Abstract Recent work by Hupbach et al. (2007, 2009) suggests that episodic memory for a previously studied list can be updated to include new items, if participants are reminded of the earlier list just prior to learning a new list. The key finding from the Hupbach studies was an asymmetric pattern of intrusions, whereby participants intruded numerous items from the second list when trying to recall the first list, but not vice-versa. Hupbach et al. explain this pattern in terms of a cellular reconsolidation process, whereby the first-list memory is rendered labile by the reminder, and the labile memory is then updated to include items from the second list. Here we show that contextual reinstatement and item-context binding within the Temporal Context Model (TCM) can account for the asymmetric intrusion effect. These results suggest that findings that (purportedly) show human reconsolidation are consistent with existing cognitive theories of human memory.

Recent computational theories of decision making in humans and animals have portrayed two systems locked in a battle for control of behavior. One system—variously termed “model-free” or “habitual”—favors actions that have previously led to reward, while a second called the “model-based ” or “goal-directed ” system favors actions that causally lead to reward according to the agent’s internal model of the environment. Some evidence suggests that control can be shifted between these systems using neural or behavioral manipulations, but other evidence suggests that the systems are more intertwined than a competitive account would imply. In four behavioral experiments, using a retrospective revaluation design and a cognitive load manipulation, we show that human decisions are more consistent with a cooperative architecture in which the model-free system controls behavior, while the model-based system trains the model-free system by replaying and simulating experience. Model-Based Revaluation 3