explanation for forgetting: interference theory evaluation Flashcards
what does it mean when we say that there is evidence for interference from lab studies
interference in memory is probably the most consitently demonstrated findings in the whole of psychology
There is literally thousands of lab experiments that have been carried out into this explanation ( interference) for forgetting
e.g. McGeoch and McDonald’s research
why is having lab studies as evidence a strength
This is a strength because lab experiments control the effects of irrelevant influences and thus give us confidence that interference is a valid explanation for at least some forgetting
what does it mean when we say that some research into interference involved artificial materials
There is a much greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in the lab than in real-life situations
The stimulus materials used in most studies are lists of words - task facing participants is to learn these lists
Learning lists of actual words is more realistic than learning consonant syllables. However, it is still some distance from the things we learn in everyday life
why is having artificial material a disadvantage
It is a limitation because the use of artificial tasks makes interference much more likely in the lab.
Therefore, interference may not be as likely explanation for forgetting in everyday life as it is in a lab
what does it means when we say there is real - life studies into interference
Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch (1977) considers interference in everyday life
PROCEDURE:
They asked rugby players to try to remember the names of the teams they played so far in that seasons, week by week
Because most of the players had missed games, for some the “last game” they played might have been two week ago
what was the findings of Baddelely and Hitch’s study into interference
The results very much showed that accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place.
The number of games they had played in the meantime was much more important
Therefore, a player’s recall of a team from three weeks ago was better if they had no matches since then.
This sudsy shows that interference explanation can be applied at least in some everyday situations
why is having real life studies a strength
having real life studies as evidence for interference increases its validity as an explanation forgetting
describe Endel Tulving and Joseph Psotka’s (1971) research into the effect of cues on interference
Endel Tulving and Joseph Psotka (1971) gave participants five lists of 24 words, each list was organised into six categories
e.g. words such as hut, cottage, tent,
hotel, cliff, river, hill, volcano, captain , sergeant e.t.c
The categories were not explicit but it was presumed that they were obvious to the participants
- Recall was 70% for the 1st word list
- this fell as participants were given an additional list to learn presumably due to interference
However, at the end they were given a cruel recall test, they were told they names of the categories as a cue, recall rose to about 70%
why is the fact that interference effects may be overcome by using cues a limitation
it is a limitation as it limits the explanation power of the interference theory
