Explanations for Forgetting - Interference theory

Question 1

What is forgetting?

Answer 1

Forgetting is the failure to retrieve memories.

This may be because the information is either unavailable (trace decay theory), or inaccessible (interference theory; retrieval failure, due to an absence of cues).

Question 2

The two key explanations for forgetting that you need to know are:

Answer 2

Interference theory (proactive and retroactive interference)
Retrieval failure, due to absence of cues

Question 3

what is interference

Answer 3

Interference: One memory disrupts the ability to recall another

Question 4

Proactive interference

Answer 4

Proactive interference: Works forwards in time.
A form of interference that occurs when past memories inhibit an individual’s ability to recall new memories.
For example, you get a new pin number for your bank account, but have difficulty recalling it as you keep recalling your old pin number.

Question 5

Retroactive interference

Answer 5

Retroactive interference: Works backwards in time.
A form of interference that occurs when newly learned information interferes with the recall of previously learned information.
For example, you go on holiday to the same place twice, but when you try to recall what you did during your first trip, you keep remembering what happened the second time you visited.

Question 6

Schmidt et al. (2000): Interference Theory
Aim

Answer 6

To assess the influence of retroactive interference upon the memory of street names learned during childhood

Question 7

Schmidt et al. (2000): Interference Theory
Procedure

Answer 7

700 names were randomly selected from a database of 1700 former students of a Dutch elementary school and were sent a questionnaire.
211 responded to the questionnaire, ranging from 11 to 79 years of age.
They were given a map of the Molenberg neighbourhood (where they had gone to school) with all 48 street names replaced with numbers and asked to remember as many of them as possible.
Other relevant personal details were collected by questionnaire, such as how many times they had moved house, where they had lived and for how long, how often they visited Molenberg, etc.
The amount of retroactive interference experienced was assessed by the number of times individuals had moved to other neighbourhoods or cities (thus learning new sets of street names).
This measurement was very variable; 25% of participants had never moved, while one participant had moved 40 times.

Question 8

Schmidt et al. (2000): Interference Theory
Findings

Answer 8

There was a positive association between the number of times participants had moved house outside the Molenberg neighbourhood and the number of street names forgotten

Question 9

Schmidt et al. (2000): Interference Theory
Conclusions

Answer 9

The findings suggest that learning new patterns of street names when moving house makes recalling an older pattern of street names harder to do.
Retroactive interference does seem to be able to explain forgetting in some real-life situations.

Question 10

Schmidt et al. (2000): Interference Theory
Evaluation

Answer 10

:(Extraneous variables: Those who had played extensively in the neighbourhood or walked to school would probably have learned the street names to a greater degree than those who didn’t play in the neighbourhood or who were driven to school.

:)The methodology used shows that it is possible to conduct research on interference in real-life settings.

Question 11

:(Interference theory only really explains forgetting when the two pieces of information are similar to each other (e.g. two names or phone numbers)
Why is this a weakness?

Answer 11

It cannot explain all incidences of forgetting – it is not particularly common to be presented with two very similar pieces of information so this theory cannot explain forgetting in the majority of real-life settings.

Question 12

:)However, there is support from research evidence:

Answer 12

P: Evidence to support the interference theory of forgetting comes from Schmidt et al. (2000)….
E: This study found…
C: This supports forgetting due to retroactive interference because…

Question 13

:)Much of the research into the interference theory of forgetting is conducted under highly controlled laboratory conditions. Why is this a strength?

Answer 13

This means that the results have high internal validity and it is easier to establish a cause-effect relationship in terms of the factors that lead to forgetting.
Replication is also possible.

Question 14

:(HOWEVER… what is the drawback of studying memory under highly controlled, artificial settings?

Answer 14

Low ecological validity – it can be difficult to generalise the findings to everyday settings because the tasks are often artificial (e.g. learning lists of word pairs) and have little relevance to forgetting in real life scenarios.
Researchers may deliberately attempt to induce interference in laboratory studies, e.g. by limiting the time between learning and recall, which wouldn’t necessary happen in the real world.

Question 15

:(Although there is strong evidence from research that interference is a real effect, these studies do not and cannot identify the cognitive processes at work - we must make inferences about what is happening within the memory to cause the disruption.

Answer 15

It could be argued that this reduces the validity of the theory as there is no direct empirical evidence for interference.
Inferences may be incorrect as mental processes are not directly observable