Memory bk2- Explanations For Forgetting

Question 1

Interference theory

Answer 1

One memory disrupting ability to recall another, most likely to occur when memories are similiar

Question 2

Retroactive interference

Answer 2

New info interfering with old

E.g. changing email address , 6 months later asked old one but can’t remember

Question 3

Proactive interference

Answer 3

Old info interfering with new

E.g. learning french for years, start learning Spanish. When asked a word in Spanish gives it in french.

Question 4

Evaluate interference

Answer 4

+muller supports retroactive
Gave ppts list of syllables to learn for 6 minutes after interval, during interval some asked to describe a painting, performance less good if given intervening task, intervening task produced retroactive as later task interfered with what had previously been learnt
+underwood supports proactive
Analysed findings from number of studies, if ppts memorised 10+ lists recall after 24hours was 20%, only one list recall was 70%
-research is quite artificial
Artificial lists of words or nonesense syllables, may not to relate to everyday use of memory, nay lack motivation as not real life situation can cause interference, low ecological validity
-interference only explains some situations
Memories have to be quite similiar, considered relatively unimportant explanation for everyday forgetting, more theories are needed to prove a complete explanation of forgetting

Question 5

Retrieval failure

Answer 5

Due to absence of cues
Being able to retrieve a memory that is there but isnt accesible
Depends on using cues

Question 6

Cues

Answer 6

Reminders

Meaningfully link to material to be remembered/meaningfully linked

Question 7

Context cues

Answer 7

Familiar things acting as memory cues

Recall better if in same environment for recall as rehersal

Question 8

State cues

Answer 8

Mental state your in while learning can act as cue

If something is learnt whilst drunk you can recall it when your drunk rather than when your aober

Question 9

Evaluate retrieval failure research

Answer 9

Tulving and pearlstone-words and categories
Abernethy-different instructors
Godden and baddeley- scuba divers
Goodwin-drunk vs sober
Carter and cassaday-antihistimines

Question 10

Tulving and Pearlstone - words and categories

Answer 10

Lab
Ppts learnt 48 words belonging in 12 categories e.g. fruit-apple, fruit-orange
Free recall only 40% when cues given in forms of categories recall was 60%

Question 11

Abernethy - different instructors

Answer 11

Field
Students tested before course and tested each week, some tested in teaching room by normal instructor, others by other instructor. Different room with normal/diff instructor, 4 conditions
Those tested in same room with same instructor did best, familiar things (room/instructor) acted as cues

Question 12

Godden and baddeley - scuba divers

Answer 12

Field
Divers learnt words either under water or on land, asked to recall underwater or on land. 4 conditions
2 conditions environment of learning and recall matched, accurate recall 40% lower in non matching conditions,external cues at learning and retrieval were different led to retrieval failure

Question 13

Goodwin - drunk vs sober

Answer 13

Lab
Ppts learnt words drunk/sober, asked to recall 24 hours after some sober some drunk. 4 conditions
Scores suggest info learnt drunk is more available when in same state later

Question 14

Carter and cassaday - antihistamines

Answer 14

Lab
Drugs given to ppts, mild sedative made slightly drowsy, created internal physiological state different from normal, ppts learnt list of words, 4 conditions
In conditions where there was a mismatch in internal state at learning and recall performance was significantly worse, when cues are absent there is more forgetting