forgetting Flashcards
what are the 2 ways we forget
interference and cue dependent forgetting
2 types of interference (to do with forgetting)
proactive- where older memories interfere with an attempt to remember newer memories (eg, trying to remember new phone number but telling others your old one instead)
retroactive- where new memories interfere with an attempt to remember older memories (eg, trying to remember old postcode but remembering new postcode only)
2 types of cue dependent forgetting
context dependent- failure is when information is forgotten because the external environment where learning occurred is different to the place in which the test took place.
state dependent- failure is when the internal retrieval cues are different (eg, trying to recall information learnt when drunk but now sober)
evidence to support interferance- Mcgeoch and McDonald
participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they had full 100% accuracy. They were then given a new list of words to learn (6 groups).
groups: 1= synonyms, 2= antonyms, 3=words unrelated to original ones, 4= consonant syllables, 5= 3 digit numbers, 6= no new list (control group)
conclusions: when participants were asked to recall the original list of words synonyms produced the worst recall. This shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar.
was Carter and Cassaday’s research into context or state for cues as an explanation of forgetting
State
what did Carter and Cassaday’s research (and procedure) look into for cues explaining forgetting
If antihistamine drugs had a mild sedative effect making participants slightly drowsey and it creating an internal psychological different state to being awake and alert.
They did this by giving participants a list of words and passages to recall in these conditions: learn on drug and recall on drug, learn on drug and recall not on drug, learn not on drug and recall on drug, learn not on drug and recall not on drug.
what did Carter and Cassaday’s research find out for cues as an explanation or forgetting
In conditions where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning and recall, performance on the memory test was significantly worse.
conclusion of Carter and Cassaday’s research for cues explaining forgetting
When in a different state recall decreases because when cues are absent forgetting increases
was Godden’s and Baddeley’s research into context or state for cues as an explanation of forgetting
context
what did Godden and Baddeley find out in their research for cues explaining forgetting and the procedure they used
Studied deep sea divers who work underwater to see if training on land helped or hindered their work underwater.
Divers learnt and recalled a list of words in one of these conditions: learn on land and recall on land, learn on land recall underwater, learn underwater and recall on land, learn underwater and recall underwater.
what did Godden’s and Baddeley’s research find out as an explanation for forgetting
Accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions (e.g. learn underwater and recall on land)
conclusion of Godden and Braddeley’s research into cues as an explanation for forgetting
external cues available at learning were different from the ones available at recall, and this and to retrieval failure.
one strength supporting Braddley&Godden and Carter&Cassaday’s research of context and state dependent forgetting
(evaluation)
There is a large amount of research that supports retrieval failure explanation. Both psychologist duo groups show how with a lack of relevant cues at recall, can lead to context and state dependent forgetting in everyday life. This research suggests that even though these were done in controlled lab conditions, they still can be applied to real world situations.
one limitation of Braddley&Godden and Carter&Cassaday’s research of context and state dependent forgetting
(evaluation)
Context effects may depend on the type of memory being tested. G&B replicated their experiment but used a recognition test instead of recall. When recognition was tested there was no context dependent effect, peformance was the same in all 4 conditions. Therefore, this suggests that retrieval is a limited explanation for forgetting, because it only applies when a person has to recall information rather than reccognise it.
