explanations of forgetting :interference eval

Question 1

Evidence from lab studies

Answer 1

Research into Interference has the most consistent findings. Therefore this explanation is reliable. Also thousands of lab experiments have been carried out for interference such as McGeoch and McDonald’s. These studies show that interference is the common way we forget info. This is a strength because lab experiments control for extraneous variables and thus increases validity.

Question 2

Artificial materials

Answer 2

Research has been done in labs rather than real life situation. Stimulus used are lists of words. These words have no particular meaning to ppts so are less likely to remember. However if you were to use more meaningful material this would be less of a limitation. Therefore this has low external validity and cannot be applied to everyday life

Question 3

Real life studies

Answer 3

Baddeley and Hitch asked rugby players to remember the names of the teams they faced that season. Most players missed some games due to injury. Results showed that recall didn’t depend on how long ago you played the matches, It was the number of games they played. Supports this explanation as it shows that passage of time is not the main reason for forgetting but rather it is inference. Gives explanation ecological validity.

Question 4

Real life study by Burke and Skrull

Answer 4

They presented a series of ads for ppts who had to recall the details of what they have seen.In some cases they had difficulty in recalling earlier adverts and other cases they had problems remembering later ones. They found that the effect was greater when the ads were similar. They called this competitive interference.

Question 5

Individual differences

Answer 5

some people are less likely to be affected by proactive interference. Kane and Engle showed that people with greater working memory were less susceptible to proactive interference. The ppts with low working memory spans showed greater proactive interference when recalling the second and third word list than ppts with higher working memory spans. limitation as it showed that higher working spans can counteract the effects of proactive interference. SO this explanation doesn’t take into account individual differences