Retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

• Retrieval failure theory


  Forgetting in LTM is mainly due to retrieval failure, so the information is still available but you just can't access it, this may be because you have insufficient clues or cues
• Encoding specificity principle (ESP)


  Memory is most effective if information that was present at encoding is also available at time of retrieval
• A cue doesn't have to be exactly right, but the closer it is to the original item, the more useful it'll be
• Tulving and Pearlstone (1966) study

  1. Participants had to learn 48 words, belonging to 12 categories

  2. Each word was presented as 'category+ word'

  3. Group 1: Participants recall as many words as they can (free recall)

  4. Group 2: Participants were given cues (the name of the category) and have to recall as many words as they can (cued recall)
• Findings of Tulving and Pearlstone. Free recall condition - 40% of words recalled on average, Cued recall condition - 60% of words recalled on average
• Conclusions of Tulving and Pearlstone This suggests that cues that memory is most effective if information that was present at time of encoding is also available at time of retrieval
• Other cues are also encoded at the time of learning but not in a meaningful way, these are: context-dependent forgetting (external cues) and state-dependent forgetting (internal cues)
• Context-dependent forgetting (External cues)

  There may be contextual (environmental) cues that act as a trigger to help you access a memory
• Godden and Baddeley (1975) study


  1. Scuba divers were asked to learn a set of words either on land or underwater, they were then tested either on land or underwater

  2. Highest recall occurred when the initial context matched the recall environment, accurate recall was 40% lower in non-matching conditions
• Conclusion of Golden and Baddeley. The external cues available at learning were different from the ones at recall and this led to retrieval failure
• Retrieval failure can occur due to poor encoding or storage processes, leading to weakened memories.
• Cues are external stimuli that trigger recall of information from long-term memory.
• • One strength of retrieval failure is the quantity of research support
  • Range of lab, filled a natural experiment support the idea of retrieval failure
  • For example, tulving and pearlstone demonstrate the power of retrieval queues and godden and baddeley demonstrate the importance of context dependent learning
  • This mass is because evidence has relevance every day memory experiences and therefore high levels of ecological validity
• • limitation is that context effects are actually not very strong in real life
  • baddeley that different context have to be very different indeed before an effect is seen
  • Learning something one room and recording it in another is unlikely to result in much forgetting because the environments are not different enough
  • So the real life applications of retrieval failure due to contextual cues don’t actually explain much forgetting
• • Strength of retrieval failure is application to everyday memory
  • Aberenethy that students recorded more information when tested in the same room with the same teacher in comparison to students tested in a different room with a different teacher
  • Supports the idea of context dependent learning in everyday memory and students should revise in the same room where they will be taking their exams
  • Because of research provides a strategy for students to enhance their memory and improve their exam results
• • One criticism is that retrieval cues do not always work
  • Most of the research of retrieval cues participants are learning word lists . however every day learning is far more complex.
  • For example, learning about the multicore model requires complex associations that are not easily triggered by a single queue
  • This matters because retrieval queues are unable to explain all types of learning/forgetting