Memory: forgetting

Question 1

Explain forgetting in the STM

Answer 1

• This due to an availability problem -> info is no longer available to its limited capacity / limited duration of the STM.
  -> Info may be pushed out (displaced) or faded away (decay).

Question 2

Explain forgetting in the LTM

Answer 2

• Can be due to decay, but also because:
  -> info is stored, but is hard to retrieve -> an accessibility problem.
  -> E.g. Read something a long time ago and need help recalling.
• Info is confused -> there is an interference problem.
  -> E.g. 2 pieces of learnt info are too similar -> can’t tell them apart.

Question 3

What is interference and what are the 2 types

Answer 3

• the ability to remember a particular thing learnt can be affected by learning something similar before or since.
• retroactive interference
• proactive interference

Question 4

What is retroactive interference (Underwood + Postman)

Answer 4

• where new info interferes with ability to recall older info.
  -> Underwood + Postman:
• Lab exp, ppts were split in 2 groups.
• groups were given a list of paired words, e.g. ‘cat tree’.
• the experimental group was given a 2nd list, 1st words in each pair was the same as in the 1st list, e.g. ‘cat-dirt’.
• control group wasn’t given a second word list.
• recall was better in the control group, suggesting that interference of the 2nd word list had affected recall for the experimental group.

Question 5

What is proactive interference (Underwood)

Answer 5

• where older info interferes with the ability to recall new info.
• Underwood looked at studies into forgetting over a 24 hour period.
  -> if people learnt 15 or more word lists during experiment -> next day recall of the last word list was around 20%.
  -> if they didn’t learn any earlier lists -> recall a day later was around 80%.
  -> Conclusion: proactive interference from earlier lists had affected the participants ability to remember later ones.

Question 6

Evaluate the interference theory

Answer 6

(+) lots of support from lots of studies -> highly controlled lab experiments.
-> (+) ecological validity too, e.g. may struggle remembering French if you later start learning German.

(-) Interference -> effects are greater in an artificial lab setting then in real life.
-> May not be as strong a theory as once thought.

(-) Explanation on why we forget -> doesn’t go into cognitive or biological processes -> doesn’t fully explain how.

Question 7

Explain how recall can depend on cues

Answer 7

• Forgetting is seen as a retrieval failure -> info still exists in memory but isn’t accessible.
• Higher chance of retrieving a memory if the cue is appropriate.
  -> cues can be internal (e.g. mood)
  -> or external (e.g. surrounding, situation etc).
  -> we recall more if we are in the same context/mood was we were when we coded info originally -> known as cue-dependent learning.

Question 8

Explain Tulving and Psotka’s research on forgetting in the LTM (cues)

Answer 8

• Method: ppts were given 1-6 word lists of words.
• Words were presented in category order, e.g. all animals -> trees etc.
  -> one condition: ppts simply recall -> total free recall.
  -> condition 2: ppts were given all category names, had to try recall words from the list -> free cued recall.
• Results: total free recall -> those with more lists had lower recall, suggesting retroactive interference.
  -> in free cued recall -> the effects of retroactive interference disappeared.
  -> recall was the same no matter the number of list (70%).
• Conclusion: Memories are more accessible when a cue was used.
• forgetting shown in total free recall was cue-dependent forgetting.

Question 9

Evaluate Tulving + Psotka’s research on forgetting in the LTM (cues)

Answer 9

(+) lab experiment -> high control.
(-) lacking ecological validity -> artificial tasks.
(-) only tests recall of words -> results can’t be generalised to other types of info.

Question 10

evaluate cues

Answer 10

(+) seen as the best explanation for forgetting in LTM -> has strongest evidence.
- forgetting is caused by retrieval failure.
-> means memory is available in LTM -> just need the right cue to access it.

(-) artificial evidence (recalling word lists) -> lacks ecological validity.
-> difficult to test if all info is available/accessible and just need the right cue.

(-) may not apply to all types of memory -> e.g. procedural memory -> riding a bike or playing an instrument.