INTERFERENCE ; explanations for forgetting

• limitation for interference as an explanation for forgetting - challenging evidence


  TULVING AND PSTOKA

  • found that when participants were given a clue in the recall test, their recall rose above the original percent (70%).
  • suggests that loss of information may be temporary and overcome with clues
• strength for interference as an explanation for forgetting - research support

  BADDELEY AND HITCH (1977)

  • asking rugby players to recall the teams they played week by week for that season.
  • found that a accurate recall of earlier matches didn't depend on how long they played but how many teams they played in the meantime.
• counter argument for interference as an explanation for forgetting - lab experiment


  tasks are artificial.

  • may not be valid for forgetting everyday life
• Strength of interference as an explanation for forgetting - lab experiment

  experiment was taken place in a lab so the extraneous variables are highly controlled, increasing reliability of the study. showing that inference is a explanation for forgetting.
• effects of similarity FINDINGS

  when the participants then recalled the original list of words, their performance depended on the nature of the second list. the most similar material ( synonyms ) produced the worst recall.
• Effects on similarity PROCEDURE


  • participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy
  • they then learnt a new list.
  • six groups who had learned different types of lists
• who conducted the the effects of similarity (competitive inference) study?

  John McGeoch and William McDonald
• PROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

  working forward

  • old interferes with new
• RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

  working backwards

  • new informations interferes with old
• interference


  when two pieces of information conflict with eachother
• why do we forget?

  because we can't access the memory