Forgetting: Interference Flashcards
What are the 2 types of interference?
1) Proactive Interference - past memories interfere with your ability to form new memories
2) Retroactive Interference - recent memories interfere with old memories
What is the Interference Theory?
- The idea that when 2 pieces of information conflict with each other, it causes 1 or both pieces of information to be forgotten
- Information from your LTM is permanent so forgetting is probably due to a lack of access to these memories despite them being available
- Interference only makes them harder to access
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Procedure
- Participants had to successfully learn a set of 10 words with 100% accuracy
- They were then put into one of the following conditions: synonyms, antonyms, words unrelated to the original, nonsense syllables, three digit numbers or rested
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Findings
When asked to recall the original list, performance depended on the nature of the 2nd task.
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Conclusion
Interference is strongest when tasks are similar.
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Strength
Evidence from lab studies increases reliability and gives high internal validity.
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Weaknesses
Time between material is unrealistic so low external validity.
Interference is worse when both pieces of information is similar - McGeoch and McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity - Weaknesses
Artificial materials so low mundane realism.
Interference - Strength
- Evidence from lab studies.
- Interference in memory is one of the most consistently demonstrated findings in the whole of psychology.
- 1000s of lab experiments have been conducted into the explanation for forgetting, such as McGeoch and McDonald’s research.
- Most of these studies show that both types of interference are very likely to be common ways we forget information from LTM.
- This is a strength as lab experiments control the effects of irrelevant influences and thus give us confidence that interference is a valid explanation for at least some forgetting.
Interference - Strength
- Real life studies.
- Some research studies have considered interference effects in more everyday situations.
- Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch (1977) wanted to find out if interference was a better explanation of forgetting than the passage of time. So they asked rugby players to try to remember the names of the teams they had played so far in that season, week by week. Because most of the players had missed games, for some, the last team they played may have been 2 or 3 weeks ago or more.
- The results clearly showed that accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place. Much more important was the number of games they played in the meantime.
- So a player’s recall of a team from 3 weeks ago was better if they had played no matches since then.
- This study shows that interference explanations can apply to at least some everyday situations.
Interference - Strength
- Interference effects may be overcome using cues.
- Endel Tulving and Joseph Psotka (1971) gave participants 5 lists of 24 words, each list organised into 6 categories.
- The categories weren’t explicit but it was presumed that they would be obvious to participants. Recall was about 70% accurate for the first word but this fell as participants were given each additional list to learn, presumably due to interference.
- However, at the end they were given a cued recall test.
- They were told the names of the categories as a clue and recall rose to about 70%.
- This is a strength as it displays that interference is one of the causes of forgetting but also shows how it can be overcome through using cues.
Interference - Weakness
- Artificial materials.
-There is a much greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in the lab than in real-life situations as the stimulus used in studies are lists of words. The task facing participants is to learn these lists. - Learning lists of words is definitely more realistic than learning lists of consonant syllables, such as TZK. But this is still quite some distance from the things we learn and try to remember in everyday life, such as people’s face and birthdays.
- This is a weakness as the use of artificial tasks makes interference much more likely in the lab. Interference may not be as likely an explanation for forgetting in everyday life as it is the lab.
Interference - Weakness
- Time between learning.
- No doubt that the majority of lab experiments are designed so that the possibility of interference is maximised.
- One example of how this occurs is in the time periods between learning lists of words and recalling them.
- For good practical reasons, these time periods are relatively short.
- So a participant may have to learn 1 list of words, and then learn a 2nd one 20 minutes later, and then recall one of them a few minutes after that.
- This is a limitation of the interference theory as we generally don’t learn and remember information like this.
