These findings suggest that participants in Experiment 1 may have been relying on a lexically focused retrieval strategy, a possibility consistent with the fact that overall IP recall performance fell precipitously from 76% in Experiment 1 to 57% in Experiment 2 (a 19% reduction), a drop that was highly significant, F (1, 48) = 98.44, p < .001, η p 2 = .672.
The group, as a whole, showed better recall in the Baseline condition than after retrieval suppression, although this effect was marginally significant, F (1, 24) = 4.06, p = .055, η p 2 = .145.
As can be seen in Figure 1 , participants with lower trauma showed reliable suppression-induced facilitation on the IP test, F (1, 24) = 4.88, p = .037, η p 2 = .169, whereas higher-trauma participants show a weak trend toward suppression-induced forgetting , F (1, 24) = 2.76, p = .109, η p 2 = .103.
The interaction of trauma Group × Repetition, however, did not quite reach significance in this sample, F (1, 24) = 2.57, p = .122, η p 2 = .097.