Cue - dependant forgetting
Failure to retrieve
Tulving (1974)
Used the term ‘cue - dependant forgetting’ to refer jointly to state dependant and context - dependant forgetting.
According to Tulving, your ability to retrieve information will depend upon retrieval cues or routes which are encode
when you learn the material or provided later as pointers.
Abernethy (1940)
Got one group of subjects to learn and recall in the same room while a second group learned and recalled in a
different room. The first group did much better.
The problem is being able to define a cue encoded at learning independently of its ability to simulate recall of
information.
Motivated forgetting - Repression
Freud
Stated that we forget for a reason. Painful disturbing or threatening thoughts can be forced out of our conscious minds into the unconscious to protect us.
There are also two theories of forgetting in long term memory.
Gestault
Similar to the theory of perception. Proposed that memories undergo qualitative changes over time so tat a ‘good
form’ occurs i.e. our memory becomes simpler and more consistent. However this is not spontaneous as Gestault
theory says.
Prevention of consolidation
Consolidation is required for memory to be firmly recorded. Explains why loss of memory of events before accident
can occur.
Evidence for theories of forgetting
Short term memory
Trace decay
Evidence from experiments question the idea of trace decay
Waugh and Norman (1965)
Presented subjects with a series of 16 numbers. They were given a number from the series and asked which
number followed it. This is known as the serial probe technique. The numbers were presented at different speeds.
If information fades away due to the passage of time then numbers presented at a faster rate have less time in
which to decay that numbers presented slower. If trace decay is occurring memory should be better.
Displacement
There is some evidence to support the idea of displacement
Shallice (1967)
Presented subjects with a list of numbers. The more numbers that followed a probe number the less likely the
probe number was to be remembered. The later numbers tend to displace the earlier numbers making them more
difficult to remember. However because the earlier numbers were presented first they were forgotten as a result of trace decay.
Shallice claimed that although time appeared to have some effect on recall, the number of items following a probe
number had a grater effect. This suggest that displacement provides a better explanation of forgetting in short term
memory than trace decay.
Interference
Support fro interference theory is based mainly on the findings of laboratory experiments.
Slamecka (1966)
Participants were given a word i.e. animal and asked for a word they associated with it i.e. dog. They gave the first
word that came to mind which probably reflects an everyday situation. They were then asked to learn a new set of
words linked to animal such as cow bear cast etc. they were than asked to recall these words including their first
associated word dog.
This should result in retroactive interference because the words belong to the same semantic category. New
learning should disrupt older memories and participants would probably forget the first word dog. This however
didn’t happen. This study provided no evidence for interference.
Long term memory
Trace decay
Little evidence to support the explanation that memories automatically decay over time. If the memory trace
decays steadily over time the older memories will always be forgotten before more recent ones. This suggests
memories do not necessarily fade away with time.
Jenkins and Dallenbach (1924)
Participants were asked to learn lists of nonsense syllables. Their recall was better if they slept after learning the
lists rather that staying awake for the same period of time.
This suggests it is not the passage of time causing information to be forgotten. Memories do not appear to fade
over time. It is what happens during that time that is important.
Interference
Laboratory experiments care carefully designed to produce interference.
Eyseck and Keane (1995)
Believe interference is unlikely to be a major factor in forgetting in everyday life.
Loftus (1980)
Interference can occur in the following example:
A young woman in moments of passion tended to cry out the name of her previous boyfriend. This is an
example of proactive interference.
Experiments on interference are compressed into short period of time and information is encoded in the same
setting. This indicates low ecological validity. The encoding of information in everyday life might interfere with
existing information. It is usually spread out over a longer period of time and often takes place in different settings. This may reduce the effects of interference i.e. new information may be associated with a particular time
place or person will make it different from existing information.
Cue - dependant/ retrieval failure
There is considerable evidence to support this theory
Many people say they can’t remember much about their childhood or schooldays but returning to their childhood
home or a school reunion provides retrieval cues which trigger a flood of memories.
Eysenck (1998)
It has proved easy to demonstrate powerful effects of cue - dependant forgetting inside the laboratory. It seems
probable that this is the main reason for forgetting in long term memory.
Emotional factors
Flash bulb memories
Researchers disagree about the existence of flash bulb memories.
Conway (1995)
Argues that flash bulb memories are a distinctive type of memory characterised by the emotional response an event
produces ad the importance attached to the event.
Others researches see nothing special about so – called flash bulb memories. They see them as subject to the
normal process of forgetting just like any other memory.
There is some evidence to support both points of view.
Motivated forgetting
It is difficult to evaluate the evidence on repressed memories for the following reasons:
- they are not easy to retrieve
- creating the kind of traumatic experiences required would be very difficult
- it would also be unethical to create traumatic experiences
- researchers have tried to create repressed memories but the mild anxiety that results is hardly a basis for repression
Holmes (1990)
These experiments have provided little or no evidence for repressed memories. Most of the evidence comes from
clinical studies where psychiatrists ask their clients detailed and probing questions about past events.
