Explanations for Forgetting: Interference

Question 1

Interference:

Answer 1

Forgetting because one memory blocks another, causing one or both memories to be distorted or forgotten.

Question 2

Proactive Interference: PI

Answer 2

Forgetting occurs when older memories, already stored, disrupt the recall of newer memories memories. The degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar.

Question 3

Retroactive Interference: RI

Answer 3

Forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories already stored. The degree of forgetting is again greater when the memories are similar.

Question 4

Effects of Similarity: Procedure

Answer 4

John McGeoch and William McDonald (1931):
Studied retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between 2 sets of material. Learn a list of 10 words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy:
Group 1: synonyms- words with the same meanings as the originals.
Group 2: antonyms- words with the opposite meanings to the originals.
Group 3: words unrelated to the original ones.
Group 4: consonant syllables.
Group 5: 3 digit numbers.
Group 6: no new list- these participants just rested.

Question 5

McGeoch and McDonald: Findings

Answer 5

1. When the participants then recalled the original list of words, their performance depended on the nature on the second list.
2. The most similar material produced the worst recall. This shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar.

Question 6

E: Evidence from Lab Studies

Answer 6

1. One of the most consistently demonstrated findings in psychology, thousands of experiments into forgetting.
2. Many shows that both types of interference are likely to be common ways we forget information from LTM.
3. Lab experiments control the effects of irrelevant influences and thus give confidence that interference is a valid explanation for at least some forgetting.

Question 7

Evaluation: Real Life Studies

Answer 7

1. Baddeley and Hitch (1977) wanted to find out interference was a better explanation than the passage of time.
2. Asked rugby players to remember the names of the teams they had played so far in that season week by week.
3. Most of the players had missed games, so for them the last team was weeks ago.
4. Results showed that accurate recall depended more on how many matches had taken place in the meantime not how long ago the matches were.
5. Shows that interference explanations can apply to some everyday situations.

Question 8

E: Artificial Materials

Answer 8

1. There’s a greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in a lab than in real-life situations.
2. The stimulus materials were often words, more realistic than learning lists of consonant syllables.
3. Still quite a distance from the things we learn and try to remember everyday like faces and names.
4. Limitation because the use of artificial tasks mask interference much more likely in the lab, may not be a good explanation for real life.