Explanations of Forgetting - Interference

Question 1

Interference Explanation

Answer 1

1) Forgetting in LTM from being unable to access memories even though they’re available
2) Worse when memories are similar because:
• In PI previously stored info makes new info more difficult to store.
• In RI new info overwrites previous memories which are similar.

Question 2

Types of Interference

Answer 2

1) Proactive - older memory disrupts new one, e.g. learning french before disrupts learning spanish now.
2) Retroactive - newer memory disrupts older one, learning spanish now disrupts previously learnt french.

Question 3

Effects of Similarity - Procedure

Answer 3

1) Pps asked to learn a list of words to 100% accuracy.
2) Then were given a new list to learn. The new material varied in the degree to which it was similar to the old:
• Group 1: synonyms - words had same meanings as the originals.
Group 2: antonyms - words had opposite meanings to the originals.
• Group 3: unrelated - words unrelated to the original ones.
• Group 4: consonant syllables.
• Group 5: three-digit numbers.
• Group 6: no new list - (control condition).

Question 4

Effects of Similarity - Findings

Answer 4

McGeoch & McDonald

1) Performance depended on the nature of the second list. The most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall.

—> This shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar.

Question 5

STRENGTH of Interference

Answer 5

REAL-WORLD APPLICATION

1) Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall the
names of teams they had played against during a rugby season.
2) Players did not play the same number of games (injuries). Those
who played most (more interference) had poorest recall.
—> Shows interference operates in real situations, increasing validity of theory.

Question 6

STRENGTH of Interference

Answer 6

RESEARCH SUPPORT - Drug Studies

1) Material learned just before taking diazepam recalled better than a placebo group one week later - this is retrograde facilitation (Coenen and van
Luijtelaar 1997).
2) The drug stopped new info
reaching brain areas that process memories, so it could
not retroactively interfere with stored information.
—> Shows forgetting is due to interference - reducing the interference reduced the forgetting.