Explanations Of Forgetting Flashcards
Interference
When one set of information competes with another causing it to be overwritten, leading to forgetting
Proactive interference
When old information disrupts the learning and retention of new information
Retroactive interference
When new information disrupts the retention of old information
Effect of similarity on interference
Interference is more likely when two lots of information are similar
Postman experiment for retroactive interference (1960)
Method: control group learned one list of paired words
Experimental group two lists of similar pained words ( first list= cat-moss , . second list= cat - jelly )
Findings: recall of the first list was higher in the control group.
Strength of The Interference Theory
Supports role of similarity (McGeoch and McDonald-1931)
Real world applications (Danaher et al-2008)
Limitations of the interference Theory
Artificiality
Incomplete explanation of forgetting (Ceraso)
Ceraso ( 1967 ) incomplete explanation of forgetting
If participants were tested again 24 hours later, recognition showed spontaneous recovery
Shows memories are temporary inaccessible
Encoding specificity principle
Proposed by Tulving
If a cue is needed to trigger memory recall, it must be present at encoding and retrieval
If the cue available at encoding and retrieval are different, forgetting occurs
Context-dependent forgetting
Cues can be external
Cues are encoded alongside information that is learned
Absence of these cues at the point of recall causes context dependent forgetting
This is because nothing in the environment will trigger memory recall
Godden and Baddeley (Context-Dependent Forgetting)
18 divers learned 36 words either on land or underwater
Where the environment was the same for learning and recall - better free recall
Where the environment was different for learning and recall - recall accuracy was worse
Cues were different - lead to retrieval failure
Conclusion of Godden- Baddeley (Context-Dependent Forgetting)
Memory is better when context for learning and recall is consistent
Associated contexts are called alongside information in memory
If context are different at point of recall - forgetting is more likely
State-dependent forgetting
Cues can be internal (mood, emotional state, physiological state)
If internal cues are different at point of recall, state dependent forgetting (internal cues cannot trigger memory recall )
Goodwin et al (State-Dependent Forgetting)
Male volunteers asked to remember a list of words when drunk or sober
They were then asked to recall 24 hours later - some were drunk some weren’t
Participants had higher recall when in the same physiological state at learning and recall
Suggests that if physiological states are different at learning and recall then forgetting is more likely
Carter and cassaday forgetting experiment
Participants given an antihistamine or a placebo and asked to learn a list of words
Asked to recall same list of words either with antihistamine or placebo
Recall was higher when participants were in the same physiological state
