evaluating interference as an explanation for forgetting

Question 1

strength of using interference as an explanation of memory/forgetting

Answer 1

It is high in validity as real world applications are present. One example showing this is in Braddeley and Hitch’s research into rugby players. In this experiment the players were asked to recall team names they’d played that season and all players played for the same time interval but some missed some due to to injuries. Players who played the most games had the poorest recall due to the most interference.

Question 2

weakness of using interference as an explanation of memory/forgetting

Answer 2

Tulving and Pstoka gave participants lists of words one organised into categories but participants weren’t told the categories. Recall averaged about 70% for the first list, but became progressively worse as participants learned each additional list (proactive interference). However, at the end of procedure participants were given names of categories and recall rose to 70% again. T&P’s research goes against B&H’s theory of interference causing forgetting, because they showed how cues can be a trigger memory, meaning interference only causes a temporary memory loss and therefore