Explanations for Forgetting

Página 1

Interference theory-

Memory can be disruptive or interfered with by what we have learned previously we will in future. There are to ways which interference can cause forgetting.

Proactive interference-when you cannot learn a new task because of what you already know interferes with what you're currently learning (old memories disrupt new memories)

Retroactive interference-when you forget previous learned tasks due to new learned tasks (new memories interfere with old memories).

They are thought to be more likely to occur where memories are similar.

Evidence-

Postman investigated how new info interferes with the ability to recall info that was learned earlier on. (retroactive interference) In a lab experiment, ppts were split into 2 groups and both had to learn a list of paired words eg:cat-tree, book-tractor. The experimental group also had to learn another list of words where the second pairs were a different word eg: cat-glass, book-revolver. The control group weren't given this list. All ppts were asked to recall the words on the first list, this was more accurate on the control group than the experimental group.

Evaluation-

interference theory does not help us to understand the cognitive processes involved in forgetting. Most research into the road of interference has been carried out in a lab using lists of words, this situation means that research lacks ecological validity.

Página 2

Retrieval failure-

When we store info we use retrieve cues, when we come to the same situation, we can trigger the memory of that situation. There are 2 types:

External (context) - cues in the environment, smells, places.

Internal (state) - cues inside of us, physical, emotional, mood.

Retrieval failure s where info is in the long-term memory but cannot be accessed because the retrieval cue isn't present. Info is more likely to be retrieved from the LTM if the retrieval cues are present. Tulving said this.

Research-

Baddeley - demonstrated context retrieval on divers and they memorised a list of words. One group learned words on the beach and recalled underwater another on learned on the beach and recalled in the beach and the 3rd learned underwater and recalled underwater. When they were asked to recall the words, the divers who recalled in the same environment they learned in were 40% better at recall that the ones that learned and recalled in different environments.

Página 3

Eyewitness Testimony (EWT)-

Loftus and Palmer researched the accuracy of the EWT by investigating the effects of leading questions. The leading questions they asked were based on "How fast were cars going when the smashed into each other?" but the verb "smashed" was varied to lead the ppts to perceive different speeds for the vehicles.

Experiment 1

45 student ppts viewed a short video of a car accident. The ppts were divided into 5 groups and were given a questionnaire after watching it. The different versions of the critical question were given to each group, the verbs were, "smashed" (41%), "collided" (39), "hit" (34), "bumped" (37) and "contacted" (32).

Experiment 2

150 student ppts viewed a short video of a car accident, afterwards they were given a questionnaire. The critical leading question contained the word "hit" in group 1 and "smashed" in group 2. Group 3 wasn't asked the leading question. A week later ppts were asked to return and answer more questions including "Did you see any broken glass?" (there was none in the clip). The ppts who reported the car was travelling faster were more likely to report finding broke glass. This suggests that their memory lead to them inventing ideas as they expected it to be there.

Página 4

Cast study-

Yuille and Cutshall researched the effect of leading questions on EWT on real event. 21 witnesses to a gun-shooting crimes were interviewed by police and 4/5 months after the accident 13 ppts witnesses were re-interviewd. It was found that misleading questions were had no effect.

Evaluation-

There is some evidence from real studies that recall is not effected by leading questions this may be because of emotional arousal makes the original image stronger. However, the light levels of control in the lab experiments mean it it possible to show clearly that EWT could be affected by the way questions were asked. The results have real life applications.

Página 5

Factors That May Influence EW Memory

Estimator variables and system variables-Estimator variables are factors to do with a witness. They might include levels of stress and wether or not the criminal was carrying a weapon. System variables are factors the justice system has some control over, eg: preventing the use of leading questions.

Duration of event and time of day- the longer we watch, the more we are likely to remember details. Witnesses also remember more when they see something during the day or at night but remember less when they see something at twilight.

Violence distraction- people have better memory for non-violent events. Clifford and Scott showed he ppts 2 video clips, one was violent and the other wasn't. Ppts remembered more about the non-violent one.

The amount of time between the event and recall- the longer the time, the worse the recall. This is trace dependent forgetting. Over time the memory trace will disappear because when memory circuit are not active for long periods, the connections a=between them may weaken to the point where the circuit is broken and the information is lost.

Anxiety- highly emotional events may either be more memorable or less memorable. Flashbulb memories can be described as memories of emotional events that last for a lifetime. Emotional involvement may increase the accuracy of the memory but Freud suggested repression is the way we protect out ego from unplesent memories and that unhappy memories are more likely to be forgotten.

Age of witness- Cohen and Faulkner found that older ppt were significantly more likely to be mislead by leading questions.