Forgetting

Question 1

Incidental forgetting

Answer 1

occurs without the intention to forget

Question 2

motivated forgetting

Answer 2

purposefully diminish access to memory (e.g., unwanted memories)

Question 3

superior autobiographical memory

Answer 3

• uncontrollable remembering
• feels as though the person relives the events they remember
• not under conscious control
• cannot forget unpleasant memories
• memories can be distracting

Question 4

forgetting rate

Answer 4

forgetting increases as time progresses BUT the rate of forgetting is different

Ebbinhaus ‘forgetting curve’
- logarithmic relationship
- forgetting rapid initially
- less additional forgetting at longer intervals

Question 5

Forgetting public events: Meeter et al., 2005

Answer 5

aim:
- forgetting rate of public events
task:
- 14k participants completed online study of recall and recognition for 40 events

results:
- similar to Ebbinghaus forgetting curve

Question 6

forgetting personal events: Bahrick et al., 1975

Answer 6

aim:
- to explore forgetting rate of personal events/information

task:
- 400 US high school students were tested on recalling and recognising names of classmates after delays of up to 30 years

results:
- recognition of faces/names remained intact
- match up with faces also unimpaired
- recall a name when given a face extensively impaired
- similar to Ebbinghaus

Question 7

forgetting knowledge: Barrack, 1984

Answer 7

aim:
- explored forgetting of foreign language taught at university

task:
- tested graduates attending annual alumni reunion

results:
- forgetting levels out after a period of 2 years
- little forgetting after this period

Question 8

availability vs accessibility (memory)

Answer 8

recall worse after delays than recognition

availability:
- is the item in the memory store (may not have a memory trace any more)
accessibility:
- is the item accessible for retrieval

both may denote forgetting

Question 9

factors that discourage forgetting

Answer 9

-better learning at the beginning
- repeated attempts to retrieve - (testing effect/generation effect) builds up resistance to forgetting
- Linton (1975): recalling an event reduces rate of forgetting

incomplete or inaccurate retrieval may lead to memort distortions

Question 10

Jost’s law:

Answer 10

Older memories are more durable and forgotten less rapidly than newer memories

New memories are initially more vulnerable to disruption/distortion until they are consolidated

Question 11

consolidation

Answer 11

the process that transforms new memories from a fragile state, in which they can be disrupted, to a more permanent state, in which they are resistant to disruption

Question 12

synaptic consolidation

Answer 12

• structural changes in the synaptic connections between neurons
• may take hours - days to complete
• memories are vulnerable until these changes are complete

Question 13

systems consolidation

Answer 13

• gradual shift of memory from hippocampus to the cortex
• memory components (in the cortex) are replayed until they are linked
• may take months - years to complete
• memories are vulnerable for as long as they rely on the hippocampus

Question 14

causes of incidental forgetting

Answer 14

1. trace decay - memories weaken due to passage of time
2. context shifts - different cues are available now than the only ones at encoding
3. interference - similar memories hinder retrieval

Question 15

trace decay

Answer 15

• priming and familiarity especially prone to memory
• a memorys activations fade but memory is intact OR memory degrades as well

bio basis
- synaptic connections degrade, neurons die
- neurogenesis leads to remodeling of connections - bad for older memories, good for learning

cannot control REHEARSAL and INTERFERENCE FROM NEW EXPERIENCE when attributing forgetting to decay

Question 16

contextual fluctuation

Answer 16

• similarity between encoding and retrieval context may explain forgetting
• incidental context differs more between retrieval and encoding over time
• incidental context is less similar to the remote past than more recent past

Question 17

interference

Answer 17

• similar traces/ memories impede retrieval
• it is difficult to discriminate between them
• similar memories accumulate more over time
• whenever the cue that can be used to access a memory becomes associated with other memories

Question 18

How does interference work?

Answer 18

competition assumption:
memories associated to a shared cue automatically impede retrieval when the cue is presented

interference occurs due to the negative effect of having competitors

Question 19

retroactive interference

Answer 19

a similar memory interferes with a target memory further in the past

Introducing a new (second) memory impairs recall of a first memory (especially similar)

Question 20

proactive interference

Answer 20

a similar memory interferes with a target memory closer to the present

The tendency of older memories to interfere with retrieval of recent experiences and knowledge

more severe for recall than recognition

Question 21

retroactive interference: realistic memories

Baddely and Hitch, 1977

Answer 21

task:
- rugby players asked to recall the names of teams they played earlier in the season
control:
- some players missed certain games, allowing discrimination of forgetting fue to time vs interference
results:
- time not a good predictor of forgetting
- forgetting increased with number of intervening games

Question 22

part-set cuing impairment

Answer 22

• the tendency for recall to be impaired by the provision of retrieval cues drawn from the same category of items in memory
• providing hints may impede memory retrieval
• the impairments are more severe with increasing numbers of cues provided from the same set

competition

Question 23

Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF)

Anderson et al., 1994

Answer 23

• selective/partial retrieval can harm recall of other memories related to the retrieved item
• compared to baseline items for which no related items had been retrieved
• selective retrieval may contribute to more severe forgetting for information that is not practiced/retrieved

Question 24

associative blocking

Answer 24

a cue fails to elicit a target trace because it repeatedly elicits a stronger competitor, leading people to abandon efforts to retrieve target

e.g., tip of the tongue, RI, Part set cuing

Question 25

associative unlearning

Answer 25

associative bond linking a stimulus to a memory trace is punished by weakening it after being retrieved in error
- difficult to demonstrate empirically

e.g., RIF and RI

Question 26

inhibition (forgetting)

Answer 26

inhibition: it allows an unwanted reponse to be stopped, while an alternative response needs to get strengthened

suggests that forgetting targets the memory itself - not association to the cue

Question 27

functional account of forgetting

Answer 27

• control retrieval in the face of competition
• may serve a functional purpose and therefore can also be an active process
• facilitates future retrieval attempts of practiced/ strengthened memories by inhibiting competitors
• serves goal directed behaviour and decision making