1. Proactive or retroactive interference?

2. Proactive or retroactive interference?

3. Explanations for forgetting: Retrieval Failure/ Cue-dependent forgetting
To be able to outline explanations for forgetting: retrieval failure, due to absence of cues.
To be able to evaluate retrieval failure as an explanation of forgetting.

4. Starter: Recap
On your whiteboard write down what we learnt last lesson…
Now… can you add anymore info if I give you the following cues?
2 types of interference… pro & retro
McGeoch & Mcdonald (1931)
Evaluation…lab studies

5. Why was it easier after I provided you with cues?

6. Explanations for forgetting Retrieval failure
People may forget information because there are insufficient cues
When the information is placed in memory, associated cues are stored at the same time
If these cues aren’t available at recall it may seem like you have forgotten the information, but… this is due to retrieval failure – not being able to access memories that are there (available)

7. Key Terms…
Retrieval failure – a form of forgetting, occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues to access memory. Memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided Cue – a ‘trigger’ of information that allows us to access a memory. Such cues may be meaningful or indirectly linked with coding at time of learning.

8. The encoding specificity principle (ESP)
Tulving (1983) reviewed research and discovered that if a cue is to help us recall information it needs to be present at encoding (when we learn the material) and at retrieval (when we recall the material).
What happens if the cues we available at encoding and retrieval are different?
Forgetting occurs

9. Context-dependent forgetting
In the environment, smell, place ect. Occurs with external retrieval cues, with forgetting occurring when the external environment is different at recall from how it was at coding. e.g getting fewer marks in a test when sitting in a room you’re not familiar with.
External / Context - in the environment, e.g. smell, place etc.
Internal / State- inside of us, e.g. physical, emotional, mood, drunk etc.

10. Context-dependent forgetting
Research to support… Godden & Baddeley (1975) Complete the findings and conclusion, using page 56 of the book.

11. Context dependent forgetting AO3
P: Context effects are questionable E: Baddeley (1997) argues that context effects are not very strong, especially in real life. Different contexts have to be very different for an effect to be seen. E: beyond the research, it would be hard to find a context as different as being underwater and on land L: this is a limitation because it means that the real-life applications of retrieval failure due to context cues don’t actually explain much forgetting.

12. Practical – context dependent forgetting
A number of experiments have indicated the importance of context-based cues for retrieval. An experiment conducted by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966) asked participants to learn lists of words belonging to different categories, for example names of animals, clothing and sports.
Participants were then asked to recall the words. Those who were given the category names recalled substantially more words than those who were not.
The categories provided a context, and naming the categories provided retrieval cues. Tulving and Pearlstone argued that cue-dependent forgetting explains the difference between the two groups of participants.
Those who recalled fewer words lacked appropriate retrieval cues.

13. State-dependent forgetting
Internal – inside of us, physical, emotional, mood, drunk ect. Occurs with internal retrieval cues, with forgetting occurring when an individual’s internal environment is dissimilar at recall to when information was coded. e.g trying to recall information you learned sober while you are drunk.
External / Context - in the environment, e.g. smell, place etc.
Internal / State- inside of us, e.g. physical, emotional, mood, drunk etc.

14. State-dependent forgetting
Research to support... Overton (1972) Read page 24… is this research ethical? Discuss the cost-benefit analysis

15. Evaluation
P: Although context-related cues appear not to have a very strong effect on forgetting, Baddeley still suggests they are worth paying attention to as we can use this knowledge to apply to real life. E: when we are finding it difficult to remember something, it is worth making the effort to try to recall the environment in which you learnt the information first. This is the basic principle of the cognitive interview E: the cognitive interview is a valuable tool for accurate recall from eyewitnesses. L: Therefore explanations of forgetting such as state-dependent forgetting can be applied to real life.
Retrieval failure is able to explain certain things that can’t be explained by trace decay, and findings from a lot of studies have supported the theory. However, certain studies have been criticised; for example, the Godden and Baddeley study above has been criticised for its extreme conditions, and the Bower study has been criticised for being ethically questionable. We rarely have to recall things in real life under such extreme conditions. Other studies have been carried out which show that in normal situations, the differences in recall are less noticeable.

16. Evaluation
P: There are problems with the validity of the research supporting CDF E: The experiments are usually laboratory based and not like everyday memory tasks, they don’t take into account procedural memories E: for example, riding a bike isn’t affected by state-dependent failure L: therefore, this explanation lacks external validity and further investigation into different types of memory would be a more valid explanation

17. Can chewing gum improve your memory?
Read page 57 of the textbook
Discuss questions 1-3

18. Evaluation
P: Some of the research studies that have been used to support retrieval failure have been criticised E: Godden & Baddeley’s study above has been criticised for its extreme conditions and the Overton study has been criticised for being ethically questionable. E:We rarely have to recall information in real life under such extreme conditions. L: Therefore the validity of such research is questionable.
Retrieval failure is able to explain certain things that can’t be explained by trace decay, and findings from a lot of studies have supported the theory. However, certain studies have been criticised; for example, the Godden and Baddeley study above has been criticised for its extreme conditions, and the Bower study has been criticised for being ethically questionable. We rarely have to recall things in real life under such extreme conditions. Other studies have been carried out which show that in normal situations, the differences in recall are less noticeable.

19. Plan…
“Describe and evaluate interference as an explanation for forgetting” (12) “Describe and evaluate retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting” (12)