Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
explanations for forgetting - Coggle Diagram
explanations for forgetting
interference
retroactive interference
new information prevents recall of old information
proactive interference
old learning prevents recall of new information
where two lots of information become confused in memory resulting in forgetting one or both pieces of information.interference occurs when information that is similar in format gets in the way of the information that someone is trying to recall.
Interference is more likely when the two lots of information are similar.
Interference is less likely to occur when there is a gap between instances of learning.
supporting evidence
McGeoch&Mcdonald- indicated that participants were more likely to forget the original list when the information was similar (synonym group).provides scientific evidence, thus potentially increasing the internal validity for interference as an explanation for forgetting.
retrieval failure due to absence of cues
the idea that forgetting in long term memory is due to a lack of access to a memory rather than the availability of a memory. This is when the information is available but cannot be accessed because of the absence of appropriate cues
cue=trigger of information that allows us to access a memory therefore a lack of cues will lead to forgetting
If the context and state of the individual are similar for recall to the situation where the memory was originally processed then the chances of recalling the memory will be increased
context dependant forgetting
context= the setting or situation in which information is coded and retrieved
Evidence indicates that retrieval is more likely when the context at coding matches the context at retrieval and therefore people are more likely to forget if the context is different, as there are no triggers to aid recall (hence retrieval failure).
support- golden& baddeley- deep sea divers recall. found that recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions because the external cues available at learning were not available at recall.study shows that contextual cues aid retrieval and that forgetting occurs due to an absence of cues as suggested by this explanation for forgetting
state dependant forgetting
state= the physical or psychological state of the person when information is encoded and retrieved.
more likely to retrieve the information when they are in a similar state and more likely to forget when the state is different at recall than at leaning
support- Goodwin learned words either sober or drunk and asked to recall in either same or opposite state. found that participants were more likely to forget the words if tested in the opposite state to which they had learned the words. gives support to state dependent forgetting because it demonstrates that when there is a lack of internal memory cues (different physical/emotional state), forgetting is more likely.
evaluation
strength- high internal validity due to lab experiment to control over extraneous variables and use of standardised materials
limitation- use of artificial materials eg.word lists which are different to things we have to remember in everyday life eg. faces and birthdays. makes interference/retrieval failure much more likely in a laboratory setting. It may not be a likely cause of ‘everyday’ forgetting which limits the explanation.