Explanations for Forgetting: Inference

– Forgetting is the loss of the ability to recall or recognise something they have previously learned

INTERFERENCE THEORY

– Interference is an explanation of forgetting as one memory disrupts the ability to recall another.

– As the two pieces of information conflict with each other, it results in forgetting or distortion in one or both of the memories

– This is more likely to happen if the memories have some similarity

– It is likely that the conflicting memories were stored at different times and this lead psychologists to recognise that there are two types of interference: proactive and retroactive

PROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

– Occurs when an older memory interferes with a newer one.

– For example, your teacher has learned so many names in the past that she has difficulty remembering the names of her current class,

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

– Occurs when a newer memory interferes with an older one.

– For example, your teacher has learned so many new names this year that she has difficulty remembering the names of the students last year

EFFECTS OF SIMILARITY

– As discovered by McGeoch and McDonald (1931), in both types the interference is worse when the memories are similar

PROCEDURE

– They studied retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between two sets of materials.

– Participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember then with 100% accuracy.

– They then learned a new list.

– There were six groups of participants who had to learn different types of lists:

– Group 1 – Synonyms

– Group 2 – Antonyms

– Group 3 – Words Unrelated to the Original List

– Group 4 – Nonsense Syllables

– Group 5 – Three-digit Numbers

– Group 6 – A Control Group.

FINDINGS

– They found that when the participants recalled the original list of words, their performance depended on the nature of the second list.

– The most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall.

– This shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar.

EVALUATION OF INTERFERENCE

STRENGTHS

Evidence from Lab studies

– Thousands of lab studies have been carried out into interference theory.

– Most of these studies show that both types of interference are very likely to be common ways we forget information from LTM.

– 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.

Real life studies

– In 1977 Baddeley and Hitch wanted to find out if interference was a better explanation for forgetting than the passage of time.

– They asked rugby players to try to remember the names of the teams they had played so far in that season, week by week.

– The results clearly showed that accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the matches took place.

– Much more important was the number of games they played in the meantime.

– This study shows that interference explanations can apply to at least some everyday situations.

– Therefore, increasing validity.

LIMITATIONS

Artificial Materials

– One issue with the evidence offered in support of both pro and retroactive interference concerns the methodology of the studies.

– Most of this research used rather artificial lists of words and/or nonsense syllables.

– Thus, the findings may not relate to everyday uses of memory, which tend to not involve word lists.

– In addition, participants may lack motivation to remember that links in such studies, and this may allow interference effects to appear stronger than they really are.

– This means that research is low in ecological validity and interference may not be a likely explanation for forgetting in everyday life like it is in the lab.

Incomplete Explanation

– Another criticism of research into interference is that interference does not occur that often.

– Rather special conditions are required for interference to lead to forgetting as the two memories need to be quite similar.

– For this reason interference is considered a relatively unimportant explanation for everyday forgetting.

– Anderson concluded that interference does play a role in forgetting but how much it contributes remains unclear

– This means that other theories are needed to provide a complete explanation of forgetting.