Inference

• Retroactive Interference Muller


  •They gave ppts.  a list of nonsense syllables to learn for 6 minutes and then, after a retention interval, asked ppts. to recall the lists.•Performance was worse if ppts had been given an intervening task between initial learning and recall (they were shown three landscape paintings & asked to describe them) = AN INTERFERING TASK!The intervening task produced RI because the later task
• Interference theory


  •Proactive interference is where old learning/memories affect the recall of new information.
• Inference Theory


  Retroactive interference is where new learning/memories affect the recall of old information
• Supporting Evi


  •Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to try to remember the names of the teams they had played so far in that season, week by week. Because most of the players had missed games, for some the ‘last team’ they played might have been two weeks ago or three weeks ago or more. They found that accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place. Much more important was the number of games they had played in the meantime. So a player’s recall of a team three weeks ago was better if they had played no matches since then.
• Supporting Evi


  •There have been thousands of lab experiments carried out on this explanation for forgetting e.g. McGeoch and McDonald’s study. Most of these studies support that both types of interference are very likely to be common ways that we forget information from LTM.
• Weakness


  •There is a much greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in the lab than in real-life situations. The stimulus materials used in most studies are lists of words. The task facing participants is to learn these lists. This is more realistic than consonant syllables, but this it’s still some distance from the things we learn and try to remember in everyday life – people’s faces, their birthdays, the ingredients of our favourite food etc.