Retrieval failure

• Explanations for forgetting Retrieval Failure due to an absence of Cues Cue-a trigger of information that allows us to access a memory. They may be external or internal.
• There are two types cues Context dependent – Recall depends on external cues e.g weather or a place Being in a different place at recall, to that of learning might mean we cannot access the original memory. State dependent – Recall depends on internal cues (feelings, upset, mental states or drunkenness) Being in a different mood/state of arousal at recall, to that of learning might mean we cannot access the original memory.
• Endel Tulving (1983) reviewed research into retrieval failure and found a consistent pattern to the findings. Encoding Specificity Principle is the idea that if a cue is to help us recall information, then it has to be present at encoding (when we learn the material) & at retrieval (when we recall it). If the cues at encoding & retrieval are different (or not there at all) then, if these conditions are not met, this is when forgetting takes place
• Cue-a trigger of information that allows us to access a memory. They may be external or internal
• The explanations of forgetting is retrieval failure due to the absence of cues, which can include physical cues (e.g. the room, place, weather) and internal cues (e.g. a person’s emotional state). The encoding specificity principle argues that memory is most effective when information that was present at the time of coding must also present at the time of retrieval.
• What is one strength of retrieval cues in everyday situations?


  They can help to overcome some forgetting.
• How can knowing that forgetting occurs due to the absence of cues be beneficial?


  It allows steps to be taken to avoid forgetting in important situations.
• What might happen when you go to another room to retrieve an item and forget what it was?

  You may remember the item once you return to the original room.
• Why is the theory of retrieval cues considered a strength in improving recall?


  It helps develop effective strategies for recall in real-world situations.
• In what field has the theory of retrieval cues been particularly helpful?


  Forensic and police work.
• How does the theory facilitate recall from eyewitnesses?


  By encouraging the use of cues to trigger memories of important events.
• Evaluation – Research support Another strength is that there are a lot of studies that show how cues can help with retrieval. The studies by Godden and Baddeley (1975) and Carter and Cassady (1998) both supports the idea that forgetting is due to lack of relevant cues at recall can lead to context￾dependent and state-dependent forgetting. This evidence shows that retrieval failure occurs in real world situation as well as in the highly controlled condition of the lab (increased the validity of the explanation)
• What does recreating the context for eyewitnesses involve?


  It involves recreating both internal and external contexts.
• Why is the contribution of this theory considered positive?


  It has a positive contribution to facilitating recall in important situations.
• What type of test did Godden and Baddeley (1980) use in their replicated underwater experiment?


  Recognition test
• What was the main task participants had to perform in the recognition test?


  Participants had to say whether they recognized a word read to them from the list
• What was the outcome when recognition was tested in the underwater experiment?


  There was no context-dependent effect; performance was the same in all four conditions
• Why is the finding of no context-dependent effect in recognition tests a limitation of context-dependent forgetting?


  It suggests that retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting
• What does the study suggest about the applicability of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting?


  It only applies when a person has to recall information rather than recognize it
• Who conducted the research study in 1969 related to intoxication and learning?


  Goodwin et al.
• What was the main objective of Goodwin et al.'s (1969) study?


  To investigate the effects of intoxication on learning and recall.
• How many male medical students participated in the Goodwin et al. (1969) study?


  Forty-eight male medical students.
• How were the participants assigned to the different groups in the study?


  They were randomly assigned to four groups.
• What were the four groups in the Goodwin et al. (1969) study?


  • Group 1 (S): Sober on both days
  • Group 2 (AA): Intoxicated both days
  • Group 3 (AS): Intoxicated on day 1, sober on day 2
  • Group 4 (SA): Sober on day 1, intoxicated on day 2
• What was the blood alcohol concentration for the intoxicated groups in the study?


  111 mg/100 ml alcohol.
• What types of tests did participants perform in the Goodwin et al. (1969) study?


  They performed a verbal rote-learning task, a word-association test, and a picture recognition task.
• What was the main finding regarding performance in the AS and SA conditions compared to the AA condition?


  More errors were made on day 2 in the AS and SA conditions than in the AA condition.
• What was the exception to the finding of more errors in the AS and SA conditions?


  The picture recognition test did not show the same pattern of errors.
• What was found about the relationship between the state of learning and the state of recall?


  Performance was best when the state of learning matched the state of recall.
• What does it mean that participants who were drunk when they learned the material had to be drunk to recall it?


  It indicates that intoxication can create context-dependent memory effects.
• What are the limitations of the Goodwin et al. (1969) study regarding ecological validity?


  • Tasks may not reflect real-life performance.
  • Participants were aware of being studied, affecting behavior (demand characteristics).
  • Individual differences were not considered.
• What ethical concerns are associated with the Goodwin et al. (1969) study?


  Encouraging participants to get drunk raises ethical issues.
• Why could the Goodwin et al. (1969) study not be replicated today?


  Due to ethical concerns about encouraging intoxication.