Memory - Explanations of Forgetting

Question 1

What is the interference theory?

Answer 1

• idea that forgetting occurs in the LTM when two memories are in conflict
• more likely to happen when two memories are similar

Question 2

What is proactive interference?

Answer 2

• when an old memory interferes with the recall of a new memory

Question 3

What is retroactive interference?

Answer 3

• when a new memory interferes with the recall of an old memory

Question 4

Why is interference worse when memories are similar?

Answer 4

• PI = the previously stored info makes it more difficult to store new info
• RI = the new info overwrites previous memories (similar)

Question 5

What was the procedure of McGeoch and McDonald’s (1931) study?

Answer 5

• aim = to see if interference had an impact on forgetting
• 6 groups of ppts had to learn a words until they were 100% correct
• 5 groups of ppts had to learn a new list
  
  • g1 = synonyms
  • g2 = antonyms
  • g3 = unrelated words
  • g4 = nonsense syllables
  • g5 = 3-digit numbers
  • g6 = control group
• they were then told to recall the first list

Question 6

What were the results of McGeoch and McDonald’s study?

Answer 6

• the control group recalled the most no. of words
  
  • control group
  • numbers
  • nonsense syllables
  • unrelated words
  • antonyms
  • synonyms (recalled the least as the words in the second list were similar to those from the first list)

Question 7

What are the strengths of interference as an explanation of forgetting?

Answer 7

• supported by many controlled lab studies
  
  • extraneous variables are minimised
  • e.g. McGeoch and McDonald’s study
• realistic studies have also been conducted (Baddeley and Hitch (1977))
  
  • rugby union players (those who played every match/those who missed some games) asked to recall names of the teams they played against
  • players who played the most games forgot (proportionately) more games than those who had played fewer games
  • they believed that this took place due to retroactive interference

Question 8

What are the weaknesses of interference as an explanation of forgetting?

Answer 8

• most supporting evidence are lab studies
  
  • the use of unrealistic material means that these studies lack ecological validity
• in lab studies, the time period between learning the words and recalling them tends to be quite short
  
  • in real life, there is usually a much longer gap, so the supporting research may lack validity/not reflect real life
• research has shown that interference can be overcome by using cues
  
  • Tulving and Psotka (1971) gave ppts 5 lists of 24 words (with categories)
  • recall for the first list = 70%, this decreased as the lists went on
  • but when cues (categories) were given, the overall accuracy increased to 70%
  • ** cues are needed to retrieve info from the LTM **

Question 9

What is retrieval failure due to the lack of cues?

Answer 9

• where the info stored in the LTM cannot be retrieved due to the lack of cues
• the cues associated with that info is also stored at the same time

Question 10

What is the encoding specificity principle?

Answer 10

• Tulving (1983) suggests that the cues can help with retrieval if the same ones are present at coding and retrieval
  
  • meaningful cues can be used
  • cue which are not linked meaningfully can also be used (may relate to context in which the learning occurs e.g. weather, mental state)

Question 11

What was Tulving and Pearlstone’s (1966) study?

Answer 11

• ppts had to recall 48 words that belonged to 12 categories (gem type)
• when the cue was present, the overall recall was 60%
• without the cue, the recall fell to 40%
• supports idea thar retrieval is better when there are cues to help trigger the memory

Question 12

What is context-dependent forgetting?

Answer 12

• occurs when the environment during recall is different from the environment during learning

Question 13

What was Abernethy’s (1940) study?

Answer 13

• group of students were tested weekly but arranged in four different groups
  
  • same teaching room/same instructor
  • same teaching room/different instructors
  • different rooms/same instructor
  • different teaching rooms/different instructors
• those tested by the same instructor in the same room performed the best (context memory cues)
• ** able students were the least affected and less able students were the most affected **

Question 14

What was Godden and Baddeley’s (1975) study?

Answer 14

• 18 divers had to learn lists of 36 unrelated words
• each ppt participated in 4 conditions
  
  • learn/recall on beach
  • learn on beach/recall under water
  • learn under water/recall on beach
  • learn/recall under water
• recall was better when the environment during learning/recall was the same
• shows how context (cues) played a huge role in their recall

Question 15

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Godden and Baddeley’s study?

Answer 15

• weaknesses:
• Baddeley argued that context effects may not be strong in real life as contexts must be really different to actually see context effect
  
  • ** Abernerthy’s study proved that normal real life contexts (classrooms) are able to show how context/external cues impacts recall **
• context-dependent forgetting may depend on the type of memory being tested
  
  • when Godden and Baddeley’s experiment was repeated with recognition instead of recall, performance was the same overall
  • so retrieval failure due to absence of cues only occurs when an individual had to recall info rather than recognise it

Question 16

What is state-dependent forgetting?

Answer 16

• occurs when your mood/physiological state during recall is different from your mood/physiological state during learning

Question 17

What was Carter and Cassaday’s (1998) study?

Answer 17

• ppts had to learn and recall lists of words/passages (4 conditions)
  
  • g1 = learn and recall on drug (anti-histamines)
  • g2 = learn not on drug/recall on drug
  • g3 = learn/recall not on drug
  • g4 = learn on drug/recall not on drug
• ppts recalled best when their internal state matched during learning and recall
• when internal cues are absent, forgetting is more likely

Question 18

What are the strengths of the retrieval failure explanation?

Answer 18

• range of research (controlled lab and real-life):
  
  • Godden and Baddeley (divers study)
  • Goodwin (1969) = male ppts asked to remember a list of words either drunk or sober
  • after 24 hours, they were asked to recall them either drunk or sober (those who were in the same state during learning and recall performed best)
• context/state dependent cues have real life applications:
  
  • remembering these cues can improve memory
  • they are also used in the Cognitive Interview (showing that research into forgetting is successful in real life application)

Question 19

What are the weaknesses of the retrieval failure explanation?

Answer 19

• retrieval cues do not always work:
  
  • our learning does not relate to just cues (other factors may be affecting our recall)
  • research supporting RF mainly focuses on word lists/passages which lacks ecological validity (lacks realism as these are not the only things we learn)
• difficult to test encoding specificity principle:
  
  • certain cues may be meaningful to some but not to others and we do not know how they are encoded
  • so retrieval failure as an explanation is not very powerful (as it can be subjective)

Question 20

What is eyewitness testimony?

Answer 20

• an account given by people of an event that they have witnessed

Question 21

What can affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony?

Answer 21

• misleading information:
  
  • leading questions = questions that suggest to the witness what answer is desired
  • post-event discussions = where witnesses of an event discuss what happened after the event

Question 22

What was Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) study?

Answer 22

• 45 students were showed a video of a car accident
• each group of ppts were asked “how fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?”
  
  • hit
  • collided
  • smashed
  • bumped
  • contacted
• lowest estimated speed = contacted (31.8 mph)
• highest estimated speed = smashed (40.5 mph)
• in the second experiment, they found that ppts who originally heard “smashed” were more likely to report there being broken glass (there was none)
• this critical verb altered their memories

Question 23

What was Loftus and Zanni’s (1975) study?

Answer 23

• ppts were shown a video of a car accident and were asked if they had seen “a/the” broken headlight
  
  • a = 7% said yes
  • the = 17% said yes
• the word “the” was leading as it implied that there was a broken headlight

Question 24

How does post-event discussion affect accuracy of EWT?

Answer 24

• memory contamination = witnesses mix info from other witnesses into their own memories
• memory conformity = witnesses pick up details from EWT of other witnesses because of social approval or because they believe other witnesses are right

Question 25

What was Gabbert’s (2003) study?

Answer 25

• 60 students from Uni of Aberdeen and 60 adults watched a video of a girl stealing money from a wallet
• ppts were tested individually/in pairs
  
  • the ppts in pairs had actually seen different perspectives of the same crime (only one witnessed the girl stealing)
• 71% of ppts in the co-witness group had recalled information that they had not seen
• control group = 0%
• 60% said that the girl was guilty despite them not seeing her commit a crime
• ** shows how witnesses will absorb info from other witnesses due to post-event discussion **

Question 26

What are the strengths of the effects of misleading info on EWT?

Answer 26

• most supporting research are well-controlled lab studies:
  
  • good control over extraneous variables makes the results more valid
  • these studies can also be easily replicated making it reliable
  • e.g. Loftus and Palmer/Zanni/s ppts experienced the same standardised and procedure
• important applications to real life:
  
  • due to the effect of leading questions, police have to be careful of the way they phrase interview questions
  • Gabbert’s study shows the dangers of post-event discussion and its impact on the legal system

Question 27

What are the weaknesses of lab studies into EWT?

Answer 27

• watching a video is very different to watching a real event in real time
• watching a staged event does not cause anxiety (small amount of it can increase accuracy)
• in real life, EWT can have serious consequences but not in a study so ppts may be less motivated to be accurate
• there is a risk of demand characteristics in lab studies (effects the validity of EWT research):
  
  • Yullie and Cutshall (1986) = 13 witnesses of a real crime were interviewed 5 months after the event
  • they were asked 2 leading questions (did not affect accuracy)
  • shows that EWT is more accurate/less affected by leading questions in real life
• many of Loftus’ experiments involved students as ppts which may not be a representative group

Question 28

What is the Yerkes-Dodson Law?

Answer 28

• the relationship between emotional arousal (anxiety) and performance looks like an inverted ‘U’
• it shows that as stress increases, performance also increases up to a certain point at which it then decreases drastically
  
  • Deffenbacher (1983) believed that too much/less anxiety will affect recall accuracy
  • a medium amount of anxiety will aid most recall

Question 29

What was Johnson and Scott’s (1976) study?

Answer 29

• weapon focus effect
• ppts sat outside the lab and heard one of the 2 situations:
  
  • low anxiety = friendly convo, man emerging with pen and greasy hands
  • high anxiety = argument, man emerging with blood stained paper knife
• ppts then had to identify the man out of 50 photos
  
  • pen = 49% accuracy
  • knife = 33% accuracy (focused more on the weapon than the man)
• shows how anxiety generated by the weapon diverted attention away from the face of the man

Question 30

What was Christianson and Hubinette’s (1993) study?

Answer 30

• positive effect
• 58 real witnesses were questioned about a bank robbery in Sweden (4-15 months after event)
  
  • all witnesses had 75% accuracy of the details
  • those who were the most anxious had the best recall
• shows that high anxiety actually enhanced accurate recall
• Yuille and Cutshall (1986) found witnesses of a real-life shooting in Canada gave the most accurate recall 5 months later

Question 31

What are (strengths)/weaknesses of anxiety as a factor affecting EWT?

Answer 31

• anxiety may not cause weapon focus:
  
  • Pickel (1998) believed that surprise caused this instead
  • high threat/low surprise = scissors
  • high threat/high surprise = handgun
  • low threat/low surprise = wallet
  • low threat/high surprise = whole raw chicken
• ** identification was least accurate in the high surprise conditions instead of the high threat ones **
• field studies lack control:
  
  • confounding variables may have affected the results
  • e.g. those with the highest levels of anxiety may have been closer to the event
  • witnesses’ recall may also have been effected by extraneous variables like post-event discussion
• ethical issues:
  
  • in most lab studies anxiety was deliberately created and ppts were also deceived (e.g. staged argument)
  • although natural studies are more ethical, they have less control over variables
• Yerkes Dodson Law is too simplistic:
  
  • anxiety is very difficult to measure accurately as it has many different elements
  • it cannot always be measured through physiological means
• individual differences:
  
  • an individual’s personality characteristics may be affecting their recall instead
  • Bothwell (1987) found that highly anxious people were less accurate with increased stress levels, while stable individuals had a much better accuracy with high anxiety levels

Question 32

What are the four principles of the cognitive interview?

Answer 32

• context/mental reinstatement:
  
  • mentally recreate the physical/psychological environment of original incident
  • “Try to remember the scene, weather, how you were feeling…”
• report everything:
  
  • interviewer encourages the reporting of every detail of the event without leaving anything out
  • recall of all details can help to form a clearer picture of the event as memories are interconnected with one another
• recall in changed order:
  
  • reversing the order of the events can help to trigger extra memories and prevents dishonesty
  • it also prevents the pre-existing schema influencing what you recall
• recall from changed perspective:
  
  • interviewee is asked to recall the event from multiple perspectives
  • this helps to disrupt the schemas that people may have about certain people

Question 33

What are the principles of an enhanced cognitive interview (Fisher (1987))?

Answer 33

• actively listen
• open ended questions
• pause after each response
• avoid interruption
• encourage use of imagery
• adapt language to suit witness
• avoid judgemental comments
• minimise distractions

Question 34

What are the strengths of the cognitive interview?

Answer 34

• research suggests that it is effective:
  
  • Gieselman (1986) = intruder wearing blue rucksack enters and steals slide projector
  • 2 days later ppts are questioned using a standard or cognitive interview (leading question : “the guy in the green backpack…”)
  • those in the cognitive interview were less likely to recall the rucksack as being green (reduces the effect of leading questions)
  • meta-analysis of 53 studies found that an increase of 34% in the amount of correct info generated in CI than in SI
  • the use of a combination of techniques in the CI is more effective than just one technique

Question 35

What are the weaknesses of the cognitive interview?

Answer 35

• CI can be very time consuming
• the CI requires lots of training in order to see good results
• many studies testing its effectiveness were lab studies (may not generalise to everyday life)
• the CI technique is less effective with children:
  
  • Gieselman (1999) found that the technique lead to children under 6 reporting events less accurately
  • however, it is more effective with children 8 years or above