Explanations for forgetting

• What is interference as an explanation for forgetting?

  • When 2 memories disrupt each other causing one or both memories to be distorted or forgotten
  • Mainly explains forgetting in the long-term memory
• What is proactive interference?

  • When an older memory interferes with a newer memory e.g. a teacher has learned so many names in the past she has difficulty remembering the names of her current class
• What is retroactive interference?

  • When a newer memory interferes with an older memory e.g. a teacher has learned so many names in her class this year she has difficulty remembering the names of her class last year
• What research is there on the effects of similarity?

  • McGeoch and Mcdonald (1931): participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember them 100% accurately, they then learned a new list
  • 6 groups of participants learned different types of new lists (synonyms, antonyms, consonant syllables, 3-digit numbers)
  • When asked to recall the original list, those who learnt the MOST SIMILAR material (synonyms) had the WORST recall, showing that interference is strongest when memories are similar
• What is one strength of interference theory?

  • Research support: Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to name the teams they played against during rugby season - some played all matches, some missed matches due to injury
  • Players who played the MOST games had the poorest recall due to most interference for memory
  • Shows interference can operate in some real-world situations, increasing the validity of the theory
• What is another strength of interference theory?

  • Retrograde facilitation: Coenen and Luijtelaar (1997) gave ppts. a list of words and asked them to recall it after a week
  • Group 1 learnt the list under the influence of the drug diazepam, group 2 learnt the list BEFORE taking diazepam, control group took a placebo
  • Group 1 had poor recall of the original list compared to the control whereas group 2 had better recall, showing diazepam improved recall of material learnt beforehand
  • Wixted (2004) suggested diazepam prevented intervening information from reaching the brain's subsystems for processing memories, meaning they couldn't retroactively interfere with the list already learnt, supporting the idea that reduced forgetting can come from reduced interference
• What is one limitation of the interference theory?

  • Temporary and can be overcome by cues (hints or clues to help us remember things): Tulving and Psotka (1971) gave participants lists of words once at a time organised into categories but were not told what the categories were
  • Recall averaged 70% for the first list but got worse as participants learned additional lists due to interference
  • At the end ppts. were given a cued recall test with the categories of the lists, and recall rose to 70% again
  • Shows interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to LTM material, which interference theory did not predict
• What is another limitation of the interference theory:

  • Issues with validity: most studies supporting interference are lab-based with controlled variables but the use of artificial materials and unrealistic procedures means these studies are limited in what they can tell us about interference in everyday life
  • Suggests most forgetting may be explained better by other theories
• What is retrieval failure due to the absence of cues?

  • A form of forgetting information due to the absence of cues that were present at the time of learning the information
  • The memory is available but not accessible until a certain cue is provided
• What are cues?

  • Meaningful cues: cues that are encoded at the time of learning in a meaningful and intentional way such as mnemonics
  • Non-meaningful cues: can be either..
  • Context-dependent cues: relate to the external environment at the time of learning e.g. location
  • State-dependent: relate to someone's internal state at the time of learning e.g. drug influence
• What is the encoding specificity principle?

  • Tulving (1983) stated that if a cue is helpful it has to be present at the time of encoding (when we learn the information) and present at retrieval (when we are recalling it)
  • If cues are different or absent then there will be forgetting
• What research is there on context-dependent forgetting?

  • Godden and Baddeley (1975) had deep sea divers learn a list of words either underwater or on land and were asked to recall the list either underwater or on land
  • Accurate recall was 40% LOWER in contextually non-matching conditions - such as learning on land and recalling underwater
  • Concluded that external cues available at learning that were different to the ones available at recall led to retrieval failure
• What research is there on state-dependent forgetting?

  • Carter and Cassady (1998): gave participants a mildly sedative drug called antihistamines that created a different internal physiological state - they then had to learn lists of words and recall them in either different or same conditions
  • Recall was significantly worse in the non-matching conditions such as learning words normally and recalling under drug influence
  • Suggests there is more forgetting when state-dependent cues are absent
• What is one strength of retrieval cues?

  • Real-world application: understanding of retrieval cues can help to overcome forgetting in everyday situations
  • e.g. going to get something from a room, forgetting what you needed once you got there, but remembering once you go back to the room from before
  • Shows how research can remind us of strategies we use in the real world to improve our recall
• What is another strength of retrieval cues?

  • Research support for state-dependent cues: Goodwin et al. (1969) had participants learn a set of words either drunk or sober and recall them later when drunk or sober again
  • Results showed that information learned when drunk was recalled better when drunk, i.e. the same internal state
  • Alongside Carter and Cassady's study this supports the idea the encoding specificity principle
• What is one limitation of retrieval cues?

  • Recall versus recognition: context effects may depend on the TYPE of memory being tested
  • Godden and Baddeley (1980) replicated their experiment but instead of free recall they used a recognition test - results showed NO context-dependent effects on performance
  • Suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting as it only applies to recalling information rather than recognising it
• What is another limitation of retrieval cues?

  • Low ecological validity: Baddeley (1997) argues context effects aren't the strongest in everyday life - it would be hard to find a situation where recall is required in 2 very contrasting environments like underwater and land
  • Learning something in one room and forgetting it in another is less likely to result in forgetting because the environments are not different enough - theory may not explain everyday forgetting