M - Theories of Forgetting Flashcards
what are the different explanations for forgetting
- proactive interference
- retroactive interference
- retrieval failure due to absence of cues
what is proactive interference
when old information in the LTM interferes with the learning of new info
what is retroactive interference
the learning of new information interferes with the recall of old information in the LTM
evaluation for interference theories
+ results of Baddeley and Hitch were supported by other researchers
- only provides an insight into one type of forgetting
research into retroactive interference (B+H)
A: interference in everyday memory
M: sample of rugby players who played every match in the season and a some players who missed games due to injury, asked to recall the names of teams they had played against
R: players who had played the most games forgot more games
research into proactive interference
A: the effect of proactive. interference on the LTM
M: pts were presented meaningless 3 letter consonant trigrams at intervals and had to recall them
R: pts could remember the trigrams that were presented first, irrespective of the interval length
what are the types of dependent forgetting
- state dependent
- context dependent
what does the encoding specificity principle say
memory is most effective when information that was present at the time of coding is also present at the time of recall
what did Tulving and Thomson say (1973)
- encoding specificity principle
- environmental cues and mental cues aid recall
research into context dependent forgetting - Godden and Baddeley (1975)
- university diving club had 4 conditions
- Learn on the beach, recall on the beach - best recall
- Learn on the beach, recall in the water
- Learn in the water, recall in the water - best recall
- Learn in the water, recall on the beach
- the best results occur when conditions were the same
research into state dependent forgetting - Carter and Cassidy (1998)
- examined forgetting when using anti-histamine drugs
- when learning and recall state matched memory was improved
evaluation of Godden and Baddeley C-DF
- didn’t control other variables, cannot determine cause and effect relationship
- divers may have displayed demand characteristics
- broke ethical guidelines
evaluation of S-DF, Carter and Cassidy
+ research to support the effect of S-DF, Goodwin et al. , Darley et al.
- difficult to determine cause and effect relationship