2.3 - Forgetting

Question 1

Forgetting

Answer 1

Inability to remember memories

Question 2

Interference and retrieval failure are due to

Answer 2

Abscence of Cues

Question 3

Explanation of forgetting 1. Interference

Answer 3

When existing information is stored in the memory disrupts recall

Question 4

Types of interference

Answer 4

Retroactive interference

Proactive interference

Question 5

Retroactive interference

Answer 5

When newer information gets disrupted by older information

Question 6

Proactive interference

Answer 6

When older information interferes with your ability to remember something newer

Question 7

Underwood & postman study

In support of retroactive interference

Answer 7

• lab experiment
• participants are split in two groups
• both groups were given a list of paired words to learn
• experimental group was given a second list of words to learn where the first of the words in each pair was the same as in the first list
• control group was no given a Second list of words
• both groups were tested on their recall of the first word list by being given the 1st word from each pair
• recall was better in the control group suggesting that retroactive interference of the 2nd word list had affected recall for the experimental group

Question 8

Underwood study

Support of proactive interference

Answer 8

• looking at the results of studies into forgetting over a 24 hour period
• found that if people had previously learnt 15 or more word lists during the same experiment

= 1 day later their recall of the last word list was around 20%
If they hadn’t learnt any earlier lists recall a day later was 80%

• concluded that proactive interference from the earlier lists had affected the participants ability to remember later ones

Question 9

Interference theory evaluations - weaknesses

Answer 9

• evidence for interference existing in real world settings too
• interference effects seem much greater in artificial lab than they do in real life
• theory gives a explanation for why we forget but does not go into cognitive or Biological processes

Question 10

Interference theory strengths

Answer 10

Highly controlled lab experiments but thus low ecological validity

Question 11

Evaluations ; individual differences

Kane & Eagle

Answer 11

• some people are less affected than others by interference
• Kane & Eagle demonstrated that individuals with a greater working memory span were less susceptible to proactive interference
• researchers tested and gave 3 word lists to learn
• people with a lower working memory span showed greater proactive interference when recalling the 2nd + 3rd lists than participants with a higher span
• suggests that there are individual differences in the effects of proactive interference and thus not a complete explanation of forgetting

Question 12

Evaluation real world application to advertising

Danahar et al.

Answer 12

• when people are exposed to adverts from competing brands within a short period of time
• found that both recall and recognition of an advertisers message were impaired when participants were exposed to two advertisements for competing brands within a week
• serious problem considering the amount of money advertisers spend only to have the effect of their advertisements diluted by interference

Question 13

Abscence of cues

Answer 13

When information is stored in LTM but cannot be accessed because there is nothing to trigger the memoryn

Question 14

Tulving & Thomson - Absence of cues

Answer 14

Forgetting is more likely to occur when the context in which the memory is recalled in is different from the context in which the memory was coded

Question 15

Context dependent failure

Answer 15

When the external environment does not provide the cues necessary to recall a memory

Question 16

State dependent failure

Answer 16

When the internal environment during the recall is different from the internal environment when the memory was coded

Question 17

Darley et al. Supporting evidence for state dependant failure

Answer 17

• Observed participants who forgot they hid money whilst high on cannabis
• when high on cannabis were more likely to remember where they hid that money once they got high again compared to sober

Question 18

Golden & Baddedly evidence for context dependant failure

Answer 18

• got divers to learn lists of words on both dry land and underwater
• divers recalled words much better whilst underwater

Question 19

Weaknesses evaluation points of abscence of cues

Answer 19

Often based on experiments in artificial lab settings

Findings might not be transferred to ordinary examples of forgetting

Question 20

State dependent forgetting - Godwin et al.

Answer 20

• 48 male medical students participated on day 1 in a training session and day 2 In a testing
• randomly assigned to 4 groups

G1= sober both days
G2 = intoxicated both days
G3 = intoxicated day 1, sober Day 2
G4 = sober day 1 intoxicated day 2

Intoxicated group = 100ml alcohol in their blood

• They showed signs of intoxication
• participants had to perform 4 tests
• avoidance task
• verbal rote- learning task
• word association test
• pic recognition task

Question 21

Goodwin et al state department results

Answer 21

• many errors were made on day 2 in group 3 and 4 than in group 1 and 2
• but not for picture recognition test
• group 1 performed best on all days

Question 22

Conclusion Goodwin et al

Answer 22

• Performance was best in the participants who were either sober or intoxicated on both days
• supports state dependent theory