MEMORY : explanations for forgetting - retrieval failure

AO1 - encoding specificity principle

forgetting in LTM is mainly due to retrieval failure (lack of accessibility rather than availability) . this is the failure to find an item of information because you have insufficient clues or cues.

Tulving and Thompson 1973 propose the ESP as the idea that memory is most effective if information that was present at encoding was also available at the time of retrieval. the ESP further states that a cue deosn’t have to be exactly right but the closer the cue is to the original item the more useful it will be

tulving and pearlstone 1956 found that participants recalled either as many words as they could (free recall) or they were given cues in the form of category names (cued recall). 40% of words recalled in free recall task, 60% of words recalled in cued recall task. - had to learn 48 words belonging to 12 categories.

cues

retrieval cues can include the environmental context and or the persons emotional state

things that serve as a reminder - may meaningfully link to the material to be remembered or may not be meaningfully linked.

room (environmental cue) or cue related to mental state (being sad/drunk)

retrieval failure

occurs due to the absence of cues - an explanation for forgetting based on the idea that the issue related to being able to retrieve a memory that is there (available) but not accessible. retrieval depends on using cues.

encoding specificity principal

• memory is most effective if cues are present at coding and also present at recall.

AO1 - context dependent forgetting

context dependent forgetting - godden and baddeley 1975 investigated context dependent learning

they recruited scuba divers and arranged for them to learn a list of words on land or underwater. The divers were then tested on land or underwater. The results revealed the highest recall when the initial context matched the recall environment - e.g learning on land and recalling on land

AO1 - state dependant forgetting

Goodwin et al 1969 demonstrated state dependant forgetting by asking male volunteers to remember a list of words when they were either drunk or sober (3 times the legal limit to drive) the participants were asked to recall after 24 hours when some were sober and others had to get drunk again. The recall scores suggest information learned when drunk is more available when in the same state later

results revealed that words were best recalled when the initial environment/ context matched the recall environment e.g learning on land and recalling on land

AO3 strength -a range of evidence

One strength of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting is the wealth of research evidence that has documented the importance of retrieval cues on memory which strengthens this explanation for forgetting.

a range of laboratory, field and natural experiments support the idea of retrieval failure

e.g Tulving and Pearlstone 1966 demonstrated the power of retrieval cues and Gdlden and Baddelely 1975 demonstrate the importance of context dependant learning

this strongly supports the idea that retrieval failure is an explantation for forgetting as the research is highly applicable to everyday situations involving memory so is high in ecological validity

AO3 - strength for students

Another strength includes the application to everyday memory. It can be used by students to improve recall when needed in real world situations such as taking exams.

Abernathys research suggests that it is beneficial for students to revise in the same conditions that they will be taking the exam in as he found students performed better in an exam when they revised the content they would need to recall in that room. the room acts as an environmental cue.

this supports the idea of context dependant learning in everyday memory and suggests students should revise in the room where they will be taking heir exams.

this shows how research into retrieval failure can suggest strategies for improving recall in real world situations such as taking exams or giving eyewitness testimony

AO3 criticism - retrieval cues do not always work

a limitation as an explanation for forgetting is that retrieval cues do not always work

the information you are learning in real life situations is related to more than just the cues. In most of the research on retrieval cues, particpanst are learning word lists. However, everyday learning is far more complex and much less easily triggered by single cues

this has been called the outshining hypothesis; a cues effectiveness is reduced by the presence of better cues. According to smith and Vela, context effects are largely eliminated when learning meaningful material

this suggests that while the use of retrieval cues can explain instances of everyday forgetting they don’t explain everything