EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING

Question 1

Define interference theory

Answer 1

• when 2 pieces of information conflict with each other, resulting in the forgetting of one or both (or distortion) in the memory
• theory has been proposed for the forgetting in the LTM

Question 2

Define proactive interference

Answer 2

occurs when an older memory interferes with a new one

Question 3

Define retroactive interference

Answer 3

occurs when a new memory interferes with an older one

Question 4

who studied the effects of similarity?

Answer 4

McGeoch and McDonald

Question 5

Outline the “effect of similarity” study

Answer 5

• Studied retroactive interference
• 6 groups of ppts learned a list of words until they remembered it with 100% accuracy
• Each group had to learn a second list
• synonyms to orig list, antonyms to orig list, unrelated words, syllables, 3 digit numbers, no new list
• Then had to recall the original list

Question 6

State results of the “effects of similarity” study (McGeoch and McDonald)

Answer 6

• Those who learned no new list recalled the previous list with the highest accuracy
• Those who learned synonyms recalled the previous list with the lowest accuracy

Question 7

Explain the results of the “effects of similarity” study (McGeoch and McDonald)

Answer 7

• Learning similar lists of similar words to the previous list causes worse recall of the first list than learning unrelated items (e.g numbers)
• Shows that the similarity of information affects the ability to recall previously learned information

Question 8

describe Baddeley and Hitch’s investigation regarding interference theory

Answer 8

• wanted to compare 2 explanations for forgetting: decay and interference
• asked rugby players to recall teams played early in season
• some players were injured, so missed games

Question 9

how did Baddeley and Hitch’s finding support interference theory?

Answer 9

• results showed that the probability of correct recall was dependent on the number of intervening games, not the length of time
• recall for the last game played were equally as good, regardless of whether it was a week or 3 weeks ago
• these findings supports interference theory

Question 10

what is a limitation of interference theory?

Answer 10

• it is rare for this to be the cause of forgetting in everyday life
• the high degree of control in the laboratory environment is not present in everyday life, meaning the ideal conditions for interference are not present
• for interference, 2 sets of information must be extremely similar, which is not controlled in real life
• this means forgetting is better explained by other reasons

Question 11

how did Goenen and Luijtelaar research into interference theory?

Answer 11

• gave ppts a list to learn
• those who LEARNED AFTER taking the drug, “diazepam” had poorer recall than the control group, who had a placebo
• those who recalled the list they learned BEFORE taking the drug performed better than the control groups “later” recall

Question 12

state John Wixted’s explanation for Goenen and Luijtelaar’s drug study

Answer 12

• the drug prevented new info from reaching the part of the brain that processes memories
• so the drug prevents interference
• therefore, info cannot retroactively interfere with previously learned information
• the study showed that interference can cause forgetting

Question 13

describe Burke and Skrull’s research into supporting interference theory

Answer 13

• presented magazine ads to ppts, who had to recall details
• some had more difficulty recalling earlier ads, others with later ads
• the effect was greater when the ads were similar
• findings suggested that similar info can cause both retro and proactive interference

Question 14

who proposed and what is “Encoding Specificity Principle”

Answer 14

• Tulving, 1983
• found that for a cue to be helpful in retrieval, it has to be present at both learning and recall
• the less cues available at both learning and recall, the poorer the memory

Question 15

define and give an example of ‘Meaningful Cues’

Answer 15

• cues that are encoded at the time of learning in a meaningful way
• e.g Mnemonics, images can trigger memories

Question 16

define and give an example of ‘Non-Meaningful Cues’

Answer 16

• relate to the external environment or the internal state
• e.g. context-dependent (room you learned in), state-dependent (how you felt when learning)

Question 17

how did Godden and Baddeley’s study support context-dependent forgetting?

Answer 17

• recruited 4 groups of divers to learn a set of words either on land or underwater, then recall either on land or underwater
• found that accurate recall was 40% lower in the conditions where the environment of learning and recall didn’t match
• concluded that external cues available at learning were different from the ones available at recall, leading to retrieval failure

Question 18

how did Carter and Cassidy’s research support state-dependent forgetting?

Answer 18

• had 4 conditions, where ppts learned a list either on a drug (increasing tiredness) or off a drug, and recalled on a drug or off a drug
• found conditions where the internal state did not match at the time of learning and recall, performance was worse

Question 19

how did Aggleton and Waskett’s research support context-dependent forgetting?

Answer 19

• ppts had visited museum w significant smells 6/7years ago
• given a memory test based on museum with 2 conditions
• those who answered in the presence of the smells performed better than those who answered without the smells
• found that when cues that were present at learning are not present at recall, recall is worse

Question 20

explain the findings of Aggleton and Waskett’s context-dependent study

Answer 20

• smells acted as cues, which triggered memories in the LTM
• found that recall is worse when cues that were present at learning are not present at retrieving

Question 21

how did Godwin et al’s study support state-dependent forgetting?

Answer 21

• 4 conditions of ppts
• had to learn list of words either sober or drunk
• had to recall 24 hours later either sober or drunk
• forgetting was increased when the internal states did not match

Question 22

explain the results of Goodwin et al’s state-dependent study

Answer 22

• the internal state of the ppts acted as cues
• when states did not match, forgetting was increased
• because cues that were present at learning were not present at recall

Question 23

what is a strength of research into retrieval failure?

Answer 23

• it has real world application
• Smith showed that thinking of the room where original learning took place is just as effective as being in the same room at recall
• this can result in improved recall in things such as the cognitive interview

Question 24

what is Eysneck’s argument supporting retrieval failure due to lack of cues?

Answer 24

• may be the main reason for forgetting from the LTM
• studies being done were in labs
• this means that validity is increased, due to the high level of control. This means it is ensured that we are studying what we are aiming to investigate

Question 25

state the limitation for retrieval failure (due to context effects) provided by Baddley

Answer 25

• argues that

Question 26

explain retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

Answer 26

• suggests that forgetting occurs when the cues present at the time of encoding the information are not present at the time of recall.
• This describes Tulving’s ‘encoding specificity principle’