explanations for forgetting: interference Flashcards
interference
- when one memory disturbs the ability to recall another
- might result in forgetting information or distorting one of both parts being recalled
- more likely to happen if the memories are similar
Proactive interference
when an old memory interferes with a new one
Example of Proactive interference
Old phone number or your maiden name
Retroactive Interference
when a new memory interferes with an old one
Example of Retroactive Interference
Forgetting an old address but remembering a new address
Underwood and Postman (1960) - Aim
find out if new learning interferes with previous learning *retroactive interference)
Underwood and Postman (1960) - Procedure & Results
Group A = learnt a list of word pairs and then asked to learn a second list of word pairs
Group B = only learnt the 1st list of word pairs
They both only had to recall the first list
Group b’s recall of the first list was more accurate than Group A’s
Underwood and Postman (1960) - conclusion
New learning interfered with the ability to recall the first list
Evaluation of Underwood and Postman (1960) - Strengths
- controlled
- independent measures design
- supporting evidence
Evaluation of Underwood and Postman (1960) - Weaknesses
- lack of external validity
- individual differences
- demand characteristics
Evaluation of Interference - real-world interference (strength)
- studies have looked at more everyday situations of interference
Baddeley & Hitch (1977) - asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a season ( all played for the same amount of time but the number of games played differed due to injuries)
- players who played most games have the poorest recall
- most interference to their memory
- shows that interference can be applied to some everyday situations
Evaluation of Interference - other explanations of forgetting (weakness)
- interference is less likely to be an explanation of forgetting everyday life
- maybe an explanation in situations where the events are similar but not all events we forget are
- lab studies may prove it as they create situations where events are similar (artificial)
- suggests that forgetting may be better explained by another explanation ( retrieval failure due to a lack of cues)
Evaluation of Interference - other interference and cues (weakness)
- interference is temporary and can be overcome by using cues
Tulving & Psotka (1971) - gave ppts 5 lists of 24 words and some were arranged into categories
- they were given 1 list at a time
-recall was about 70% but fell as they were given each list
- at the end they were given a cued recall test (names of categories)
- recall rose to about 70%
- it tells us that interference does cause a temporary loss of information in the LTM and that it can be overcome if we are given a cue to help us remember
Evaluation of Interference - evidence from drug studies retrograde facilitation (strength)
- PPTs were given a list of words and some were asked to learn under the influence of diazepam & others a placebo
- experimental condition had a poorer recall of the list one week later compared to the control group
- when the list was learnt prior the drug being taken later the recall was better than the placebo (drug improved recall)
- suggested that the drug prevents new information (post-taking the drug) from reaching parts of the brain involved in processing memories so it can’t interfere retroactively with info already stored
- if you reduce interference forgetting is reduced
Evaluation of Interference - validity issues (weakness)
- in lab studies, there’s more chance of interference being shown than in real-life situations
- this is due to the artificial stimulus material (Underwood)
- we are more likely to remember birthdays, shopping lists etc
- we can’t generalise findings to real-life
