Forgetting Flashcards
interference
forgetting because one memory blocks another causing one or both memories to be distorted or forgotten
2 types:
1. retroactive interference
2. proactive interference
retroactive interference
When later (new) learning interferes with previous (old) learning.
Interference works backwards.
proactive interference
When previous (old) learning interferes with later (New) learning.
Interference works forward.
The more similar the interfering & learning tasks, the more the interference there will be.
McGeoch + McDonald
Conducted a laboratory study on RETEROACTIVE interference.
They looked how similarity between lists P’s were given to learn affected recall.
First given a list of 10 words that they were able to remember 100%.
Given new list of different words.
The most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall showing that interference is strongest when memories are similar.
strength of interference theory - supportive studies
E: In one study, researchers asked rugby players to recall all the teams they had played that season. Some had played in all games whilst others had not. They found that the more games they had played in the more interference has occurred, and the worse the recall.
C: because it supports interference theory, as a theory of forgetting.
strength of interference - supportive studies have been conducted in lab
eg McGeoch + McDonald
E: High control of variables eg. noise levels. Can also use standardised procedures eg. using same list of words each time.
C: establishes a C+E relationship eg. the more similar words causes interference. Standardised procedures also increases reliability.
limitation of interference - lab studies
E: artificial environment so doesn’t reflect real world scenarios
C: can’t generalise findings so may not tell us about interference in real life
limitation of interference - can criticise tasks
E: many of the tasks lack mundane realism: when task is unreflective of tasks we may be required to complete in everyday life. Unrealistic as we don’t normally recall lists of words everyday
C: can’t generalise findings to everyday life. Might not tell us about interference in everyday life
retrieval failure
theory argues that information might be forgotten because of insufficient “cues” that help us access a memory. The memory is still there but we don’t have the right cue.
cue is
a trigger for information that allows us to gain access to a memory
Cues are often meaningful and can be linked to external (the environment) or internal (our mood) contexts
encoding specificity principle (ESP)
Tulving (1983) reviewed research conducted in R.F and discovered a pattern in the findings.
If a cue is to help us retrieve information, it has to be present at encoding (when we first learn the information) and at retrieval.
cue dependent forgetting
Tulving identified that there were two types of cue depending forgetting- when the cues at learning & retrieval don’t match.
Context-Dependent Forgetting (external).
State-Dependent Forgetting (internal).
context dependent forgetting
The right external cues (e.g. the environment you are in) were present at learning but not at retrieval.
eg. when you go into another room looking for something but when you get there you forget. You then return to the original room and you remember!
This is because your context (the environment) has changed and the cues were present at learning but not at retrieval.
Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Conducted a study on under water divers to test context-dependent forgetting.
Given a list of words either on land or underwater then they had to recall words either on land or underwater.
In conditions where learning & recall matched, recall was higher by 40% than when the conditions didn’t match.
Showed how important the right external cues (the environment) were to prevent Retrieval Failure.
state dependent forgetting
when there is an absence of relevant psychological /physiological cues that were present at the time of learning and are missing at retrieval.
E.g. you were in a good mood when you learnt the information but when you come to retrieve it you are in a bad mood, you will be more likely to forget.
Carter + Cassaday - studied state dependent forgetting on people suffered from hay fever.
gave Ps a mild anti-histamine - made P’s feel slightly drowsy (creating an internal psychological state different to the norm).
Given a list of words to learn either before or after taking the drug and asked to recall it.
In conditions where learning & recall didn’t match, P’s were more likely to forget- retrieval failure.
Shows how influential moods/internal states are!
strength of retrieval failure - lots of research to support
E: Godden + Baddeley gave underwater divers a list of words either on land or underwater and they had to recall words on land or underwater. When learning + recall matched, recall was higher by 40% than when conditions didn’t match
C: increases validity of results as there is supportive evidence
strength of RF - supportive studies in lab setting - Carter + Cassaday
*HOWEVER artificial environment
E: high control over EVs. Standardised procedures also used eg. same list of words for all Ps.
C: C+E relationship can be established eg. same conditions for learning + recall mean we are more likely to remember more. Standardised procedures increases validity.
limitation of RF - argued that effect of context isn’t very strong
E: contexts have to be very different to actually make a difference eg. underwater + on land. In everyday life we are in different contexts all the time (diff classrooms) and can still retrieve info
C: real life application of context dependent forgetting doesn’t actually explain much about forgetting so has little explanatory power and practical applications are limited.
