Evaluation of Trace Decay Theory of Forgetting
- Created by: individdy0410
- Created on: 22-03-16 14:32
View mindmap
- Evaluation of Trace Decay Theory of Forgetting
- There is experimental evidence to support the theory
- Peterson & Peterson (1959): participants recalled fewer items the longer the delay before recall
- Less than 10% of information was recalled after 18 seconds of delay
- Peterson & Peterson (1959): participants recalled fewer items the longer the delay before recall
- Can criticise the supporting experimental research; highly controlled and artificial so the findings might not be valid in the real world
- Useful application in terms of reducing forgetting and improving memory
- Students could be advised to practice remembering information that they need for exams; reinforcing the engram
- Evidence from other studies, i.e. those supporting the levels of processing framework, suggests that rehearsal isn't the most effective method; elaboration of information is more effective
- Students could be advised to practice remembering information that they need for exams; reinforcing the engram
- Very simplistic; cannot explain why people do remember information from a long time ago, eg. childhood memories which are not rehearsed
- More up-to-date theories such as cue dependency theory suggest more detailed and sophisticated explanations of why we forget some and not other information
- Doesn't give a sufficient explanation for why we forget from long term memory
- Cannot explain how information in the ltm is still accessible if the correct cues are used; seems that information in the ltm is never permanently lost
- Effectively explains how forgetting occurs from the short term memory
- Information is not available because the information has not been rehearsed and so the traces are already lost
- There is experimental evidence to support the theory
Comments
No comments have yet been made