Explanations for Forgetting

• Interference Theory:

  :) RTS McGeoch and McDonald

  > gave participants a list of 10 words (list A) that they had to learn until they could remember them with 100% accuracy, then had to learn a second list of 10 words (list B) - participants then asked to recall list A

  > if list B was a list of similar meaning words to list A, recall was poor (12%)

  > supports because it demonstrates that interference is strongest the more similar the items are
• Interference Theory:

  :) high reliability

  > much of the research, such as McGeoch and McDonald, was conducted in a controlled setting, so can be repeated in the same conditions e.g. giving each participant the same time to learn the lists of words

  > gain consistent results into the effects of interference on forgetting - supports the research
• Interference Theory:

  :( lacks mundane realism

  > artificial tasks, such as learning lists of words, are often used in research - difficult to generalise findings to real-life examples of forgetting, as the research does not reflect what we would try to remember in everyday life e.g. people's birthdays (less likely to be contaminated by interference as they are more meaningful to us)

  > limits the support of the research
• Interference Theory

  :) RTS Baddeley and Hitch

  > asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against over the season (all players played for the same time interval, but some had missed games due to injury)

  > played who had played more games forgot proportionally more games than those who had played fewer

  > supports because it demonstrates that games became confused in memory and were less likely to be recalled, rather than due to being the amount of time that had passed
• Absence of Cues:

  :) RTS Godden and Baddeley (context-dependent)

  > scuba divers given a list of words to learn either on land or under water, and were then asked to recall the list in either the same setting or the opposite

  > they were more likely to forget the words (40% less accuracy) if tested in the opposite location

  > supports because when there is a lack of external memory cues, forgetting is more likely
• Absence of Cues:

  :) RTS Goodwin (state-dependent)

  > male volunteers asked to learn a list of words when either drunk or sober, then were asked to recall the list 24 hours later in either the same or opposite state

  > participants were more likely to forget the words if they were tested in the opposite state

  > supports because when there is a lack of internal memory cues, forgetting is more likely
• Absence of Cues:

  :( lacks mundane realism

  > artificial tasks, such as learning lists of words, are often used in research - difficult to generalise the findings to everyday cases of forgetting, as in real life we may be learning more complex information, such as psychological theories that may not be easily accessed with an internal or external cue

  > reduces the external validity
• Absence of Cues:

  :) practical applications

  > has been used to create a technique in the cognitive interview used by police - context reinstatement

  > witnesses are asked to imagine themselves at the scene of the crime and to imagine how they were feeling, which has been found to be effective in triggering memories as they access internal and external memory cues

  > important part of applied psychology