Interference

HideShow resource information
Peterson & Peterson (1959)
Participants remembered trigrams. Given intervals of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 seconds, had to do interference tasks, then had to recall the information. Found after 3 seconds success rate = 50%, after 6, 9, 12 seconds success rate = 10%, 18 secs = 5%
1 of 5
Evaluation of Peterson & Peterson (1959)
Careful to reduce factors that could affect recall other than time, Used trigrams to eliminate the attached meaning that might be used to remember. Lacks mundane realism & ecological validity
2 of 5
Underwood & Postman (1960)
Participants split into 2. Group A = learn word pairs & another word list. Group B = first list. Group B's recall = much better than Group A. Suggests new learning interfered with ability to remember previously learnt info (proactive interference)
3 of 5
Evaluation of Underwood & Postman (1960)
Lacks mundane realism & the experiment is artificial as it's done in a lab setting so is unnatural
4 of 5
kkkkkkk
kkkkkkkkkk
5 of 5

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Evaluation of Peterson & Peterson (1959)

Back

Careful to reduce factors that could affect recall other than time, Used trigrams to eliminate the attached meaning that might be used to remember. Lacks mundane realism & ecological validity

Card 3

Front

Underwood & Postman (1960)

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Evaluation of Underwood & Postman (1960)

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

kkkkkkk

Back

Preview of the front of card 5

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Memory resources »