Interference Theory of Forgetting

Interference: ONE MEMORY DISTURBS THE ABILITY TO RECALL ANOTHER.

This might result in forgetting or confusing one/the other/both. 

This is more likely to happen if the memories are similar.

Proactive Interference: PREVIOUSLY LEARNT INFORMATION INTERFERES WITH THE NEW INFORMATION TRYING TO BE STORED.

For example: a person trying to learn squash is having trouble as they remember tennis.

Retroative Interfereence: A NEW MEMORY INTERFERES WITH AN OLD ONE.

For example: struggling to remember names in Maths class as you're trying to remember names in English class.

​

Baddeley & Hitch (1977) investigated interference effects in an everyday setting of rugby players recalling the names of the teams they have played over the season. Some attended all games and others didn't.

If decay theory is correct then all players should recall a similar percentage as time alone should cause forgetting. If interference is correct then those players should forget more because of interference- which is what was found.

Research is quite artifical- Most research is lab-based and often used rather artifical lists of words/nonsense syllables. These findings may not link to everyday life and participants may lack motivation, this allowing chance for interference. Low in ecological validity.

Only explains some situations of forgetting- The issue is that, while interference does appear in everyday life, it isn't terribly common. Interference occurs under special conditions, so therefore interference is seem to be relatively unimportant.

Accessiblity vs availability- it is questioned whether interference effects actully cause a memory to disappear or if it is just temporary. Ceraso (1967) found that, if memory was tested again after 24hrs, accessiblity showed spontaneous recovery, where as availbility remained the same.  This occurs as the memory is not lost but temporarily unavailible.

Individual differences- some people are less effected by interference than others.