondary task. Experiment 1 manipulated the secondary task’s difficulty along two dimensions: decision difficulty (three vs. six choices, taxing central executive resources) and motor difficulty (one vs. two key presses, taxing motor resources). These tasks were performed during encoding, retrieval, or alone. Experiment 2 employed a calibration analysis to assess whether DA shifted encoding strategies from deep, semantic processing to shallower, surface-level processing. This analysis mapped memory performance against time resources, using functions derived from deep, medium, and shallow encoding conditions to predict recall under DA. The results confirmed a significant asymmetry. In Experiment 1, DA during encoding significantly impaired memory performance (26% drop from full attention), whereas DA during retrieval had a negligible, non-significant effect (8% drop). Crucially, only decision difficulty in the secondary task affected encoding performance; increased motor difficulty had no impact on memory. Conversely, secondary task reaction time costs were higher during retrieval than encoding and were sensitive to both decision and motor difficulties. Experiment 2’s calibration analysis revealed that actual recall under DA fell below predictions based on time allocation alone. The data aligned with a shift toward shallower encoding strategies, particularly when attention was emphasized on the secondary task. These findings demonstrate that encoding and retrieval rely on different control processes. Encoding is consciously controlled and dependent on central executive resources, making it vulnerable to interference from decision-heavy secondary tasks. This interference leads to a qualitative shift toward less effective, shallower processing. Retrieval, however, is obligatory and protected from such interference, though it consumes substantial resources that impact secondary task performance. The study supports the view that while the representations accessed during encoding and retrieval may be similar, the control mechanisms governing their execution are distinct.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• prospective memory interruptions