Memory : Retrival Failure

Question 1

What’s retrieval failure?

Answer 1

A lack of accessibility to info rather than availability (due to insufficient cues)

Question 2

Whats the encoding specificity principle?

Answer 2

Tulving and Thomson (1973) proposed that memory improves when a cue is present at time of encoding and time of retrieval and if a cue is missing at either stage, forgetting will occur

Question 3

Whats a meaningful cue?

Answer 3

Info that’s encoded at the time of learning which is stored in a meaningful way (e.g. a song, rhyme, acronym)

Question 4

What’s a non-meaningful cue?

Answer 4

Info available at the time of learning, which isn’t directly related to the encoded material
• context-dependant forgetting
• state-dependant forgetting

Question 5

Whats context-dependent forgetting?

Answer 5

Recall is influenced by an external cue (weather, or a place)

Question 6

Whats state dependent forgetting?

Answer 6

Recall influenced by an internal cue (feelings, intoxication)

Question 7

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Aim

Answer 7

To explore context dependent forgetting

Question 8

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Method

Answer 8

Divers learnt a list of words underwater or on land, then had to repeat recall underwater or on land, creating 4 conditions

Question 9

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Findings

Answer 9

Accurate recall was 40% lower in non-matching conditions
Learn on land, recall on land - 13.5 words recalled
Learn on land, recall underwater - 8.6 words
Learn underwater, recall on land - 8.4 words
Learn underwater, recall underwater - 11.4 words

Question 10

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Conclusion

Answer 10

You recall better in the same environment you encoded the info in

Question 11

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Ads

Answer 11

• good real world application : Grant (1998) found students recalled more info under congruent retrieval conditions

Question 12

Godden & Baddeley (1975): Disads

Answer 12

• retreated measures design (demand characteristics + order effects) as all divers did 4 conditions
• extraneous variables as different divers did the same conditions at different times and places
• lacks mundane realism + ecological validity as such a major difference provides a subtle result (Baddeley (199&) argued results aren’t representative to everyday life)

Question 13

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Aim

Answer 13

To explore state-dependant forgetting

Question 14

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Method

Answer 14

Anti- histamine drugs (hay fever meds) given to Ps giving them mild sedative effects - creating an internal physiological state different from the normal. Ps then had to learn a list of words either on the drug or sober, then had to recall the words either on the drug or sober, creating 4 conditions.

Question 15

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Findings

Answer 15

Where the internal state at encoding and recall were incongruent, performance was worse

Question 16

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Conclusion

Answer 16

When cues are absent, there is more forgetting

Question 17

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Ads

Answer 17

• reliable findings - Godden + Baddeley and Eysenck and Keane all show same effect
• Overton (1972) asked Ps to learn material drunk or sober then asked to recall either drunk or sober. He found recall was worse in a different internal state at encoding and retrieval.
• Darley et al (1973) investigated the effects of marijuana, testing location during/ after drug exposure. He found recall improves in congruent conditions

Question 18

Carter & Cassaday (1998) : Disads

Answer 18

• cannot be tested as leads to circular reasoning - Nairne (2002) criticised the myth of encoding-retrieval. The theory cannot be falsified as if memory improves then it supports the theory, but if memory doesn’t it also supports the theory as it just means you didn’t encode the info. Retrieval depends on encoding but there’s no way to ensure encoding - results are only correlation and not causation.