Despite a tradition in cognitive psychology that views encoding and retrieval processes in human memory as being similar, FIM Craik, R. Govoni, M. Naveh-Benjamin and ND Anderson (1996) have recently shown that notable differences exist between the 2 when divided-attention manipulations are used. In this article, the authors further examined this asymmetry by using several manipulations that changed task demands at encoding and retrieval. The authors also used a secondary-task methodology that allowed a microlevel analysis of the secondary-task costs associated with encoding and retrieval. The results illustrated the resiliency of retrieval processes to manipulations involving different task demands. They also indicated different loci of attention demands at encoding and retrieval. The authors contend that whereas encoding processes are controlled, retrieval processes are obligatory but do require attentional resources for their execution.