interference theory

Question 1

Evidence from lab studies

Answer 1

P-Thousands of lab experiments have been carried out into interference as an explanation for forgetting
E-Many of these studies show that both types of interference are very likely to be common ways we forget information in LTM
L-This is a strength because lab experiments control the effects of irrelevant influences and thus give us confidence that interference is a valid explanation for at least some forgetting.

Question 2

Artificial materials

Answer 2

P-There is a much greater chance that interference will be demonstrated in lab studies rather than in real life situations
E-For example, the stimulus in lab studies are some distance away from things we learn and try to remember in everyday life
L-This is a limitation because the use of artificial tasks makes interference much more likely in the lab, thus interference may not be as likely an explanation for forgetting in everyday life as it is in the lab

Question 3

Real life studies

Answer 3

P-Some research studies have considered interference effects in more everyday situations
E-Baddeley and Hitch wanted to find out if interference was a better explanation for forgetting than the passage of time
E-They asked rugby players to try to remember the names of the teams they played so far in that season, week by week. Because most of the players had missed games, for some of the ‘last team’ they played might have been weeks ago or more. The results clearly showed accurate recall didn’t depend on how long ago the matches took place but the number of games they played in the meantime.So a player’s recall of a team from three weeks ago was better if they played no matches since then.
L-This study shows that interference explanations can apply to at least some everyday situations.