explanations for forgetting ~ retrieval failure Flashcards
retrieval failure definition
a form of forgetting, occurs when we do not have the necessary cues to access memory. the memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided
when are associated cues stored
when in information is initially places in the memory
what happens if cues are not available on recall
it may appear that the information has been forgotten due to retrieval failure where we cannot access the memories that are there
a reason people forget
insufficient cues
cue definition
a trigger of information that allows us to access a memory. such cues may be meaningful or may indirectly linked by being encoded at the time of learning. indirect cues may be external or internal
who did research into retrieval failure
Tulving
when did Tulving do research into retrieval failure
1983
what did Tulving find when reviewing research into retrieval failure
a consistent pattern of findings which he summarised into encoding specificity principle
encoding specificity principle
a cue (if going to be helpful) has to be both present at encoding and retrieval
what happens of cues are different or absent at encoding or retrieval
there will be some forgetting
how are some cues encoded
at the time of learning in a meaningful way
what are some cues used in
mnemonic techniques
non-meaningful cues
cues encoded at time of learning but not in a meaningful way
2 types of non-meaningful cues
-context-dependent forgetting
-state-dependent forgetting
context-dependent forgetting
recall depends on external cue
state-dependent forgetting
recall depends on internal cue
who did research into context-dependent forgetting
Godden and Baddeley
when did Godden and Baddeley do research on context-dependent forgetting
1975
Godden and Baddeley research on context-dependent forgetting procedure
studied deep sea divers to see if training on land helped or hindered their work underwater. the divers leaned a list of words either underwater or on land and then asked to recall the words either under water or on land, there were 4 conditions
what were the 4 conditions on Godden and Baddeley research on context-dependent forgetting procedure
-learn on land, recall on land
-learn on land, recall underwater
-learn underwater, recall on land
-learn underwater, recall underwater
Godden and Baddeley research on context-dependent forgetting findings
-in 2 conditions environmental contexts of learning and recall were matched and on 2 they were not
-accurate recall was 40% lower in non-matching conditions
Godden and Baddeley research on context-dependent forgetting conclusions
if external cues available at learning were different at recall it lead to retrieval failure
who did research on state-dependent forgetting
Carter and Cassaday
when did Carter and Cassaday do research on state-dependent forgetting
1998
Carter and Cassaday do research on state-dependent forgetting procedure
gave antihistamine drugs to participants which had a mild seductive effect, making participant slightly drowsy. this creates a different psychological state from normal state of being awake and alert. the participants had to learn a list of words and passages of prose then recall information. there were 4 conditions
what were the 4 conditions Carter and Cassaday do research on state-dependent forgetting procedure
-learn on drug, recall on drug
-learn on drug, recall not on drug
-learn not on drug, recall on drug
-learn not on drug, recall not on drug
Carter and Cassaday do research on state-dependent forgetting findings
in conditions where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning and recall, performance on the memory test was significantly worse
Carter and Cassaday do research on state-dependent forgetting conclusion
when cues are absent there is more forgetting
strength for retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting - real world application
-retrieval cues can help to overcome forgetting in everyday situations
-although cues may not have a very strong effect on forgetting Baddeley suggests they are woth paying attention to. for example when having trouble remembering it is good to recall in environment in which you first learned it –> research can remind us of strategies we use in real world to improve recall
strength for retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting - research support
-range of research supports retrieval failure explanation
-studies by Godden and Baddeley, Carter and Cassaday are just 2 examples showing that lack of relevant cues at recall can lead to context-dependent and state-dependent forgetting in everyday life. Eyserick and Keane argue retrieval failure is main reason for forgetting from LTM –> evidence shows retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as in highly controlled lab settings
limitation for retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting - counterpoint to research support
-Baddeley argues that context effects are not very strong, especially in everyday life
-different contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen (hard to find something as different as land and water), in contrast learning something in one room and recalling in another does not likely cause forgetting as environments are not different enough
-means that retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not actually explain much everyday forgetting
limitation for retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting - recall vs recognition
-context effects may depend on type of memory being tested
-Godden and Baddeley (1980) replicated their underwater experiment but used a recognition test instead of recall (participants had to say id they recognised word from a list instead of retrieving for themselves). when recognition was tested there was no context-dependent forgetting as performance was the same in all conditions –> suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting as only applies to recall not recognition
evaluation for retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting - problems with ESP
s- a lot of evidence that forgetting takes place when there is a mismatch/absence of encoding and retrieval cues
l-however, is it possible to independently establish if a cue has been encoded or not. the reasoning is circular and based on assumptions in an experiment if the cue did not produce recall we assume it cannot have been encoded, if cue produced recall we assume it must be encoded
