explanations for forgetting

• interference

  interference - forgetting caused by one memory disrupting another

  • proactive - old memories interfering with the ability to learn something new
  • retroactive - new learning interferes with the recall of old learning
• interference and word lists

  mcgeoch + mcdonald - studied retroactive interference by asking participants to learn lists of words, before giving them a second list

  • the second list was either words or numbers
  • synonyms, antonyms, unrelated adjectives, nonsense syllables, numbers or no list as a control
  • the more similar the second list was to the first list the harder it was to recall

  this supports retroactive interference because the more similar the new list was the harder the first one was to recall, which shows how new learning disrupts the recall of old learning
• mcgeoch + mcdonald evaluation

  + supports interference theory

  + supported by baddeley and hitch's rugby player research

  - lacks mundane realism - lists don't reflect real life tasks and the time between learning lists was very short
• interference and rugby players

  baddeley + hitch - asked rugby player to remember the names of teams they had played so far in the season

  • players had a better recall of the teams if they had played less games
  • how long ago the matches were played was less important to recall

  this supports the idea of interference as the more games played the more similar information there is, so more forgetting occurs as there is more interference
• baddeley and hitch evaluation

  + high mundane realism

  + suported by mcgeoch + mcdonald and burke + skrull

  + supports interference theory
• interference and magazines

  burke + skrull - gave people magazine adverts to recall from memory

  • the more similar the products were eg. same product but different brands the worse the recall is

  supports the idea of interference because more similar products were harder to recall, also shows competitive interference
• burke + skrull evaluation

  + high mundane realism as the task was realistic

  + real life application to marketing and business

  + supported by baddeley + hitch and mcgeoch + mcdonald

  + supports interference theory
• factors affecting interference

  • time between learning - most research studies have a short time between learning which intensifies and exaggerates the effects of interference
  • use of cues - research by tulving and psotka shows the effects of interference are reduced if cue cards are used to aid memory
  • similarity of items being learned increases interference
• retrieval failure

  retrieval failure - forgetting because the material being recalled is unavailable due to the lack of a prompt
• encoding specificity principle

  tulving - a cue that helps us recall information has to be present at encoding (learning the material) and at retrieval (when it's being recalled)

  • if it isn't present at both points forgetting can occur
• cues

  cue - an object or word that stimulates the long-term memory to retrieve information

  • context-dependent - cues related to the place that learning is encoded
  • state-dependent - cues related to the state that the person is in during encoding
• context-depentent cues and divers

  godden + baddeley - studied recall in divers by having them recall lists of words in different contexts

  • land + land, water + water, water + land, land + water
  • found that recall was best if it took place in the same location as learning

  this supports the encoding specificity principle as it shows that if the context is similar at both encoding and retrieval recall is more effective, which suggests that cues do have a positive impact
• godden + baddeley evaluation

  + supported by carter + cassaday

  - low mundane realism - unrealistic task

  - results may be exaggerated as there was little time between learning and retrieval

  - effect of cues may have been exaggerated as they are more nuanced and less extreme than the experiment conditions
• state-dependent cues and drunks

  goodwin et al - investigated state dependent cues and drunkedness using four conditions

  • drunk + drunk, sober + sober, drunk + sober, sober + drunk
  • the groups were tested on a variety of tasks suchs as word association and picture recognition
  • people whose learning and retrieval were in the same state had the best recall

  this supports the encoding specificity principle because the sobriety acted as a state-dependent cue that allowed retrieval
• goodwin et al. evaluation

  + supported by godden + baddeley's context-dependent cue research which works on the same principle

  + supported by carter + cassaday's research into state-dependent cues and antihistamines

  + high degree of control allows a causal relationship

  - low mundane realism as tasks were unrealistic
• evaluation of the retrieval failure explanation

  + bank of supporting evidence eg. goodwin and godden + baddeley

  + real life application - abernathay - students perform better in exams if they sit them in the same room as they learned the content

  • smith - just thinking about the room improves recall
  • however this may mean cues are more nuanced than tulving suggested

  - cues don't always work and relying on them isn't always effective

  - learning in real life is complex and multi-faceted and single cues are rarely effective on their own