P - majority of evidence comes from labbased research
E - Mcgoech and Mcdonald lacks ecological validity - don't normally learn synonyms or antonyms lists on a day to day life
E - PPT often have only a short time between learning the new pieces of info - whole experience could be done in over a hour which doesn't reflect rea life learning
L - therefor research used to support interference theory lacks ecological validity
Strength
P - support for reallifeapplications
E - baddely and hitch - rugbyplayers remember team names they had playedduring the season
E -results = recall did not depend on how longago matches too place it was how manygames they had played
L - therefor interference does have some external validity as we can see it occurring in everydaylife
Limitation 2
P - interference can be overcome by using cues
E - tulving + ptoska gave ppt lists of words to remember and organize into categories
E - recall of list was 70% but fell down with each new list, but when given cues recall rose back up to 70%
L -this shows interference causes just a temporary loss of access to material still in LTM not a permanant loss
P -has real life practical applications - context dependent forgetting
E -cognitiveinterview developed by police to encourageEW to think about event
E - helps police in investigations- more valid accounts from EW and ultimately savesmoney for economy
L - good external validity - wider applications
Limitations
P -Baddeley argues effects of context arent very strong
E - Context has to be significantly different before effect is seen
E - Learning something in one room then recalling it another is unlikely to result in much forgetting as contexts arent different enough
L -Reallifeapplications of retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues dont normally explain much forgetting because being in a significantly different context is quite rare in life
Limitation 2
P - tulvings ESP cant be scientifically tested
E - we assume in experiments that the cue must have been encoded at time of learning
E - but no way of scientifically testing cue was encoding at learning stage
L - theory cant be falsified therefor doesnt meet aims of psychology being scientific