Forgetting

• Loess - Study into proactive interference.
• Loess:

  • Participants shown three words in the category of animals while counting backwards from 15
  • They then recalled the words
  • The first list was well recalled but this decreased each round
  • This experiment shows proactive interference
• Tulving and Pearlstone - Study into cue dependant retrieval.
• Tulving and Pearlstone:

  • Two groups were given words and one was given the category of the words
  • The group who had the categories performed better
  • Example of cue dependant retrieval
• Godden and Baddely - Study of context dependant retrieval.
• Goodwin et al - Study of state dependant retrieval.
• Displacement occurs when old information is replaced by new information.
• Interference occurs when similar memories interfere and disrupt each other.
• Proactive - older memories interfering with newer ones.
• Retroactive - newer memories interfering with older ones.
• Loess‘ research into interference:

  • Participants were presented with a list of three words from a particular category and asked to memorise them while counting backwards.
  • The first lists was recalled well but they became progressively worse at remembering, due to proactive interference.
  • When the category was changed the participants immediately improved.
• Retrieval cues enable us to retrieve information from our LTM. These cues can be sights, sounds, smells or emotions.
• Tulving and Pearlstone (1966)

  • Participants split into two groups.
  • One group given words to memorise, the others given a category with the words.
  • The group with categories recalled more, as they acted as retrieval cues.
• Context dependant retrieval suggests that the environment around you can trigger memories, especially if its the place you learnt them in.
• Godden and Baddeley:

  Four groups of divers had to memorise word lists…

  1. Learn and recall on land
  2. Learn and recall underwater
  3. Learn on land and recall underwater
  4. Learn underwater and recall on land

  The groups learning and recalling in the same place did the best because they could relive on context-dependant retrieval.
• State dependant retrieval suggests you will be able to retrieve memories more easily when you are in the same emotional state they were learnt in.
• Goodwin et al (1969)

  • University students hid money and alcohol when drunk but could not find it sober.
  • However when they got drunk again, they were able to find these objects.
  • The same effects were observed when hiding money sober and then trying to find it drunk.
• Most research supports the idea that memory stays in the LTM forever, but is just ‘lost’ through retrieval failure.