Explanations For Forgetting - Retrieval Failure Flashcards
(22 cards)
What is retrieval failure?
Retrieval failure occurs when information is stored in long-term memory (LTM) but cannot be accessed due to the absence of appropriate retrieval cues
When is the memory able to be accessed?
Not accessible unless a cue is provided
Who created the Encoding Specificity Principle (1983)?
Tulving
What does Tulving’s Encoding Specificity Principle (1983) say?
-Memory is most effective when information available at encoding is also present at retrieval.
-If cues at recall are different or missing from those at encoding, forgetting is more likely.
-Cues can be external (context-dependent) or internal (state-dependent).
What are the 2 types of retriebal failure?
- Context-dependent forgetting
- State-dependent forgetting
What is Context-Dependent Forgetting?
Occurs when the environment during recall is different from the environment during learning
Godden and Baddeley (1975) — Context-Dependent Forgetting
Aim: To investigate whether context (environment) affects the ability to recall information, testing the idea of context-dependent forgetting and retrieval failure.
Procedure:
-Participants: 18 deep-sea divers, accustomed to learning and working in different environments.
-Design: Repeated measures, with four conditions based on learning and recall environments.
-Task: Participants learned lists of 36 unrelated words under two different conditions:
-On land
-Underwater
-Later, participants were asked to recall the words in either the same or different environment:
-Learn on land, recall on land (same)
-Learn on land, recall underwater (different)
-Learn underwater, recall underwater (same)
-Learn underwater, recall on land (different)
Findings:
-Recall accuracy was significantly better when the learning and recall environments matched (same context).
-There was about a 40% decrease in recall performance when learning and recall contexts did not match.
-For example, learning underwater and recalling on land led to much poorer recall than learning and recalling underwater.
Conclusion:
-External environmental cues present at learning aid retrieval when present again during recall.
-Forgetting occurs when the contextual cues are absent or different at recall — supporting retrieval failure theory and the encoding specificity principle.
-The study highlights how memory is context-dependent, meaning the physical surroundings form part of the memory trace.
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975)
+ High ecological validity
- Artificial tasks
+ Controlled lab conditions
- Limited sample size
- Context effects may only appear in recall, not recognition
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975) - + High ecological validity
P: The study has strong ecological validity because it used real divers in real environments.
E: Participants were actual deep-sea divers learning and recalling words underwater and on land.
E: This makes the findings more applicable to real-life situations compared to typical lab-based memory tasks.
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975) - - Artificial task
P: The task was quite artificial despite the realistic setting.
E: Participants memorised lists of unrelated words, which is not something people usually do in daily life.
E: This limits how well the results can be applied to everyday memory, such as recalling meaningful events or information.
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975) - + Controlled lab conditions
P: The study had good internal validity due to controlled conditions.
E: The experiment used a repeated measures design with careful control of environmental variables (land vs. underwater).
E: This control increases confidence that differences in recall were due to context changes, not other factors.
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975) - - Context effects may only appear in recall, not recognition
P: Context-dependent forgetting effects may depend on the type of memory test used.
E: Baddeley (1997) found that context effects occurred in recall tasks but not in recognition tasks.
E: This suggests that context might not always influence memory, reducing the overall applicability of retrieval failure theory.
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley (1975) -
What is State-Dependant Forgetting?
Occurs when the person’s internal state at learning differs from the state at recall (e.g., mood, intoxication).
Carter and Cassaday (1998) — State-Dependent Forgetting
Aim: To test the effect of internal state cues on memory recall — specifically, whether mismatched physiological states between learning and recall lead to state-dependent forgetting.
Procedure:
-Participants were given either an antihistamine drug (which made them mildly drowsy) or a placebo.
-The drug altered participants’ internal physiological state, mimicking the effects of real-life changes in mental state (e.g., fatigue, drowsiness).
-Participants were asked to learn lists of words and passages of prose.
-They were later asked to recall the material under one of four conditions:
-Learn on drug – Recall on drug
-Learn on drug – Recall off drug
-Learn off drug – Recall on drug
-Learn off drug – Recall off drug
Findings:
-Memory performance was significantly worse when there was a mismatch between the internal state at learning and the internal state at recall (conditions 2 & 3).
-Best recall occurred when the internal state was the same at encoding and retrieval (conditions 1 & 4).
Conclusion:
-This supports the theory of state-dependent forgetting: if a person’s internal physiological or emotional state is different at recall than it was at encoding, they are less likely to retrieve the information.
-The results support Tulving’s encoding specificity principle — internal cues need to be present at recall for optimal memory performance.
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998)
+ Supports retrieval failure theory
- Artifical task reduces ecological validity
+ Real-world applications
- Use of drugs raises ethical and methodological concerns
- Limited generalisability due to drug-induced states
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998) - + Supports retrieval failure
P: The study provides strong support for state-dependent forgetting as part of retrieval failure.
E: Participants recalled significantly fewer words when their internal state at learning (drowsy from antihistamines) did not match their state at recall.
E: This supports Tulving’s encoding specificity principle, showing that internal states act as retrieval cues.
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998) - - Artificial task reduces ecological validity
P: The tasks used were artificial and may not reflect real-life memory use.
E: Participants learned and recalled word lists or passages, which are very different from how we remember things in everyday life (e.g., names, experiences).
E: This means the findings may lack ecological validity and may not apply well to real-world forgetting.
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998) - + Real-world applications
P: The study has useful real-life implications.
E: It suggests people should try to match their internal state at revision and in exams (e.g., avoid revising while tired or under the influence of substances).
E: This enhances the practical usefulness of retrieval failure theory in education and cognitive performance.
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998) - - Use of drugs raises ethical and methodological concerns
P: The use of antihistamines could affect results in unintended ways.
E: Drugs might cause side effects like reduced attention or drowsiness that interfere with learning independently of state-dependent cues.
E: This makes it difficult to isolate internal state as the only variable affecting memory performance.
Evaluation of Carter & Cassaday (1998) - - Limited generalisability due to drug-induced states
P: The internal states in this study may not reflect the kinds of states that affect memory in real life.
E: Being mildly sedated by an antihistamine is not the same as feeling anxious, tired, or emotional.
E: Therefore, the findings may have limited generalisability to naturally occurring changes in state.
What are meaningful cues?
Words or ideas that were meaningfully linked during learning (e.g., categories, mnemonics) can help trigger recall later.
