EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING - INTERFERENCE

What is interference

• Interference occurs when the recall of one memory blocks the recall of another, causing forgetting or distorted perceptions of these memories.

What can interference be

• Interference can be retroactive (new memories block the recollection of old memories) or proactive (old memories block the recollection of new memories).

What is the retroactive interference research

• Retroactive interference was demonstrated by McGeoch and McDonald (1931), who found that when participants were divided into 6 groups to recall different lists of words (synonyms, antonyms, words unrelated to the original list, 3 digit numbers, consonant syllables) or no new list (control group), those who'd learnt the synonyms list experienced an average of 3.1 fewer correct items recalled, compared to the control group. This supports the idea that the extent of forgetting is larger when the two memories or materials are very similar i.e. a positive correlation between forgetting and similarity.

STRENGTH - high validity of interference

• Interference has been consistently demonstrated in several studies, but particularly in lab experiments. This increases the validity of the theory, due to the use of highly-controlled conditions in lab experiments, standardised instructions alongside the removal of the biasing effects of extraneous and confounding variables.

STRENGTH - Baddeley and Hitch rugby players

• Baddeley and Hitch found that, in a group of rugby players who had to recall their last game and the number of games they'd played that season (which would be different for each player), the number of games they'd played since was more important than the total time they'd been playing for. This can be explained in terms of interference, where the more games each player had played, the more likely the memories of these newer games would interfere or block the recall of older games i.e. retroactive interference.

WEAKNESS - lack pf mundane realism and reliability

• A second methodological criticism of interference studies, further suggesting that they lack mundane realism and reliability, is that they are often conducted in very short spaces of time, with participants recalling their words 1 or 2 hours after they have learnt them. This does not reflect the normal passage of time in everyday life, where we often find that several days pass until we need to recall such information e.g. in the case of an exam. Therefore, this suggests that interference is unlikely to be a valid explanation for forgetting from the LTM.

WEAKNESS - alternative explanations with more validity

Alternative Explanations: Some researchers argue that forgetting might be due to the inability to retrieve information rather than interference. The retrieval failure theory, which suggests that memories are still stored but cannot be accessed due to a lack of retrieval cues, is an alternative explanation for forgetting that competes with the interference theory.

WEAKNESS - lack of ecological validity

Lack of Ecological Validity: Many studies on interference (such as those by McGeoch and McDonald) use artificial laboratory settings, which may not reflect real-world memory processes. The tasks, like learning word lists, do not represent how people typically use memory in everyday life, reducing the ecological validity of the findings.

STRENGTH - controlled conditions

Research with Controlled Conditions: Many studies investigating interference have been conducted in controlled laboratory settings, which helps isolate the effects of interference on memory. This allows for greater internal validity, as researchers can manipulate variables and determine cause-and-effect relationships more clearly. For example, in studies where participants are asked to learn lists of words under different interference conditions, researchers can demonstrate how different types of interference affect memory recall.