Explanations for Forgetting: Retrieval Failure + Interference Flashcards
Meaningful Cues
Cue linked to material-to-be-assessed in a meaningful way
Others also encoded at time of learning
Cues
A trigger that enables access to memories
Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)
Tulving - recall is better when cues that were present when learning something are also present when we recall it
Retrieval Failure
Memory available but not accessible
Context-dependent Forgetting
Forgetting due to recall in environment different from where learning took place
Research support for Context-dependent Forgetting
Godden +Baddeley’s study of deep sea divers —->
- pps had to learn and recall a list of words either underwater or on land - had four conditions 2 matching and 2 non matching
- Accurate recall was 40% lower in non matching conditions
- -> concluded external cues available at learning being ifferent to those at recall lead to failiure
State-dependent Forgetting
Forgetting due to physical or psychological state different from when learning took place
Research Support for State dependent forgetting
Carter + Cassaday’s study w/ hayfever drugs
- pps given antihistamines for the mild sedative effect to create an internal physiological state different from the norm - had 4 conditions 2 m 2nm
- Found where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning and recall performance on memory test was a lot worse
- -> concluded when cues are absent = more forgetting
Real World Application - AO3
STRENGTH
- Can be used to overcome some everyday forgetting - may not have a strong effect its still worth paying attention to
e. g. when we can’t remember something its worth trying to recall the environment in which you learned it
Shows research can remind us of strategies we use in real life to improve recall
Strenght of context effects in real life (L)
Argued by Baddeley (1997) - context differences aren’t drastic enough to have an effect on recall
e.g like on land and underwater
Also learning in one room and recall in another is unlikely to cause much forgetting
- Retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not explain much everyday forgetting
Tests only for forgetting not recognition (L)
LIMITATION - context effects are dependent on the type of memory being tested
Godden + Baddeley (1980) replicated underwater experiment but for recognising a word from a list
–> performance was same in all 4 conditions
Suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting because it only applies to recall
Problems w/ the ESP
its isnt possible to establish whether a cue has been encoded or not
If a cue produced recall we assume it must have been encoded
if a cue didnt we assume it wasnt encoded
- reasoning is circular and based on assumptions
Interference Theory
When 2 pieces of info in LTM disrupt each other resulting in forgetting 1 or both or distorting them
Forgetting is due to lack of access to memory but it’s still available
More severe the more simliar the info
Proactive Interference (PI)
When old memories interfere with a new one
Retroactive Interference (RI)
When new memories interfere with an older one
Research on effects on similarity
McGeoch + McDonald - studied RI by changing amount of similarity between 2 sets of materials - pps learned list of words until 100% accuracy
- Then split into 6 diff. groups to learn a new list
G1; synonyms, G2: antonyms, G3: unrelated words to orginal etc
Found: pps who had to recall synonyms the worse the recall
Shows interference is stringest when memories are similar
Real World Interference: Rugby Players - AO3
STRENGTH - Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked players to recall the teams they played against in a season
- All played but number of games varied because some players missed matches from injury
- Those who played the most games had the poorest recall
=> Shows interference can operate in at least some real-world situations increasing validity of theory
COUNTERPOINT to Real World Interference
- May cause some forgetting in everyday life but it’s unusual as these conditions for interference is relatively rare
- Is very unlike lab studies where there’s high degree of control means a researcher can create ideal conditions for interference - fairly similar in order to interfere
- May happen occasionally in everyday life but not often
=> Suggests: most forgetting may be better explained by other theories like retrieval failure due to lack of cues
Validity Issues - AO3
Most studies supporting Interference Theory are lab based so researchers can control variables including confounding variables to show the clear link between interference and forgetting
HOWEVER - uses artificial material + unrealistic procedures vs in real life we often learn somthing and recall much later
