MEMORY- explanations for forgetting Flashcards
what is interference + how does it work (3)
-occurs when 2 pieces of info disrupt each other- results in the forgetting of one/both or memory distortion
-explanation for forgetting in LTM
-interference between memories makes it harder to locate them
how does forgetting occur
memories are less accessible even though theyre available
what is proactive interference
older memory interferes with newer memory
eg. teacher has learnt so many names its hard to remember names in current class
what is retroactive interference
newer memory interferes with older one
eg. teacher learnt so many new names this year its hard to remember last year’s names
interference research: McGeoh and McDonald- procedure (3)
-studied retroactive interference by changing similarity between word lists
-p’s learnt list of 10 words until they recalled them with 100% accuracy- then they learnt a new list
group 1- synonyms
group 2- antonyms
group 3- unrelated words
group 4- consonant syllables
group 5- 3 digit number
group 6- none (control group)
interference research: McGeoh and McDonald- findings and conclusions (32)
-when recalling old world list, synonyms group produced the worst recall
-interference is strongest when memories are similar
-the reason similarity affects recall could be due to : PI- old info makes new, similar info hard to store. RI- new info overwrites old, similar info due to similarity
what is retrieval failure due to absence of cues
-forgetting due to insufficient cues
-when new info is stored, so are the associated cues
-if cues are absent when recalling, retrieval failure occurs due to inaccessible memories
what is the encoding specificity principle (4)
-a helpful cue must be present at coding and retrieval
-some cues are coded in a non-meaningful way
-context-dependent forgetting: recall depends on external cue eg. weather
-state-dependent forgetting: recall depends on internal cue eg. being drunk
context-dependent forgetting research: Godden and Baddeley- procedure (2)
-diverse learnt word list on land/underwater and recalled on land/underwater
-conditions:
learn on land- recall on land
learn on land- recall underwater
learn underwater- recall underwater
learn underwater- recall on land
context-dependent forgetting research: Godden and Baddeley- findings (2)
-recall accuracy was 40% lower in non-matching conditions
-external cues when learning were different to the ones at recall which led to retrieval failure
state-dependent forgetting research: Carter and Cassaday- procedure (3)
-p’s received drugs that made them slightly drowsy. Internal physiological state was different to normal state
-p’s learnt word lists and recalled them
-conditions:
learn on drug- recall on drug
learn on drug- recall not on drug
learn not on drug- recall on drug
learn not on drug- recall not on drug
state-dependent forgetting research: Carter and Cassaday- findings (2)
-recall was significantly worse in non-matching conditions
-absent cues=more forgetting
