Forgetting

• Retroactive interference - This is when a new memory interferes with your ability to recall an old memory.
• Proactive interference - This when an old memory interferes with a new memory.
• interference is more likely to occur when the two memories are similar
• positive that supports interference- Baddeley and Hitch Rugby players were asked to recall the names of all the teams they had played across one season It was found that those who had played the least matches had the greatest recall.
• Positive that supports interference- The players who had played every game were more likely to forget matches because the later games had interfered with a recall of the earlier games
• Baddeley and hitch- Lack ecological validity most of the research into interference have been lab experiments and so the tasks being tested may not generalise to real life activities
• Baddeley argues that in real life similar tasks are often spaced out so there is the time between them.
• Cue dependent forgetting - is an explanation for forgetting based on an absence of cues that were present when the memory was learnt.
• Retrieval failure- tulving et al- In the first condition the participants were not told the categories of the words
• tulving et al- In the second condition participants were told about the categories
• Tulving et al findings- It was found that recall was higher when participants knew the categories in advance The presence of the cues (in condition 2) had recall rates of 70% compared to 50% in condition 2.
• State dependent forgetting - People find it easier to recall information if they are in the same emotional and/or physical state as they were when they originally learnt it
• (+) state dependent forgetting- Goodwin et al asked 48 male medical students to learn a list of words either drunk or sober. They were then asked to recall the words 24 hours later This was either in the same condition: Drunk on both occasions/sober on both days Or they were asked to recall the words in the opposite state i.e. learnt drunk so recalled sober.
• (+) goodwin et al, It was found that information learnt when drunk was more easily accessed the next day if drunk again. When the state was different the next day then recall was shown to be the worse.
• Tulving et al asked participants to learn six word lists. All the words were divided into categories