interference theory

• underwood & postman 1960?

  • interference experiment
  • p divided into 2 groups:
  • both groups had to remember list of paired words - list a
  • experimental group also had to learn another list where 2nd paired word is different - list b
  • control group not given 2nd list
  • all p asked to recall list a
• what is proactive interference?

  • older memories interfere & hinder you from learning/recalling newer ones
• example of proactive interference?

  • when trying to recall a new phone number, the old one could proactively interfere with the recall
• what is retroactive interference?

  • newer information gets in the way of trying to recall older information
• example of retroactive interference?

  • you may already know greeting for hello in french but when you learn in in german it is more difficult to recall
• underwood & postman findings?

  • evidence of retroactive interference
  • p in experimental group found recall of list a more difficult
  • as new words from list b had interfered with their old memories of the previous list
• when is interference worst?

  when memories are similar
• mcgeoch & mcdonald 1931?

  • investigated similarity of materials
  • gave p list of 10 adjectives (list a) until they could remember 100% accurately
  • resting interval of 10 mins when they learned list b
• mcgeoch & mcdonald method?

  g1 - synonyms

  g2 - antonyms

  g3 - words unrelated to originals

  g4 - nonsense syllables

  g5 - 3 digit numbers

  g6 - no new list just rested
• mcgeoch & mcdonald findings?

  • if list b was synonyms recall was poor - 12%
  • if list b was nonsense syllables had less effect - 26%
  • if list b was numbers recall was best - 37%
  • interference is strongest when words/materials being learnt is similar in meaning
• 2 * for interference theory

  1. evidence to support from baddeley & hitch 1977
  2. thousands of lab experiments for this theory
• 3 X of interference theory?

  1. uses artificial stimuli
  2. may not actually cause memory to be forgotten - ceraso 1967
  3. evidence to suggest individual differences from kane & engle 2000
• X artificial stimuli?

  • list of words have no personal meaning to participants in everyday life
  • we try to remember a much wider variety of complex things
  • ? ecological
  • it is difficult to generalise findings to explanations of forgetting in real world
• X may not cause a memory to be forgotten?

  • effects of interference may be temporary
  • ceraso 1967 found if memory was tested again after 24 hrs recognition of words showed considerable spontaneous recovery
  • ? internal
  • shows interference may only occur because memories are temporarily not accessible rather than having actually been lost & become unavailable
  • suggests may be more complex reasons for why we forget info long term rather than being interfered with
• * evidence to support?

  • baddley & hitch 1977 asked rugby players to name teams had played during season weekly
  • most players missed some games so last team that some had played had been 2/3 weeks ago
  • results showed recall did not depend on how long ago team had played but number of games person had played
  • players recall of team from 3 weeks ago was better if no matches had been played since then compared to being asked 1 week later but with 3 matches played
  • demonstrates retroactive interference acts as explanation as to why we forget info in everyday situations
• * thousands of lab experiments for this theory?

  • lab experiments allow researcher to control evs that could affect results
  • e.g was conducted in controlled environment where factors such as time of day are controlled - participant/situation variables
  • * internal
  • controlled nature of research methods involved allow us to establish cause & effect relationship between introduction of new info & how much info we forget
• X evidence to suggest individual differences influence interference?

  • kane & engle 2000 demonstrated individuals with a greating wm span were less susceptible to proactive interference
  • p were given 3 word lists to learn & those with low wm span showed greater proactive interference when recalling 2nd & 3rd list
  • demonstrates that there may be other factors that influence whether or not we forget things such as working memory
• what is the interference theory?

  • when we forget things because one memory has disrupted/interfered with another memory
• what is PORN?

  P - proactive

  O - old

  R - retroactive

  N - new