6. retrieval failure

what is retrieval failure

• form of forgetting

• occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues to access memory - the memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided

what is a cue

• a trigger of information that allows us to access a memory

• such cues may be meaningful or may be indirectly linked by being encoded at the time of learning

• indirect cues may be external (environmental context) or internal (mood or degree of drunkenness)

finder of encoding specificity principle

tulving 1983 reviewed research into retrieval failure and discovered a consistent pattern to the findings - he summarised this pattern in the encoding speficity principle (ESP)

what is the EPS

• states that for a cue to be helpful, it has to be both

  1. present at encoding

  2. present at retrieval

• means if the cues available at encoding and retrieval are different or entirely absent, there will be some forgetting

examples of cues being learned in a meaningful way

the cue STM may lead you to recall all sorts of information about short term memory - such cues are used in many mnemonic techniques

examples of non meaningful cues

1. context dependent forgetting - recall depends on external cues (eg weather or a place)

2. state dependent forgetting - recall depends on internal cues (eg feeling upset or being drunk)

procedure of research on context dependent forgetting

• godden & baddeley studied deep sea divers who work underwater to see if training on land helped or hindered their work underwater

• divers learned a list of words either underwater or on land, and were then asked to recall them either underwater or on land

four conditions

1. learn on land - recall on land

2. learn on land - recall underwater

3. learn underwater - recall underwater

4. learn underwater - recall on land

findings & conclusions

• in two of these conditions, the environmental contexts of learning and recall were matched, wheras in the other two they did not

• accurate recall was 40% lower in non matching conditions

• concluded the external cues available at learning were different from the ones available at recall and this led to retrieval failure

procedure of research on state dependent forgetting

• carter & cassaday gave antihistamine drugs to their participants

• they had a mild sedative effect making the participants slightly drowsy - creating an internal physiological state different from the normal state of being awake and alert

• participants had to learn lists of words and passages of prose, and then recall the information

four conditions

1. learn on drug - recall on drug

2. learn on drug - recall not on drug

3. learn not on drug - recall not on drug

4. learn not on drug - recall on drug

findings

• in conditions where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning and recall, performance on the memory test was significantly worse

• so when cues are absent, there is more forgetting

evaluation

1. real world application

2. research support (& counterpoint)

3. recall versus recognition

4. problems with the ESP

real world application

• retrieval cues can help overcome everyday forgetting

• baddeley suggests we often experience retrieval failure, like forgetting what we needed when moving between rooms but remembering when we returns

• suggests recalling the environment in which we learned can help retrieval, meaning research can provide useful memory strategies for real life situations

research support

• strong evidence supports retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

• two studies show that forgetting occurs due to context dependent and state dependent cues - indicating retrieval failure is a major cause of forgetting, both in labs and real world situations

• strengthens credibility of retrieval failure theory

counterpoint

• context effects may not be as strong in real life

• baddeley argues that large environmental differences (eg land vs water) are needed for context effects to be seen - in everyday life, learning and recall usually happen in similar environments, so context dependent forgetting is less impactful

• suggests retrieval failure may not explain everyday forgetting

recall versus recognition

• context effects depend substantially on how memory is tested

• godden & baddeley repeated their underwater study but used a recognition test (indentifying words instead of recalling them) and there was no context dependent effect - context only effects recall, not recognition

• suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting

problems with the ESP

• ESP is difficult to test scientifically

• principle assumes cues must be present at encoding and retrieval, but this is a circular reasoning (if a cue helps, it must have been encoded) - makes it impossible to test independently whether a cue was actually encoded

• weakens validity of theory