Retrieval Failure

• Retrieval failure theory


  This theory argues that forgetting occurs in the absence of appropriate cues. The encoding specificity principle argues that for a cue to be helpful in recall, it has to be present at encoding and retrieval. If the cues at encoding and retrieval are different, or the cues are completely absent at retrieval, there will be some forgetting
• Retrival Failure Theory


  •It may appear as though we have forgotten the information, but it is really retrieval failure – the memory is inaccessible due to the lack of cues, but the memories are available.
• Encoding specificity principle


  •The encoding specificity principle argues that there are two types of forgetting due to the absence of cues:1.Context-dependent forgetting2.State-dependent forgetting
• Cue-dependent forgetting


  1.Context-dependent forgetting - being in a different place at recall may inhibit memory. The external cues available at learning (encoding) are different from those at recall which leads to retrieval failure. E.g. classroom vs exam hall.●
• Cue-dependent forgetting


  State-dependent forgetting - being in a different mood/state of arousal at recall may inhibit memory. The internal cues at learning (encoding) are different from those at recall, which leads to retrieval failure. E.g. drunk vs sober
• Godden & Baddeley


  •. The researchers recruited scuba divers as ppts and arranged for them to learn a set of words either on land or underwater. They were then tested either on land or underwater.The results again showed that highest recall occurred when the initial context matched the recall environment, e.g. learning on land and recalling on land
• Goodwin et al.


  •asked male volunteers to remember a list of words when they were either drunk or sober (those in the drunk condition consumed about 3X the UK drink driving limit).••Ppts were asked to recall the lists after 24 hours when some were sober but others had to get drunk again (for experimental purposes). The recall scores are shown in the graph, suggesting that information learned when drunk is more available when in the same state later .
• Carter & cassaday


  •gave anti-histamines (that have a slightly sedative or tiring effect) to groups of participants, followed by a recall task.  They were compared to a non-sedated control group. •–Learn on drug – recall on drug–Learn on drug – recall when not on it–Learn when not on drug – recall on drug–Learn when not on drug – recall when not on drug••They found that participants best recalled words when they were in the same state of mind as when they learned the words. If they’d taken anti-histamines during encoding they best recalled them when they were on anti-histamines. 
• abernethy


  •arranged for a group of students to be tested before a certain course began. They were then tested each week.•Some students were tested in their teaching room by their usual instructor, whereas others were tested by a different instructor. Others were tested in a different room either by their usual instructor or by a different one. Those tested by the same instructor in the same room performed best.•Familiar things acted as memory cues and she also found that superior students were least affected by the changes and inferior students the most.
• Retrieval failure


  When information learned in one context cannot be recalled in a different context
• Baddeley and Godden (1975) study

  • Divers learned a list of words either on land or underwater
  • Divers were asked to recall the words either on land or underwater
  • Created four conditions: learn on land - recall on land, learn on land - recall underwater, learn underwater - recall on land, learn underwater - recall underwater
• Accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching context conditions
• External cues available at learning were different from those at recall

  Led to retrieval failure