Explanations for forgetting- interference Flashcards
What is interference?
An explanation for forgetting in terms of one memory disrupting the ability to recall another.
WHAT DOES INTERFERENCE THEORY SUGGEST ?
Interference theory suggests forgetting is caused by conflicting memories
What makes it more likely for interference to occur and why?
The more similar the two memories are the more interference it causes as the two memories become confused with one another.
What is retroactive interference?
Refers to the observation that learning something new interferes with previously learned material, leading to that material being forgotten.
Who first identified retroactive interference?
Muller (1900).
What did M find with RI?
Muller (1900) identified retroactive interference through a study where participants tasked with learning a list of syllables are given an intervening task between exposure to the syllables and recall. The intervening task (describing paintings) produced retroactive interference with participants struggling to recall their lists.
What did M+M find? RI
McGeoch & McDonald in a lab experiment Showed that forgetting of original material is greater if the intervening terms presented prior to recall are more similar to the original, something only RI rather than decay can explain.
peel paragraph for m+m + evidence
P= Supporting evidence from McGeoch & Mcdonald
E= studied retroactive interference by changing amount of similarity between 2 sets of materials, ppts first learnt a set of words when they had to learn another list
E= ppts recall of the original list was lower with synonyms compared to acronyms, unrelated adjectives, numbers of nonsense syllables.
L= demonstrates interference strongest when memories similar.
Methodology of M+M (1931)
effects of similarity - Retroactive interference - mcgeoch and Mcdonald
-procedure- studied retroactive interference by changing the similarity two sets of lists
- participants learned a list of 10 words to 100% accuracy then learned another list of words depending on their group
- there where 6 groups therefore 6 conditions changing based on the 2nd set of word who learned different words.
-Group 1 Synonyms (same meaning)
-Group 2 (opposite meaning)
-Group 3 unrelated words
-Group 4 nonsense syllables (XYN)
-Group 5 3 digit number
-Group 6 rested (no new list)
peel paragraph with limitation of m+m research and supporting evidence from B+H RUGBY?
P= Limitation- lacks ecological validity
E= recalling list of words not everyday event
E= Baddeley and hitch found rugby players recall of team from 3 weeks ago better if 0 matches played since.
L= Demonstrates accurate recall did not depend on how long ago matches took place but games played in mean time illustrating interference as reason for forgetting.
What is proactive interference?
Refers to the observation that previously learned material interferes with current attempts to learn something, leading to forgetting of current material.
What did Under…. find and conclude?
Underwood found that ppts typically remembered the trigrams that were presented first, irrespective of the interval length.
They concluded that the results suggest proactive interference occurred, as memory for the earlier consonants, which had transferred to long-term memory, was interfering with the memory for new consonants, due to the similarity of the information presented.
What was underwoods methodology?
Participants were presented with meaningless three-letter consonant trigrams (for example, THG) at different intervals (3, 6, 9 second, etc). To prevent rehearsal the participants had to count backwards in threes before recalling.
criticism for the theory from K AND EAG… PEEL
P= Opposing research from Kane and Eagle
E= PPTS with low WM spans had greater proactive interference
E= Demonstrates that a greater WMM span was less susceptible to proactive interference
L= Kane and Eagle research provides incomplete exp bc doesn’t account for these individual differences in forgetting.
PEEL FOR CRITICISM TUL..
P= limitation- fails to explain loss of info may only be temporary
E= Tulving demonstrated apparent interference effects are actually due to absence of cues
E= PPTS given 5 word lists organised into categories recall was 70% for 1st word list but fell w addition lists, when told name of categories rose again to 70%
L= demonstrates interference theory too simplistic, retrieval failure better exp as can account for findings of Tulving through encoding specificity principle.
