Explanation of forgetting Flashcards
(12 cards)
The 2 explanation of forgetting
- Interference
- absense of cues
2 types of interference
- proactive
- retroactive
what is proactive
when older information interferes with your ability to remember something new
e.g:- when you try to remember your password, but you keep thinking of your old password.
what is retroactive
newer information gets disrupted by older information
e.g:- trying to remember your address form 10 years ago, but you keeping thinking of your address from 2 years ago.
A03: interference
McGeoch and McDonald (1931): 6 groups of participants.
Participants learned a list of words to 100% accuracy.
Then learned a second list that was either:
Synonyms (similar meanings)
Antonyms (opposite meanings)
Unrelated words
Nonsense syllables
Three-digit numbers
No second list (control)
Found: More similar material caused more forgetting (i.e., more interference). Shows interference is strongest when memories are similar.
Real-Life Evidence: Baddeley & Hitch (1977): Rugby players asked to recall names of teams they’d played over a season. Players who played fewer games recalled better, even if time since matches was the same. Suggests interference (number of games), not time, caused forgetting.
Artificial Materials: Most studies use word lists or nonsense syllables, not meaningful real-life information.
Lacks ecological validity; may not reflect how memory works in everyday life.
Limited Explanation: Only explains forgetting when two memories conflict. Doesn’t explain forgetting when there’s no similar material or why some memories are more resistant to interference.
what is the definition of absense of cues
when information is stored in LTM but can not be accessed because there is no memory to trigger the memory.
what did tulving and thomas suggest
(absense of cues)
suggest when forgetting is more likely to occur when the context in which memory is recalled is different from the context in memory which was coded
2 types of absence of cues
- context dependant forgetting
- state dependant forgetting
what is the context dependant forgetting
when external information does not provide the cues necessary to recall a memory
what is the state dependant forgetting
when the internal enviroment during recall is different from the internal enviroment when the memory is coded
Key studies for retrieval failure.
Key Study: Godden and Baddeley (1975) (Context-Dependent Forgetting). Scuba divers learned words either underwater or on land. When recall took place in the same context (land-land or water-water), recall was better. When recall took place in different contexts (land-water or water-land), recall was worse. Suggests that context can serve as an important cue to trigger retrieval.
Key Study: Goodwin et al. (1969) (State-Dependent Forgetting)
Male participants learned a list of words when either sober or drunk. When recall occurred in the same state (sober-sober or drunk-drunk), recall was better. When recall occurred in a different state (sober-drunk or drunk-sober), recall was worse. Suggests that our internal state can influence memory retrieval.
A03 of retrieval failure
limitation
Research Support: Godden and Baddeley (1975) provide strong evidence for context-dependent forgetting with their underwater study. Goodwin et al. (1969) provide robust evidence for state-dependent forgetting, showing how recall can be influenced by internal states (e.g., intoxication). These studies add credibility to the theory by demonstrating retrieval failure under controlled, experimental conditions.
The Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP): Tulving (1983) proposed that retrieval is most successful when the cues at retrieval match the cues present at encoding. This principle has been supported in numerous studies, including those by Godden & Baddeley, and provides a theoretical framework for understanding how retrieval failure works.
LIMITATIONS:
Lack of Ecological Validity: Most of the research (e.g., Godden & Baddeley’s underwater experiment) involves artificial tasks such as recalling word lists, which may not reflect how retrieval failure operates in real-world situations. This makes it difficult to generalize the findings to real-life memory retrieval.
Over-Simplification of Memory Retrieval: The theory might oversimplify the complex process of memory retrieval by focusing too heavily on environmental or internal cues. Memory recall involves numerous factors (e.g., attention, motivation, and previous knowledge) that the retrieval failure theory does not fully address.
Alternative Explanations of Forgetting: Other theories, like Interference Theory, might also explain why we forget information, suggesting that it is not just the lack of cues but competing memories that block retrieval. Retrieval failure might be one mechanism of forgetting, but it is not the only one.
