explanations of forgetting

• what is proactive interference

  when information stored previously interferes with an attempt to recall something new

  eg, the memory of an old phone number disrupts attempts to recall a new phone number.
• what is retroactive interference

  when new information disrupts information stored previously

  eg, the memory of a new car registration number preventing the recall

  of a previous one.
• postman 1960 study

  aim - to investigate how retroactive interference affects learning

  procedure - Participants had to remember a list of paired words e.g. cat-tree, jelly–moss etc.

  The experimental group also had to learn another list of words where the second paired word was different e.g. cat-glass, jelly–time etc. The control group was not given the second list. All participants had to recall words on the first list.

  findings - The recall of control group was more accurate than that of the experimental group.
• baddeley and hitch 1977 study -

  investigated interference effects in an everyday setting of players recalling the names of the teams they had played against over a rugby season.

  The time interval from start to end of the season was the same for all players but the number of intervening games was different for each player because of missed games.

  findings - players who played most games forgot proportionately

  more because of interference.
• strengths of interference

  1. there is evidence from lab experiments ( mcgeoch and mcdonald) - this increases validity and reliablity
  2. there is evidence from real life research ( baddeley and hitch-rugby) - this suggests that the evidence has external validity
• weaknesses of interference

  1. much of the supporting evidence involves artificial stimuli ( eg, in most experiments, pps have to recall lists of words which is less realistic than the things we have to learn in real life, eg peoples names - this suggests the study lacks ecological validity
  2. evidence from real life research lacks control (eg, in baddeley and hitch's study, some pps may have discussed results from matches more than others meaning their memory would be better - this suggests the supporting study lacks control and therefore low in internal validity
• retrieval failure

  this looks at memory from the point of view of availability. It states that the information is in our LTM but we cant get to it because we don't have the right cues (a trigger of information that allows us to access the memory) to enable us to get it. The memory is there , its just not available
• tulving - encoding specificity principle (ESP)

  he stated that if a cue is going to help us recall information, it has to be present at encoding ( when the information goes into your head - when we learn it) and at retrieval ( when we recall it ). If the cues are absent at retrieval/dont match the cues that were present at encoding, then we forget the information
• what is context dependent

  the context that you are in when you are encoding information has to match the context when you are retrieving the information, otherwise you will forget. These are external cues , eg , the environment you're in
• what is state dependent

  the state you are in when you are encoding information has to match the context when you are retrieving the information, otherwise you will forget. These are internal cues, eg, drunk, sober, drowsy, alert