Evaluations - A03

• Strength of Interference Theory - has practical applications. Danaher et al (2008) found that both recall and recognition of advertiser's message was impaired when participants were exposed to two adverts for competing brands over a week. Suggesting that one strategy might enhance memory trace by running multiple exposures to advert on one day rather than spread these out. Results in reduced interference from competitors adverts. Thus showing how interference theory can be applied to real world.
• Limitation of Interference Theory - effects may be temporary rather than permanent form of forgetting. Ceraso (1967) found that if memory tested again after 24 hours, recognition showed considerable spontaneous recovery. Suggests memories are temporarily not accessible rather than being lost or overwritten. Thus argued that theory fairly weak form of forgetting.
• Strength of Retrieval Failure - large number of research studies to support including laboratory, field and natural experiments thus has relevance to everyday memory experiences. Eysenck argues main reason for forgetting is due to retrieval failure. Shows that RF occurs in real life situations as well as in highly controlled conditions of lab. Thus increasing validity of theory as explanation for forgetting.
• Limitation of Retrieval Failure - relies on evidence which uses extremely different contexts. Baddeley suggests using retrieval cues in real life isn't very effective because the context effects are not very strong. In Godden and Baddeley's research contexts of learning and recall extremely different and conclusions drawn suggesting that forgetting occurs due to retrieval failure as environment has changed. Problem as learning and recalling in different rooms unlikely as environments are generally not different enough. Thus lacks ecological validity.
• Limitation of Retrieval Failure - Godden and Baddeley replicated underwater study using recognition task instead of free recall task. Participants to say whether they recognised a word read to them from list instead of retrieving it. When recognition tested no context-dependent effect; performance same in all four conditions as before. Means presence / absence of cues affects memory when learnt in certain way. Thus undermines value of theory explaining forgetting, reducing its validity.
• Limitation of Interference Theory - research evidence comes from artificial lab experiments. Tasks given to test interference require special conditions, these conditions are rare in day to day life therefore research appears to have little relevance life. Ecological validity can be questioned as interference can only account for very specific and limited range of forgetting in LTM. Thus evidence of interference seen as invalid further limiting validity of theory.
• Strength of Interference Theory - Postman (1960) had two groups of participants learn list of paired words (cat-tree, jelly-moss). Experimental group learnt another list of words where second paired word different (cat-glass) whereas control group not given second list. Recall higher in control group than experimental showcasing interference pairing words lead to forgetting. Shows interference effects is reliable phenomenon found in range of different experimental conditions, thus increasing validity.
• Strength of Retrieval Failure - has practical application. For example, when taking exam in school, need to pass exam by retrieving information from LTM; this research can be used to help avoid forgetting and improve recall. Abernethy suggests when trying to recall information one should imagine room of learning (mental reinstatement) as it is effective as being in the same room (context reinstatement). Thus showcasing useful research improving accuracy of recall and memory.