Lesson 09 - proactive and retroactive interference

define interference

interference theory suggests that we forget things not because they disappear from memory, but because other memories get in the way and make it harder to retrieve them. it explains forgetting as a result of memory competition rather than memory loss. one memory blocks another, causing the other memory to be forgotten

define proactive interference

forgetting occurs when older memories, already stored, disrupt the recall of newer memories. the degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar

define retroactive interference

forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories already stored. the degree of forgetting is again greater when the memories are similar

describe McGeoch and McDonald’s study

investigated whether retroactive interference is worse when memories are similar

procedure:

participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy. they then learned a new list. the 6 groups:

1. synonyms

2. antonyms

3. words unrelated to the original ones

4. consonant syllables

5. three-digit numbers

6. no new list (control condition)

findings and conclusions:

when the participants were asked to recall the original list of words, the most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall (e.g. the most forgetting). this shows that interference is strongest when the memories are similar.

describe Baddeley and Hitch’s study

procedure:

they interviewed rugby players and asked them to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a particular rugby season. the players all played for the same overall time interval (over one season) but the number of games they played varied from player to player because some missed matches due to injury.

findings and conclusions:

players who played the most games (more chances of interference) had the poorest recall

describe Tulving and Psotka’s study

procedure:

participants were given lists of words organised into categories, one list at a time, but they were not told what the categories were. Participants’ recall of each list was tested immediately after being exposed to the list

findings and conclusions:

recall averaged about 79% for the first list but became progressively worse as participants learned each additional list. this demonstrates proactive interference

evaluate the studies

2 lab experiments - word lists - show effects of interference

1 quasi experiment - rugby players - shows effect of interference

triangulation

lab experiments - low mundane realism, unrealistic materials and unrealistic situation (no distractions etc)

rugby study is real life