4🍓Forgetting- Memory PAPER1 Flashcards
(24 cards)
Proactive Interference
-old information interferes with recall of new information
-old disrupts new
-interference works forward in time
Retroactive interference
-new information interferes with recall of old information
-new disrupts old
-interference works backwards in time
Factors that affect interference
-similarity
-time sensitivity
what makes interference more likely
-if new information is similar to information previously learned, response competition
what makes interference less likely
-time sensitivity
-if there’s large gap in instances of learning
who investigated effect of retroactive interference
Schmidt et al (2000)
Schmidt et al (2000)
-investigate effect retroactive interference in memory of childhood street names in participants aged 17-74
-negative correlation
-the more times moved house, the less street names recalled on map of childhood school
-new information of new streets interferes with memory of old street names, made recall harder
who investigated proactive interference
Greenberg & Underwood (1950)
Greenberg & Underwood (1950)
-participants learned 10 paired word lists in 48 hours before recalling
-repeated 4 times
-the more word pairs learnt previously, the less accurate recall of new word pairs
-evidence proactive research
-previously learned word lists cause confusion, interfere with recall of newly learned lists
encoding specificity principle
-information is already in LTM but can’t access it due to lack of appropriate cues/ prompts
context dependent cues
-external prompts in environment, surroundings that aid recall, eork as cues to memory
who conducted research which is evidence for context dependent cues
Godden & Baddely (1985)
Godden & Baddely (1985)
-divers, word list to learn
-learn on land or underwater
-then recall in land or underwater
-those who recalled in same environment as they learned words had better recall (e.g learned on land and recalled on land)
-shows that context dependent cues improve our retrieval
state dependent cues
-internal environment, factors such as emotions, influence of drugs or alcohol
-provide cues to help trigger memory
who’s research provides evidence for state independent cues
Overton (1972)
Overton (1972)
-participants learned material when drunk or sober
-then recalled same material drunk or sober
-recall best in same internal state when learning material e.g learned and recalled drunk
-evidence shows state dependent cues aid recall of old
category/organisational cues
-cues that relate to the organisation of information which aids recall
when are category/organisational cues most effective/ least effective
-most effective : when no other information associated with the cue
-the less organisated the information is, the less effective the cue is
who’s research provides evidence for organisational/ categorical cues
Tulving & Pealstone (1966)
Tulving & Pealstone (1966)
-participants recall 48 words in assigned condition
-free recall in any order
or
-recall to match 12, 4 word categories
-recall significantly better in condition with categories
-suggests categories act as cues aiding recall
Strength (application)
-psychological research into how forgetting works has real world applications
-students revision techniques context cues to improve recall
-used to develop strategies used by police in cognitive interviews to improve eyewitness testimony
Limitation (not true explanation)
-interference and cue theory may only explain temporary loss of information, not true explanation for forgetting
-forgetting would be permanent loss of information from LTM
-it could be that interference involves over writing information or making it inaccessible
Limitation (day to day examples)
-interference only explains forgetting set of information that’s similar or learnt close together in time (time sensitivity)
-struggled to explain day to day examples such as forgetting someone’s birthday
Limitation (lab)
-research evidence used in interference conducted in lab setting
-low external validity, artificial, lack mundane realism, may not reflect interference that happens in real life setting, not generalisable
-lowering confidence in interference as explanation of forgetting
