Chapter 2 Memory - Explanations for forgetting

Question 1

Interference - Types of interference?

Answer 1

Proactive - old memories disrupt new ones.
Retroactive - new memories disrupt old ones.

Question 2

Interference - Effects of similarity?

Answer 2

McGeoch & McDonald - 6 groups learned lists, similar words (synonyms) created more interference.

Question 3

Interference - Explanations of the effect of similarity?

Answer 3

PI (makes new info difficult to store) or RI (old info overwritten).

Question 4

Evaluations of interference? (SLSX)

Answer 4

S - Real-world interference (CP)
L - Interference & cues
S - Support from drug studies
X - Validity issues

Question 5

Evaluation of interference - Real-world interference (S)

Answer 5

• Rugby players remembered less if played more games over a season (Baddeley & Hitch).
• CP is that interference is unusual in everyday situations (e.g. similarity unusual).

Question 6

Evaluation of interference - Inteference & cues? (L)

Answer 6

Interference effects are overcome using cues (Tulving & Psotka).

Question 7

Evaluation of interference - Support from drug studies? (S)

Answer 7

Taking diazepam after learning reduces interference & forgetting = retrograde facilitation (Coenen & van Luijtelaar).

Question 8

Evaluation of interference - Validity issues? (X)

Answer 8

Lab studies have high control but use artifical materials & unrealistic procedures.

Question 9

Retrieval failure - Encoding specificity principle?

Answer 9

• Tulving: cues most effective if present at coding & at retrieval.
• Link between cues & material may be meaningful or meaningless (context & state).

Question 10

Retrieval failure - Context-dependent forgetting?

Answer 10

Godden & Baddeley (deep-sea divers) - recall better when external contexts matched.

Question 11

Retrieval failure - State-dependent forgetting?

Answer 11

Carter & Cassaday (antihistamine) - recall better when internal states matched.

Question 12

Evaluation of retrieval failure? SSLX

Answer 12

S - Real-world application
S - Research support
L - Recall vs recognition
X - Problems with the ESP

Question 13

Evaluation of retrieval failure - Real-world application? S

Answer 13

Cues are weak but worth paying attention to as strategy for improving recall.

Question 14

Evaluation of retrieval failure - Research support? S

Answer 14

• Wide range of support suggests this is the main reason for forgetting (Eysenck & Keane).
• CP is that there is no forgetting unless contexts are very different e.g. on land vs underwater (Baddeley).

Question 15

Evaluation of retrieval failure - Recall vs recognition? L

Answer 15

No context effects when memory assessed using recognition test (Godden & Baddeley).