Inference- Explanations for Forgetting

• Overview:

  Some forgetting occurs due to interference, meaning when two pieces of information conflict with each other, resulting in one or more being forgotten or some distortion of memory.

  Proposed as a way LTM can be forgotten as interference can make them harder to locate and recall- this is 'forgetting'.
• Types of Interference:

  It is likely that 2 or more interfering memories were stored at different times, psychologists then recognise two types:

  Proactive Interference- occurs when an older memory interferes with a newer one, making it harder to remember new information.

  Retroactive Interference- occurs when a newer memory interferes with an older one, making it harder to recall the older memory.
• Effects of Similarity- PROCEDURE

  In both proactive and retroactive interference, it is worse if the information is similar. Demonstrated through McGeoch and McDonald's study.

  Procedure: They studied retroactive interference and varied the degree of similarity between the 2 sets of material. P's had to learn a 10 word list until they could remember it with 100% accuracy. They then learned a new list- G1: synonyms, G2: antonyms, G3: unrelated words, G4: consonant syllables, and G6: no new word list.
• Effects of Similarity- FINDINGS

  Findings: When p's recalled their original list of words, their performance depended on the nature of the second list given. G1: Synonyms produced the worst recall; interference is stronger when information is similar. G6: No new word list was the best recall, followed by G5: 3-digit numbers.
• AO3: Consequences of Lab Studies

  They allow for the control of confounding variables, so studies show a clear link between interference and forgetting.

  Though there is a greater chance that interference would be demonstrated in lab studies rather than real-life; the artificial stimuli used aren't overly replicable to real-life scenarios. This limits its ecological validity.
• AO3: Real-Life Studies

  Study by Baddeley and Hitch; asked rugby players to remember the names of teams they had played that season. Many players had missed several games, but it was found that accurate recall didn't depend on how long ago the matches took place- it was the number of games they had played collectively.

  Ecologically valid research support.
• AO3: Real-Life Studies

  Burke and Skrull found that when p's were given similar magazines, in some cases they had issues recalling the earlier magazines and some the later magazines. This effect was greater when the ads were similar, this is known as competitive interference.
• AO3: Interference and Cues

  Tulving and Psotka gave p's 5 lists of 24 words, each organised into categories which weren't make explicit, though it was presumed they would be obvious.

  Recall was 70% for the first word list, but this fell as p's were given additional lists to learn- presumably due to interference.

  However, at the end they were given a cued recall test and told the names of the categories, recall then rose back to 70%.