Forgetting:retrieval failure

• Retrieval failure-

  Encoding specific principle: Tulving 1983 found that a cue has to be present at encoding and retrieval, memory is aided.
• Retrieval failure-

  • Context-dependent forgetting:
  •  Goddan and Baddeley (1975) studied deep sea divers to see if their learning was hindered underwater or on land.
  • Learned a list of words either underwater or on land, then recalled on either.
  • Learned on land- tested on land | learned on land- recalled underwater | learned underwater- recalled underwater | learned underwater- recalled on land.
  • When the context was matched recalled was 40% higher, showing cues help.
• Retrieval failure-

  • State-dependent forgetting:
  • Carter and Cassaday (1998) gave antihistamine drugs to participants making them feel slightly drowsy, creating a different internal psychological state.
  • Participants made to learn a list of words and passages of prose then recall them.
  • Learn on drug- recall on drug | learn on drug- recall normally | learn normal – recall normal | learn normal – recall on drug.
  • State unmatched has significantly worse recall, showing that when the cues were absent the recall was worse.
• Retrieval failure-

  S- Can be used daily – real world application.

  W- Godden and Baddeley (1980) did their test with recognition instead of recalling, where there was no context-dependent effect since performance was the Sam in all conditions – only applies to recall not recognition.
• Retrieval failure-

  CPS- Eysenck and Keane (2010) suggest that retrieval failure is perhaps the main reason for forgetting in LTM.

  CPW- Baddeley (1997) different contexts have to be very different, so contextual forgetting doesn’t explain daily forgetting.