define interference
when one memory disturbs or distorts the ability to recall another
what is proactive interference
new info is being interfered with. old memories interfere with new memories.
what is retroactive interference
old info is being interfered with. new memories interfere with old memories.
outline Postman’s research (1960) into retroactive interference
- lab experiment
- two groups, both the control and experimental group had to learn a list of paired words e.g. cat-tree
- the experimental group then learnt another list of words in which the second word of every pair was different e.g. cat-glass
- both groups were then asked to recall the first-word list
- the control group displayed significantly better recall
- in the experimental group the new words in the second word lists interfered with the recall
outline Baddeley and Hitch’s research (1977) into retroactive interference
- researched interference in rugby players in a natural experiment
- the players had to recall names of the teams they had played against no matter how many games they had played in
- the results showed a negative correlation, as more games played (more new information) the less team names were remembered
A03 evaluation of interference as an explanation for forgetting
strengths:
- range of supporting evidence (Baddeley + Hitch and Howe)
- applicable to real life in advertising, people pay more attention to the last adverts on an ad break
weaknesses:
- interference is not likely to be a long-term cause of memory loss
- research has low ecological validity as word and picture lists used in many of the studies are not applicable to real life (lacks mundane realism)
what are the two types of cues that aid retrieval
- context (external cues)- in the environment (place, smells)
- state (internal)- inside of us (mood, physical)
outline Godden and Baddeley’s research (1975) into context dependent forgetting
- 18 divers learnt lists of 36 unrelated words
- 4 conditions:
- learnt on beach recalled on beach
- learnt on beach recalled under water
- learnt under water recalled under water
- learnt under water recalled on beach
> findings showed that highest recall occurred when initial context matched the recall environment therefore shows context acts as a cue
evaluate Godden and Baddeley’s research into context dependent forgetting
strengths:
- controlled experiment produces reliable and replicable results
weaknesses:
- meaningless words used in the experiment makes it harder to apply to real life, lacks eco validity
- changes in the environment may have acted as an extraneous variable
outline Godwin et al. research (1969) into state dependent forgetting
- asked 48 medical students to take part in an independent groups lab experiment
- day 1 had to learn a word list and day 2 had to recall the words
4 conditions : - SS sober both days
- AA intoxicated both days
- SA sober day 1 intoxicated day 2
- AS intoxicated day 1 sober day 2
- AS and SA made more errors
- supports state dependent forgetting as memory was better when the participants were sober/intoxicated on both days
A03 Evaluation of retrieval failure due to the absence of cues
strengths:
- wealth of research support
- Abernathy’s research shows its good to revise in the room that you take the exam in which is applicable to real life along with assisting in the cognitive interview (EWT)
- Tulving and psokta demonstrated that retrieval failure due to absence of cues can explain interference. they gave participants trying to recall word list cues and the effects of interference disappeared, they recalled 70% of the words regardless of how many lists were given
weaknesses:
- retrieval due to a failure of cues can’t explain everything. complex and more meaningful material is harder to recall with just context
what are the two explanations for forgetting
- interference
- retrieval failure due to an absence of cues
