memory - explanations of forgetting: interference theory.

Question 1

What is meant by “proactive interference”?

Answer 1

Occurs when an older memory interferes with a newer one.

Question 2

What is meant by “retroactive interference”?

Answer 2

Occurs when a newer memory interferes with an older one.

Question 3

What are the two types of interference?

Answer 3

• proactive interference.
• retroactive interference.

Question 4

What is an example of proactive interference?

Answer 4

Teacher has learned so many new names in the past she struggles with the names of her current classes.

Question 5

What is an example of retroactive interference?

Answer 5

Teacher has learned so many new names this year this year that she has difficulty remembering the names of students last year.

Question 6

What does the interference theory state?

Answer 6

• sometimes we forget as a result of interference.
• occurs when two pieces of information conflict with each other
  ↳ leads to one memory disrupting the ability to recall another.
• interference is mainly said to be the cause of forgetting memories in the LTM.
• interference can make it difficult for us to access these memories although they are still in the LTM
  ↳ known as forgetting.

Question 7

What experiment researches proactive interference?

Answer 7

Keppel and Underwood’s in 1962.

Question 8

What was the aim of Keppel and Underwood’s proactive experiment?

Answer 8

Examine effect of proactive interference on LTM.

Question 9

What is the procedure of Keppel and Underwood’s proactive experiment?

Answer 9

1. presented with meaningless three-letter consonant trigrams such as THG at different intervals (3,6,9 seconds, etc).
   
   2. to prevent rehearsal participants had to count backwards in threes before recalling.

Question 10

What are the findings of Keppel and Underwood’s proactive experiment?

Answer 10

Typically remembered trigrams that were presented first, irrespective of the interval length.

Question 11

What is the conclusion of Keppel and Underwood’s proactive experiment?

Answer 11

Results suggest proactive interference occurred as memory for earlier consonants which had transferred to LTM was interfering with the memory for new consonants.

Question 12

What experiments research retroactive interference?

Answer 12

Underwood and Postman’s in 1960.

Question 13

What was the aim of Underwood and Postman’s retroactive experiment?

Answer 13

Examine effect of retroactive interference on LTM.

Question 14

What is the procedure of Underwood and Postman’s retroactive experiment?

Answer 14

1. lab experiment where participants were split into two groups.
   
   2. both groups had to remember a list of paired words such as cat and tree, jelly and moss, book and tractor.
      
      3. control group were not given second list.
         
         4. all participants were asked to recall words on the first list.

Question 15

What are the findings of Underwood and Postman’s retroactive experiment?

Answer 15

Recall of control group was more accurate than that of the experimental group.

Question 16

What is the conclusion of Underwood and Postman’s retroactive experiment?

Answer 16

Suggests that learning items in second list interfered with participants’ ability to recall the list.

Question 17

What experiment researches the effect of similarity?

Answer 17

McGeoch and McDonald’s in (1931).

Question 18

What was the aim of McGeoch and McDonald’s similarity experiment?

Answer 18

Investigate the effect of similarity on interference.

Question 19

What is the procedure of McGeoch and McDonald’s similarity experiment?

Answer 19

1. changed the amount of similarity between 2 sets of materials.
   
   2. participants had to learn a list of words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy.
      
      3. then they learned a new list of words.
         
         4. 6 groups of participants who had to learn different types of lists
            ↳ group one: synonyms – words with same meanings as originals.
            ➝ group two: antonyms – words with the opposite meanings of the originals.
            ➝ group three: words unrelated to the original ones.
            ➝ group four: nonsense syllables.
            ➝ group five: three-digit numbers.
            ➝ group six: no new list – participants just rested.

Question 20

What are the findings of McGeoch and McDonald’s similarity experiment?

Answer 20

Most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall.

Question 21

What is the conclusion of McGeoch and McDonald’s similarity experiment?

Answer 21

Suggests interference is strongest when memories are similar.

Question 22

What is a strength of the interference theory?

Answer 22

• support from real life studies.

Question 23

What are the weaknesses of the interference theory?

Answer 23

• interference and cues.
• artificial materials.
• time between learning.

Question 24

What is the evaluation of the interference theory - support from real life studies?

Answer 24

POINT - one strength is that it has supportive real-life evidence.
EVIDENCE - Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to try remember the names of teams they had played week by week. Most players has missed games. Accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place but on the number of games they played in the meantime.
EXPLANATION - players who missed matches have less interference meaning their recall would be better than those who had played every match supporting the theory due to the lack of conflicting information.
LINK - increased external validity due to nature of the study reflecting day to day activity.

Question 25

What is the evaluation of the *interference theory* - **interference and cues**?

Answer 25

**POINT** - one weakness is it can be overcome by suing cues. **EVIDENCE** - Tulving and Pstoka (1971) gave participants lists of words organised into categories one list at a time. Recall averaged about 70% for the first list but got worse as participants learnt additional list. Participants were given a cued list and old names of categories and recall rose to 70%. **EXPLANATION** - words have not disappeared from LTM just inaccessible unless they had sufficient cues to help retrieve information. **LINK** - interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material that is still in LTM.

Question 26

What is the evaluation of the *interference theory* - **artificial materials**?

Answer 26

**POINT** - one weakness is it has relied on the use of artificial materials. **EVIDENCE** - most research carried out in a lab where materials tend to be lists of words with a task attached to learn them McGeoch and McDonald used word lists in experiment. **EXPLANATION** - differs from what we try to learn everyday such as people's faces, birthdays, etc. Difficult to generalise lacking mundane realism. **LINK** - lacks external validity.

Question 27

What is the evaluation of the *interference theory* - **time between learning**?

Answer 27

**POINT** - one weakness is the reliance on lab experiments means they are designed so the possibility of interference is maximised. **EVIDENCE** - time period between learning lists of words and recalling them are short. Whole experience of learning could be over within an hour. **EXPLANATION** - do not generally learn and recall information within such a short time. The longer the time between learning and recall the less likely there is to be forgetting due to interference. **LINK** - lab studies may over exaggerate the effect of interference as a form of forgetting in real-life.

Question 28

What is the evaluation **point** of the *interference theory* - **support from real life studies**?

Answer 28

One strength is that it has supportive real-life evidence.

Question 29

What is the evaluation **evidence** of the *interference theory* - **support from real life studies**?

Answer 29

- Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to try remember the names of teams they had played week by week. - most players has missed games. - accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place but on the number of games they played in the meantime.

Question 30

What is the evaluation **explanation** of the *interference theory* - **support from real life studies**?

Answer 30

Players who missed matches have less interference meaning their recall would be better than those who had played every match supporting the theory due to the lack of conflicting information.

Question 31

What is the evaluation **link** of the *interference theory* - **support from real life studies**?

Answer 31

Increased external validity due to nature of the study reflecting day to day activity.

Question 32

What is the evaluation **point** of the *interference theory* - **interference and cues**?

Answer 32

One weakness is it can be overcome by suing cues.

Question 33

What is the evaluation **evidence** of the *interference theory* - **interference and cues**?

Answer 33

- Tulving and Pstoka (1971) gave participants lists of words organised into categories one list at a time. - recall averaged about 70% for the first list but got worse as participants learnt additional list. - participants were given a cued list and old names of categories and recall rose to 70%.

Question 34

What is the evaluation **explanation** of the *interference theory* - **interference and cues**?

Answer 34

Words have not disappeared from LTM just inaccessible unless they had sufficient cues to help retrieve information.

Question 35

What is the evaluation **link** of the *interference theory* - **interference and cues**?

Answer 35

Interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material that is still in LTM.

Question 36

What is the evaluation **point** of the *interference theory* - **artificial materials**?

Answer 36

One weakness is it has relied on the use of artificial materials.

Question 37

What is the evaluation **evidence** of the *interference theory* - **artificial materials**?

Answer 37

Most research carried out in a lab where materials tend to be lists of words with a task attached to learn them McGeoch and McDonald used word lists in experiment.

Question 38

What is the evaluation **explanation** of the *interference theory* - **artificial materials**?

Answer 38

- differs from what we try to learn everyday such as people's faces, birthdays, etc. - difficult to generalise lacking mundane realism.

Question 39

What is the evaluation **link** of the *interference theory* - **artificial materials**?

Answer 39

Lacks external validity.

Question 40

What is the evaluation **point** of the *interference theory* - **time between learning**?

Answer 40

One weakness is the reliance on lab experiments means they are designed so the possibility of interference is maximised.

Question 41

What is the evaluation **evidence** of the *interference theory* - **time between learning**?

Answer 41

- time period between learning lists of words and recalling them are short. - whole experience of learning could be over within an hour.

Question 42

What is the evaluation **explanation** of the *interference theory* - **time between learning**?

Answer 42

- do not generally learn and recall information within such a short time. - the longer the time between learning and recall the less likely there is to be forgetting due to interference.

Question 43

What is the evaluation **link** of the *interference theory* - **time between learning**?

Answer 43

Lab studies may over exaggerate the effect of interference as a form of forgetting in real-life.