Explanations for forgetting Flashcards
What are the two explanations?
1) Interference theory
2) Retrieval failure due to an absence of cues
What are the two features of interference theory?
1) Proactive interference
2) Retroactive interference
AO1: Intro for interference theory
Interference theory suggests forgetting is due to when two pieces of information that are coded at different times get confused in the LTM, one memory disrupts the ability to recall the memory of another. This is most likely to happen if the information is similar. There are two types proactive and retroactive interference.
AO1: Interference theory
Proactive interference is when forgetting occurs because past information disrupts the ability to recall of present information meaning for example the memory of on old phone number meaning you forget the new number.
Retroactive interference is when forgetting occurs because the memory of recent information stores disrupts the ability to recall past information. For example the information of a new address disrupting the ability to recall an old address.
What are the 4 evaluations for interference theory?
1) RTS - McGeoch and McDonald - list of words
2) High reliability
3) Lacks mundane realism
AO3: IT - RTS
Research to support interference theory as an explanation for forgetting was conducted by McGeoch and McDonald. They asked participants to recall a list of 10 words (list A) until 100% accuracy. Participants then had to recall a second list of words (list B) and then asked to recall list A. They founds It was found this if list A and B had similar meanings recall was poor (12%) and forgetting is more likely compared to when the words were different (26%). This supports interference theory because it shows that recent information had interfered with the recall of past information and interference is strongest the more similar the items are, increasing the validity of interference theory as an explanation for forgetting.
AO3: IT - High reliability
A strength of interference theory as an explanation for forgetting is that much of the research, such as McGeoch and McDonald is high in reliability. This is because its conducted in a controlled lab setting so it can be repeated in similar conditioned for example giving participants the same lists to gain consistent results. Interference is one of the most consistent finding in Psychology with most studies showing that both types of inference is a very common way of forgetting in the LTM. Therefore increasing the internal validity of interference theory as an explanation for forgetting.
AO3: IT - mundane realism
However critics would argue that there’s a greater chance of interference in research studies than in real life as the research into interference theory as an explanation for forgetting lacks mundane realism as the research includes artificial tasks such as learning lists of words. Therefore it is more difficult to generalise the findings to real life examples of forgetting as it doesn’t reflect what we try to remember in real life such as birthdays, people’s faces and ingredients to a cake. These memories may be less likely to be contaminated by interference as they are more meaningful to us, strengthening the support of the research into interference theory.
What are the two features of retrieval failure due to an absence of cues?
1) Context-dependent forgetting
2) State- dependent forgetting
AO1: RFAC - intro
RFAC suggests forgetting is when information is still in the LTM but can’t be accessed due to a lack of memory cues.
AO1: RFAC
Context-dependent forgetting is when forgetting occurs due to a lack of external cues to trigger recall but the environment is different to where the information is coded, so forgetting is more likely. For example forgetting information in an exam in a different classroom to where the information was learnt.
State-dependent forgetting is when forgetting is due to a lack of internal cues to trigger recall because emotional state is different to when information was coded, so forgetting is more likely. Fir example forgetting a dance routine when performing because you are anxious compared to being calm when rehearsing.
What are the evaluations for RFAC? (4)
1) RTS - Godden and Badly - scuba divers
2) RTS - Goodwin et al - drunk or sober
3) Lacks mundane realism
4) Practical applications
AO3: RFAC - Scuba divers
RTS context dependent forgetting as an explanation for forgetting come from Godden and Badly. They asked sub divers to learn a list of words either on land or underwater. They then had to real the list in the same or opposite location. They found forgetting was more likely (40% less accurate) when asked to recall the list in the opposite location. This supports context-dependent forgetting as there was a lack of external cues to trigger recall so forgetting was more likely. This increases the credibility of the research into context dependent forgetting.
AO3: RFAC - Drunk
RTS state dependent forgetting as an explanation for forgetting comes from Goodwin et al. They asked male volunteers to learn a list of words drunk or sober. They then had to recall the information in the opposite state to which information was coded. They found forgetting was more likely when information was recalled in the opposite state as there was a lack of internal cues to trigger recall so forgetting is more likely. This increases the validity of state depend forgetting as an explanation for forgetting.
AO3: RFAC - mundane realism
RFAC can be criticised as an explanation for forgetting as much of the research lacks mundane realism. This is because tasks includes learning lists of words. Therefore it difficult to generalise the findings to real life example of forgetting as in real life we may be learning more complex information such as Psychological theories which can’t be easily accessed with memory cues. This reduces the external validity of the research into RFAC.
AO3: RFAC - Practical applications
A strength of RFAC as an explanation for forgetting is that it has practical applications. This is because the principles of the theory that forgetting is due to a lack of memory cues has led to a technique used in the cognitive interview called context reinstatement. This is where the witness is asked to mentally place themselves at the scene of the crime and think about their emotions to trigger recall as they access internal and external memory cues. Therefore the research into RFAC is an important part of applied psychology is important because it gives a more accurate EWT, increasing the credibility of RFAC as an explanation for forgetting.
