explanations for forgetting

• explanation for forgetting: interference LTM: when two pieces of information disrupt eachother - result in forgetting one or both

  • once information reaches LTM, any forgetting of LTM is most likely because we cannot access them even though they are available
• • proactive interference: occurs when older memories interfere with a newer ones (teacher learned so many names in the past that she struggles to learn new ones)
  • retroactive interference: a newer memory interferes with an older one (learned new names so cannot remember old names)
• McGeoch and McDonald: studied retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between two sets of material - learn a list of words until you could recall with 100% accuracy and then given a new word list.

  • had 6 groups with different types of lists

  findings: when participants asked to recall original list, the word list with similar meanings (synonyms) produced worst recall - showing inference is stronger when memories are similar
• evaluation of interference:

  strength:

  • Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall names of team members they played against during rugby season - players who played most games had better recall than others who were injured and missed games

  showing that interference can have real-world application, improves validity
• evaluation of interference:

  weakness:

  • studies used may be artificial and unrealistic procedures. in every-day life we often learn something and recall it later on - revising for exams
• explanation for forgetting: retrieval failure

  • cues: a trigger of information that allows us to access memory

  when information is initially placed in memory, associated cues are stored at the same time - if cues are not available at time of recall = retrieval failure
• encoding specificity principle:

  Tulving (1983) reviewed research into retrieval failure and discovered a consistent pattern.

  • a cue has to be 1. present at encoding and 2. present at retrieval

  context dependent forgetting - recall depends on external cue

  state dependent forgetting - recall depends on internal cue
• context dependent forgetting:

  • Godden and Baddeley (1975) studied deep-sea divers to see if training on land hindered their work underwater.

  they learnt a list of words either underwater or on land and then asked to recall them either underwater or on land

  • findings: accurate recall was lower in non-matching conditions. External cues at learning were different to ones at recall
• state dependent forgetting:

  • Carter and cassaday (1998) gave drugs that treat for hayfever to participants. this created a drowsy affect on them, to then make them learn a word list either on the drug then recall them off or vice versa.

  findings: mismatch made recall significantly worse - shows when cues are absent means more forgetting
• retrieval failure evaluaiton:

  strength:

  • help to overcome forgetting in everyday situations -research can remind us of strategies we use in the world to improve our recall - recall environment

  weakness:

  • context effects may depend substantially on the type of memory being tested. Baddeley and Godden replicated their study with recognition instead of recall, performance was the same - retrieval failure is a limited explanation as it only applies when recalling