Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Suppressing unwanted memories by executive control


Freud proposed that unwanted memories can be forgotten by pushing them into the unconscious, a process called repression1. The existence of repression has remained controversial for more than a century, in part because of its strong coupling with trauma, and the ethical and practical difficulties of studying such processes in controlled experiments. However, behavioural and neurobiological research on memory and attention shows that people have executive control processes directed at minimizing perceptual distraction2,3, overcoming interference during short and long-term memory tasks3,4,5,6,7 and stopping strong habitual responses to stimuli8,9,10,11,12,13. Here we show that these mechanisms can be recruited to prevent unwanted declarative memories from entering awareness, and that this cognitive act has enduring consequences for the rejected memories. When people encounter cues that remind them of an unwanted memory and they consistently try to prevent awareness of it, the later recall of the rejected memory becomes more difficult. The forgetting increases with the number of times the memory is avoided, resists incentives for accurate recall and is caused by processes that suppress the memory itself. These results show that executive control processes not uniquely tied to trauma may provide a viable model for repression.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Final recall for respond and suppression items as a function of the number of repetitions for the same-probe (SP) and independent-probe (IP) tests.
Figure 2: Three mechanisms that can explain impaired recall in the same-probe condition, illustrated with a stimulus pair.
Figure 3: Final recall of withhold and respond items as a function of the number of repetitions.


  1. Freud, S. in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud 1 (ed. J. Strachey) 117–128 (Hogarth, London, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chao, L. L. & Knight, R. T. Human prefrontal lesions increase distractibility to irrelevant sensory inputs. Cog. Neurosci. Neuropsychol. 6, 1605–1610 (1995).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Dagenbach, D. & Carr, T. H. (eds) Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory, and Language (Academic, San Diego, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Smith, E. E. & Jonides, J. Storage and executive processes in the frontal lobes. Science 283, 1657–1661 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hasher, L. & Zacks, R. T. Working memory, comprehension and aging: A review and a new view. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 22, 193–225 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Anderson, M. C. & Spellman, B. A. On the status of inhibitory mechanisms in cognition: Memory retrieval as a model case. Psychol. Rev. 102, 68–100 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bjork, R. A. in Varieties of Memory and Consciousness: Essays in Honour of Endel Tulving (eds Roediger, H. L. & Craik, F. I. M.) 309–330 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Luria, A. R. Higher Cortical Function in Man (Basic Books, New York, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Logan, G. D. & Cowan, W. B. On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A theory of an act of control. Psychol. Rev. 91, 295–327 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Posner, M. I. & Peterson, S. E. The attention system of the human brain. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 25–42 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Knight, R. T., Staines, W. R., Swick, D. & Chao, L. L. Prefrontal cortex regulates inhibition and excitation in distributed neural networks. Acta Psychol. 101, 159–178 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen, J. D. & Servan-Schreiber, D. Context, cortex, and dopamine: A connectionist approach to behavior and biology in schizophrenia. Psychol. Rev. 99, 45–77 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Carter, C. S., Botvinick, M. M. & Cohen, J. D. The contribution of the anterior cingulate cortex to executive processes in cognition. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 49–57 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mayr, U. & Keele, S. W. Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 129, 4–26 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Casey, B. J. et al. A developmental functional MRI study of prefrontal activation during performance of a go-no-go task. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 9, 835–847 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Garavan, H., Ross, T. J. & Stein, E. A. Right hemispheric dominance of inhibitory control: An event-related functional MRI study. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 8301–8306 (1999).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. de Zubicaray, G. I. et al. Motor response suppression and the prepotent tendency to respond: A parametric fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 38, 1280–1291 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sakagami, M. & Niki, H. Spatial selectivity of go/no go neurons in the monkey prefrontal cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 100, 165–169 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wegner, D. M. Ironic processes of mental control. Psychol. Rev. 101, 34–52 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Freyd, J. J. Betrayal Trauma: The Logic of Forgetting Childhood Abuse (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Geiselman, R. E., Bjork, R. A. & Fishman, E. L. Disrupted retrieval in directed forgetting: A link with posthypnotic amnesia. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 112, 58–72 (1983).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Conway, M. A., Harries, K., Noyes, J., Racsmany, M. & Frankish, C. R. The disruption and dissolution of directed forgetting: Inhibitory control of memory. J. Mem. Lang. 43, 409–430 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Norman, D. A. & Shallice, T. in Consciousness and Self-Regulation: Advances in Research and Theory (eds Davison, R. J., Schwardz, G. E. & Shapiro, D.) 1–18 (Plenum, New York, 1986).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. MacDonald, A. W., Cohen, J. D., Andrew-Stenger, V. & Carter, C. S. Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. Science 288, 1835–1838 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Shimamura, A. P. The role of the prefrontal cortex in dynamic filtering. Psychobiology 28, 207–218 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Rowe, J. B. et al. The prefrontal cortex: Response selection or maintenance within working memory. Science 288, 1656–1660 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. D'Esposito, M. et al. Functional MRI studies of spatial and nonspatial working memory. Cogn. Brain Res. 7, 1–13 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schacter, D. L. & Wagner, A. D. Medial temporal lobe activations in fMRI and PET studies of episodic encoding and retrieval. Hippocampus 9, 7–24 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Schacter, D. L. Memory and awareness. Science 280, 59–60 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Anderson, M. C. Active Forgetting: Evidence for functional inhibition as a source of memory failure. J. Agression Maltreatment Trauma (in the press).

Download references


The research reported here was supported by a grant from the US National Institute of Mental Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael C. Anderson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anderson, M., Green, C. Suppressing unwanted memories by executive control. Nature 410, 366–369 (2001).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing