why do we forget
- Created by: BKW
- Created on: 20-05-19 14:11
View mindmap
- Why do we forget?
- incidental forgetting
- interference
- proactive - previously learned info interferes with new mems
- retroactive - new info interferes with old mems
- retrieval failiure - memories are present but cant be accessed
- context dependency - changes in environment between encoding and retrieval will effect recall
- interference
- encoding failiures
- Subsequent memory effect - things can be subsequently remembered or forgot
- Paller et al 1988 activity at the time of a study can determine if it will be later remembered or forgot
- many studies show reduced activity during encoding for items that will be forgot
- Kim 2011 meta analysis found these areas showed subsequent forgetting effects
- Temporoparietal junction, posterior cingulate cortex, precuneus, ventromedial pfc
- Subsequent memory effect - things can be subsequently remembered or forgot
- Directed forgetting
- Item method
- interfere with encoding process
- were more likely to retrieve items were told to remember than forget
- Anderson and Hanslmayr 2014
- fond this fr both pictures and words in both recall and recognition tasks
- perhaps memory was never created in first place
- Anderson and Hanslmayr 2014
- were more likely to retrieve items were told to remember than forget
- WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN
- selective rehearsal hyp
- people restrict processing of 'forget' items - there is more effort in remembering than forgetting
- encoding suppression hyp
- forgetting is an active process, more effort in forgetting than remembering
- Fawcett and Taylor 2008
- RTs to secondary task is slower after forget than remember items
- selective rehearsal hyp
- interfere with encoding process
- List method
- interfere with retrieval
- Anderson and Hanslymayr 2014
- PPS given 2 lists - at the end of 1 told to forge it but did in fact have to recall both lists
- pps remember more from remember list than forget
- this waonly found in recall not recognition meaning it must be retrieval that's impaired
- pps remember more from remember list than forget
- PPS given 2 lists - at the end of 1 told to forge it but did in fact have to recall both lists
- Anderson and Hanslymayr 2014
- interfere with retrieval
- Item method
- Motivated forgetting
- Anderson ey al 2004 - think-no think paradigm
- phase 1 - training - pps learn series of unrelated words eg pen-cherry, table-crane
- phase 2 - experimental session - some pairs are tagged as think, no thik or not at all
- phase 3 - test - pps are asked to try and remember what word goes with….
- phase 2 - experimental session - some pairs are tagged as think, no thik or not at all
- found recall was worse for no think pairs but not for think pairs
- forgetting ^ with more suppression attempts
- reduced activity especially in bilateral anterior hippocampi during supression
- In agreement with known role of hippocampus in memory - supressed activity of hippocampus may explain forgetting
- phase 1 - training - pps learn series of unrelated words eg pen-cherry, table-crane
- Anderson ey al 2004 - think-no think paradigm
- Stress
- Psychogenic amnesia = emotional and stressful events can cause amnesia effecting autobiographical mem
- can last houurs/days and then mem is recovered - no evident neurological cause of this
- Psychogenic amnesia = emotional and stressful events can cause amnesia effecting autobiographical mem
- Bias
- were more likely to remember good mems
- Bernten 1996 - 49% pleasant 19% unpleasant
- Sidikes and green 2000 - we tend to remember more positive than negative feedback
- the inconsistency negativity neglect model
- feedback that is inconsistent with self image and concept is threatening so ignoring it ensures stable self concept
- the inconsistency negativity neglect model
- Sidikes and green 2000 - we tend to remember more positive than negative feedback
- Bernten 1996 - 49% pleasant 19% unpleasant
- Own race bias
- were more likely to remember good mems
- incidental forgetting
Comments
No comments have yet been made