memory- retrieval failure (explanations for forgetting) Flashcards
how does lack of cues cause retrieval failure?
-when info is initially placed in memory, associated cues are stored at the same time
-if cues aren’t available at the time of retrieval you might not access memories that are actually there
encoding specificity principle
-Tulving 1983
-cues help retrieval if same ones present at encoding and at retrieval
-if cues available at at encoding and retrieve are different (or if cues are entirely absent) there will be some forgetting
links between encoded cues and material to-be-remembered.
-meaningful links- the cue ‘STM’ leads you to recall lots
of material about short-term memory
not meaningful links:
-context-dependent forgetting - recall depends on external cue (e.g. weather or a place)
-state-dependent forgetting - recall depends on internal cue (e.g. feeling upset, being drunk)
Godden and Baddeley (1975) context-dependent forgetting: procedure
-deep-sea divers learned word lists and were later asked to recall them
-condition 1: learn and recall on land
-condition 2: learn on land, recall underwater
-condition 3: learn underwater, recall on land
-condition 4: learn and recall underwater
Godden and Baddeley (1975) context-dependent forgetting: findings and conclusions
-accurate recall 40% lower in conditions 2 and 3 (mismatched contexts) than in conditions 1 and 4 (matched contexts).
-retrieval failure due to absence of encoded context cues at time of recall - material was not accessible (i.e. forgotten)
who investigated context dependant forgetting?
Godden and Baddeley (1975)
who investigated state-dependent forgetting?
Carter and Cassaday (1998)
Carter and Cassaday (1998) State-dependent forgetting: procedure
-p’s learned lists of words/prose and later recalled them
-condition 1: learn and recall on drug
-condition 2: learn when on drug, recall not on drug
-condition 3: learn not on drug, recall on drug
-condition 4: learn not on drug, recall not on drug
Carter and Cassaday (1998) State-dependent forgetting: findings and conclusions
-recall was significantly worse in conditions 2 and 3 (mismatched cues)
compared with 1 and 3 (matched cues)
-when cues at encoding are absent at retrieval (e.g. you are drowsy when recalling material but had been alert when you learned it then) there’s more forgetting.
ao3 retrieval failure: real-world application
-people often go to another room to get an item but forget what they wanted, but remember again when they go back to the original room
-when trouble remembering something, it’s probably worth making the effort to recall the environment in which you learned it first
-shows research can remind us of strategies we use in the real world to improve recall
ao3 retrieval failure: impressive range of supporting evidence
-Godden and Baddeley (divers) and Carter and Cassidy (drugs) show that lack of cues at recall leads to everyday forgetting
-in fact Eynseck and Keane (2010) argue retrieval failure is perhaps the main reason for forgetting in LTM
-shows retrieval failure due to lack of cues occurs in everyday life as well as in highly-controlled labs
ao3 retrieval failure: CA to supporting evidence
-Baddeley (1997) argues that contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen (e.g. on land versus underwater).
-learning something in one room and recalling it in another is unlikely to result in much forgetting because the environments are not different enough.
-retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not explain much everyday forgetting.
ao3 retrieval failure: context effects vary in recall and recognition
-Godden and baddeley (1980) replicated underwater experiment using a recognition test instead of recall
-no context-dependent effect. findings same in all four conditions whether the contexts for learning and recall matched or not
-suggests that retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting because it only applies when a person has to recall information rather than recognise it
