Explanations for Forgetting

Question 1

What is interference?

Answer 1

An explanation for forgetting in terms of one memory disrupting the ability to recall another

Question 2

What is proactive interference (PI)?

Answer 2

Past learning interferes with current attempts to learn something

Question 3

What is retroactive interference (RI)?

Answer 3

Current attempts to learn something interferes with past learning

Question 4

What study tested for retroactive interference?

Answer 4

McGeoch and Mcdonald (1931)

Question 5

What was the procedure of the retroactive interference study?

Answer 5

All participants had to learn the same first word list
They were then divided into groups for the second word list:
1. Synonyms
2. Antonyms
3. Words unrelated to the original list
4. 3 digit numbers
5. Consonant syllables
6. No new word list (control group)

Question 6

What were the findings of the retroactive interference study?

Answer 6

Those who had learnt the synonyms list experienced an average of 3.1 fewer correct items recalled, compared to the control group
This supports the idea that the extent of forgetting is larger when the 2 memories or materials are very similar

Question 7

Real life application of interference theory - AO3

Answer 7

One strength of interference theory is evidence for its effect in more everyday situations.
Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a rugby season. The players all played for the same time interval (over one season) but the number of intervening games varied because some players missed matches due to injury. They found that players who played the most games had the poorest recall
This study shows that interference can operate in at least some real world situations, increasing the validity of the theory.

Question 8

Inference theory research counterpoint - AO3

Answer 8

However despite this, critics have argued that interference in the real world may be quite rare, because the conditions needed to produce interference are quite rare, whereas in a lab this is not the case.
For example, in the real world we only rarely learn two very similar pieces of information within a short time frame and then have to recall them, Whereas in a lab learning an recall are controlled and happen quite quickly. Also in the real world there are variables that impact us and our learning, which can be controlled in a lab.
Therefore a lab can produce the conditions need for interference to occur in a way they may rarely do in the real world which means that whilst we can produce interference in a lab, it may not always be a reliable explanation in the real world and forgetting may be better explained by theories such as retrieval failure.

Question 9

Interference can be overcome by using cues - AO3

Answer 9

One limitation is that interference is temporary and can be overcome by using cues.
Tulving and Psotka (1971) gave participants lists of words organised into categories, one list at a time (the categories were kept a secret). Recall averaged at around 70% for the first list but became progressively worse as additional lists were learned (PI).
However, at the end of the experiment the participants were given a cued test in which they were told the categories, which resulting in the recall rising to around 70% again.
This shows that interference causes a temporary loss of access to material that is still in LTM, rather than causing forgetting, as the theory suggests.

Question 10

Who proposed the encoding specificity?

Answer 10

Tulving (1983)

Question 11

What is the encoding specificity?

Answer 11

• If a cue is going to be helpful, it must be present at the time of coding and also present at the time of retrieval
• If this isn’t the case, forgetting will occur
• Info is in fact still there, but we can’t access it

Question 12

What are the 2 types of retrieval failure?

Answer 12

Context dependent forgetting
State dependent forgetting

Question 13

What is context dependent forgetting?

Answer 13

Recall depends on external cues such as the weather, location, sights, sounds, etc.

Question 14

What is state dependent forgetting?

Answer 14

Recall depends on internal cues such as how you’re feeling at the time, or experiencing a change in external state (e.g being drunk)

Question 15

What was the study researching into context dependent forgetting?

Answer 15

Godden and Baddeley (1975)

Question 16

How did Godden and Baddeley carry out this study?

Answer 16

Participants split into 4 conditions:
1. Learn on land: recall on land
2. Learn on land: recall underwater
3. Learn underwater: recall on land
4. Learn underwater: recall underwater
- Found that accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions
- Concluded that recall was lower due to cues when learning being different to cues when retrieving

Question 17

What was the study researching state dependent forgetting?

Answer 17

Carter and Cassaday (1998)

Question 18

How did Carter and Cassaday carry out this study?

Answer 18

Participants were split into 4 conditions:
1. Learn on drug: recall on drug
2. Learn on drug: recall not on drug
3. Learn not on drug: recall on drug
4. Learn not on drug: recall not on drug
- Recall was significantly worse in the mismatched conditions
- Suggests that when cues are absent, forgetting occurs

Question 19

AO3 - research support for retrieval failure

Answer 19

P: a strength of retrieval failure as a theory of forgetting is the wide range of research support
E: further research completed by Godden and Baddeley found that participants who learnt word lists in the same conditions had a 40% higher recall rate
E: this shows that retrieval failure also had real world application, which increases the validity of the theory

Question 20

AO3: lack of context effects

Answer 20

P: a limitation of the research, however, is that Baddeley (1977) argued that context effects are actually not very strong, especially in real life. Different contexts may have to be studied before an effect is seen
E: for example, it would be difficult to find an environment as contrasting as land and underwater.
E: learning in 2 different rooms isn’t likely to cause retrieval failure as the environments do not differ enough
L: this shows that retrieval failure due to context dependent forgetting may not explain enough about forgetting in daily life

Question 21

AO3: retrieval failure may depend on the type of memory being used

Answer 21

P: a further limitation suggests that context effects may depend on the type of memory being used
E: Godden and Baddeley (1980) repeated their underwater experiment but asked whether ppts recognised a word read to them, rather than retrieving the word themselves
E: under these circumstances, there was no context dependent effect; performance was the same across all 4 conditions
L: therefore retrieval failure as an explanation may be limiting, because it only applies when a person has to recall the info rather than recognise it