Forgetting- interference

• What is Interferene Theory?

  Forgetting in LTM is because you can't get access to information.As the info is stored at different times so makes it harder to locate(one memory blocks another)
• What is Interferene Theory?

  Forgetting in LTM is because you can't get access to information.As the info is stored at different times so makes it harder to locate(one memory blocks another)
• What is Proactive Interference?

  Older Memories interferes with the new
• What is Retroactice Interference?

  New Memories interferes with the old
• When is Interference worse?

  When the memories or learning is similar
• What was Schmidt et al's Study?

  Real-life study of childhood street names-

  PPs were given a map with the street names replaced by numbers.Asked to remember as many as possible.(Other relevant info was collected by questionnaire) - how many times they moved

  
  

  Positive association between number of times moved and number of street names forgotten.
• What was the conclusions of Schmidt's Study?

  Learning new patterns of street names when moving makes recalling older patterns more difficult.

  
  

  Retroactive interference effects recall in real-life situations
• What was the Evaluation of this Study?

  Extraneous Variables - confounded resultsMethodology used shows that its possible to research RI in real-life situations.
• What was Baddeley and Hitch's Study?

  Asked Rugby Players to try and remember the names of the teams they had played so far in that season week by week
• What did Baddeley and Hitch's results?


  Very clearly showed that accurate recall didn't depend on how long ago the match took place.

  Numbers of games they had played in the meantime.

  A player's recall of a team from three weeks ago was better if they had played no matches since then.
• Positive Evaluation Points of Interference Theory?

  Evidence from lab studies consistently demonstrates interference

  Real-life studies supports it

  The effects of interference may be overcome using cues
• Negative Evaluation Points of Interference Theory?

  Only really explains forgetting when two sets of info are similar.

  Most are lab experiments- lacks EV

  Don't clearly identify the cognitive processes
• MCGEOGH AND MCDONALD- EFFECTS OF SIMILARITY

  • Support for effects of similarity.
  • Groups of 6, Ppts learnt list of 10 words until recall was 100% accurate
  • Learned a new list with different types of words (e.g. synonyms, antonyms, unrelated words, consonant syllables, 3 digit numbers, no new list)
  • FOUND: Ppts performance when recalling the original list depended on the nature of the second list.
  • Most similar material produced worst recall, supporting idea that interference is stronger when memories are similar.
• METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATION (AO3)

  • :(  METHODOLOGY LIMITATION-> Use of a lab study and artificial stimuli.-> We learn and remember various different types of things in life not just reduced down to lists (e.g. birthdays, faces numbers etc.)-> Which may impact and vary in terms of recall. Limitation as study lacks external validity, _> findings cannot be generalized to a certain extent as it does not truly reflect how our memory operates in a real-life situation- we remember more than just lists, vasts amounts of information.-> Therefore, can be suggested that use of artificial tasks makes interference greater in a lab setting due to the contrived and simplistic nature (?) overall lack of context (?).-> Therefore, a limited explanation for forgetting.
• Real life app alternative study Baddeley and Hitch

  • :) REAL LIFE APP.->  Alternatively, there is research to consider the effects of interference in real life situations with relevant stimuli-> Baddeley and Hitch supported the idea of interference in studying rugby players and recalling team names they had previously played-> Players had to name the teams they had  played week by week within the season, the length of time varying due to players missing games-> found accurate recall did not depend on the length of time between games-> players recall from 3 weeks ago tended to be better if they had played no matches since then, reducing the chance of proactive/retroactive interference to occur.-> Therefore this may suggest that interference as an explanation for forgetting is still applicable to some extent of real-life situations and is therefore not limited to the environment of a lab study, therefore a strength in supporting the idea.