Mem: Retrieval Failure AO3

Question 1

-strength- there is a lot of evidence suggesting that it’s a reliable finding

Answer 1

-studies like Carter & Cassaday, Godden & Baddeley, and Eysenck & Keane (2010) show the same effect of cue dependent forgetting
-these studies are in a range of settings, and all find consistent results
-the concept is also a phenomena that is widely reported in real list, e.g. people go into a room to collect something but forget what it was, so return to the previous room to trigger the memory
-therefore, despite results of lab studies lacking ecological validity, the effect is present in real life situations too

Question 2

Strength- has good real-life application for contexts where recall of memory is needed

Answer 2

-e.g. students could use theory to help prepare for exams/tests- if they did revision in the same room their exam will be in, they’re more likely to succeed remembering the info
-supported by Grant (1998)- showed context-dependent learning based on if students studied listening to music or not
-students recalled more info under congruent encoding/retrieval conditions, since exams must be in silence, this informs efficient study practice.
-theory of cue dependent forgetting has useful practical applications + can affect peoples lives

Question 3

A limitation of the explanation of context dependent forgetting is that for there to be an effect on forgetting the context needs to be very different

Answer 3

-e.g. Godden and Baddeley showed effects on land + in sea
-major difference is not representative example of normal life, so results may lack ecological validity
-Baddeley (1997) argues context affects are not strong in real life
-this suggests learning something in one room and recalling it in another is unlikely to be significant enough for there to be an effect.
-limitation because it might mean context effects are not significant in real world application, limiting its usefulness as an explanation

Question 4

Limitation of encoding specificity principle- cannot be tested- it leads to circular reasoning in experiments

Answer 4

-Naire (2002) criticized (what he calls) the ‘myth of the encoding-retrieval’ match
-where a cue produces the successful recall of a word, we assume the cue must have encoded at the same time of learning
-if a cue doesn’t result in successful recall, the cue may not have been encoded.
-however, are only assumptions and can’t be tested- no way to know if they’ve been encoded or not
-these results are only correlational, not causational
-weakness as the principle cannot be tested using rigorous, scientific principles- are fundamental to psychology