Explanations of forgetting - Experiments

?

Paired associate testing - McDonald et al

AIM: To test proactive and reteroactive interference

METHOD: Lab Experiment & Independent Groups. Participants are required to learn words from List A paired with List B eg. Cat (A), Tree (B) Secondly, they were asked to learn words from List A paired with List C eg. Cat (A), Stone (C). Finally, each particpant is given the first word of the pair and asked to recall the word from List C (Proactive interference) or List B (Retroactive interference). A control group only learns List A-B to see what recall occurs when there's no interference.

FINDINGS: Recall of response word is poorer and was affected by both proactive and reteroactive interference as what list was given the second word was recalled worse.

CONCLUSION: Evidence for both types of interference

1 of 5

Testing proactive interference - Underwood

AIM: To show proactive interference is equally as significant

METHOD: Analysed findings from a number of studies - (Meta-analysis)

FINDINGS: When ppts have to learn a series of word lists, they do not learn the lists of words encountered later on as well as the lists they encountered earlier. If ppts memorised 10 or more lists, after 24 hours they would remember about 20% of what they learned. If the only learnt one list, recall was over 70%- proactive because the old lists are interfering with the new.

CONCLUSION: More lists a participant has to learn, the worse the overall recall is - explained by proactive interference because each list makes it harder to learn subsequent lists

2 of 5

The effect of similarity - McGeoch & McDonald

AIM: To experiment with the effects of similarity of materials

METHOD: Lab Experiment & Independent Groups. Ppts were given a list of 10 adjectives (List A). Once these were learnt, there was a resting period of 10 minutes - during this ppts had to learn List B. They were then asked to recall List A.

FINDINGS: If List B was a list of synonyms for List A, recall was poorest (12%), if List B was a list of nonsense syllabus it had less effect (26%). Finally, if list B was a list of numbers recall was highest (37%).

CONCLUSION: This shows that interference is strongest when items are similar

3 of 5

Context-dependent forgetting (external cues) - God

AIM: To see whether the context in which words were learnt effect recall

METHOD: Field Experiment & Independent Groups. Study of deep sea divers - crucial for good memory as its life or death for divers. Divers learnt a list of words underwater or on land and were then asked  to recall underwater or on land.

Group 1 - Learn on land / Recall on land (same env)

Group 2 - Learn on land / Recall underwater (different env)

Group 3 - Learn underwater / Recall on land (different env)

Group 4 - Learn underwater / Recall underwater (same env)

FINDINGS: Accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions because according to context dependent forgetting we are better at recalling information from where we first learned it

CONCLUSION: Supports context-dependent forgetting as recall is better in matchign conditions

4 of 5

State-dependent forgetting (internal cues) - Carte

AIM: To see whether state of mind effects how many words are recalled

PROCEDURE: Lab Experiment & Independent Groups. Looked at the effect of anti-histimines on research, these have a mild sedative effect so ppt is slightly drowsy - internal psychological state is different from normal state of awake and alert. Had to learn a list of words and passages of prose then recall.

Group 1 - Learn on drug / Recall on drug (same state)

Group 2 - Learn on drug / Recall not on drug (different state)

Group 3 - Learn not on drug / Recall on drug (different state)

Group 4 - Learn not on drug / Recall not on drug (same state)

FINDINGS: Recall was significantly worse when there was a mismatch of internal state as the internal cues are absent therefore more forgetting.

CONCLUSION: Supports state-dependent forgetting as recall better in matching states of mind

5 of 5

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Memory resources »