Explanations for Forgetting: Retrieval Failure

Question 1

Outline the encoding specificity principle

Answer 1

• Tulving and Thomson proposed memory is most effective if info present at encoding is also available at time of retrieval.
• The principle says that a cue doesn’t have to be exactly right but the closer the cue is to the original item, the more useful it will be

Question 2

Define context-dependent forgetting

Answer 2

A type of forgetting that occurs when the environment isn’t the same at the time of recall than it was at the time of encoding

Question 3

Define state-dependent forgetting

Answer 3

A type of forgetting that occurs when the state an individual is in is different at the time of recall than the state at the time of encoding

Question 4

Describe Tulving and Pearlstone’s study

Answer 4

• They showed the value of retrieval cues. Participants learnt words in categories. Each word was presented with a category. They had to either recall as many as they could (free recall) or given cues in the form of category names (cued recall).
• In the free recall condition, 40% of words were recalled compared to 60% in the cued recall. Showing that cues are explicitly or implicitly encoded at the time of learning.

Question 5

Describe a study on state-dependent forgetting (emotional/mental state)

Answer 5

• Goodwin et al asked male volunteers to remember a list of words when they were drunk or sober. They were asked to recall the lists after 24 hours when some were sober but others had to get drunk again.
• They found recall was higher for those in the state they were in when encoding matched the recall state

Question 6

Describe a study on context-dependent forgetting

Answer 6

• Godden and Baddeley investigated the effect of contextual cues.
• They got scuba divers to learn a set of words on land or underwater. Then, were tested on land or underwater. Highest recall was when the initial context matched the recall environment.

Question 7

Give evaluation for retrieval failure (research support)

Answer 7

• Carter and Cassaday gave participants antihistamine drug which them slightly drowsy, creating a difference in state.
• They had to learn a list of words then recall the info (4 conditions). In the conditions where there was a mismatch in states, recall was worse. So when cues are absent (being drowsy when learning) then forgetting is more likely, as retrieval failure.

Question 8

Give evaluation for retrieval failure (real-life application + counter)

Answer 8

• It has been used to improve recall for real-world situations. An application was Abernathy’s research that suggests how revising in the room where you will take an exam can improve result, or even thinking of the room can be effective. This shows how research into retrieval failure can suggest strategies to improve real-life situation like taking exams.
• However, Baddeley argues context effects in real life aren’t strong. Contexts have to be very different before the effect is seen. e.g. learning something in one room and recalling in another is unlikely to cause much forgetting as these environments aren’t different enough. This means real-life applications of retrieval failure due to contextual cues don’t actually explain much forgetting.

Question 9

Give evaluation for retrieval failure (support for retrieval failure over interference as an explanation)

Answer 9

• Tulving and Psotka showed that interreference effects may be due to the absence of cues. Participants were given word lists, each word with categories. They were asked to list the words with no cue (free recall) or after being given the category names as cues (cued recall). The more lists they had to learn, the worse their performance became
• But, in the cued recall condition, effects of interference disappeared, they remembered about 70% of words regardless of how many lists were given. This shows information is available but can’t be retrieved, making retrieval failure a powerful explanation.