1. Interference is a powerful explanation of forgetting.
A01: retroactive interference - definition
Muller 1900: gave participants (pps) a list of nonsense syllables to learn and, after a
retention interval asked to recall the lists. The performance was worse if participants were
given an interference task (describing pictures) while trying to recall the syllables.
A03: But, low ecological validity. The tasks have been argued to lack mundane realism so
findings cannot be generalised. Can't tell whether pps are experiencing interference or forgot
because not personally involved.
Thus, difficult to conclude that interference is a powerful reason for forgetting.
2. However, Baddeley 1977: Asked rugby players to name all the teams they had played
over the season. So the time interval (one season) was the same for all the players but the
number of games was different. If decay theory was correct then all the players should
remember a similar % of the names of the teams as time alone is responsible for forgetting.
Support for interference being an important reason of forgetting by demonstrating
interference effects in everyday life
3. Similarity
Interference can only explain some aspects of forgetting. Whilst interference effects do occur
in real-life they don't occur that often. Special conditions are required for this to occur such
as these memories have to be similar. As these conditions don't occur that often, it has been
argued that interference is a largely unimportant explanation for forgetting. Additionally, it is
hard to test whether participants can't remember the words due to interference
(inaccessible) or the information is just permanently lost from LTM (unavailable) Therefore,
although interference does play a role in forgetting, the amount of forgetting that can be
attributed to interference is not totally clear.
4. Real world application for advertising.
The knowledge of the effects of interference has been used to explain how adverts from
competing brands presented to people in a short time affects purchasing. It was found that
both recall and recognition of the advertisers' message were impaired when pps were
exposed to competing brands within a week. A serious problem because the advertisers
spend a lot of money only to have their message diluted by the power of interference.
It was suggested should repeat their message on the same day rather than over a week,
reducing interference from competitors' adverts. Therefore, interference research can
A01: retroactive interference - definition
Muller 1900: gave participants (pps) a list of nonsense syllables to learn and, after a
retention interval asked to recall the lists. The performance was worse if participants were
given an interference task (describing pictures) while trying to recall the syllables.
A03: But, low ecological validity. The tasks have been argued to lack mundane realism so
findings cannot be generalised. Can't tell whether pps are experiencing interference or forgot
because not personally involved.
Thus, difficult to conclude that interference is a powerful reason for forgetting.
2. However, Baddeley 1977: Asked rugby players to name all the teams they had played
over the season. So the time interval (one season) was the same for all the players but the
number of games was different. If decay theory was correct then all the players should
remember a similar % of the names of the teams as time alone is responsible for forgetting.
Support for interference being an important reason of forgetting by demonstrating
interference effects in everyday life
3. Similarity
Interference can only explain some aspects of forgetting. Whilst interference effects do occur
in real-life they don't occur that often. Special conditions are required for this to occur such
as these memories have to be similar. As these conditions don't occur that often, it has been
argued that interference is a largely unimportant explanation for forgetting. Additionally, it is
hard to test whether participants can't remember the words due to interference
(inaccessible) or the information is just permanently lost from LTM (unavailable) Therefore,
although interference does play a role in forgetting, the amount of forgetting that can be
attributed to interference is not totally clear.
4. Real world application for advertising.
The knowledge of the effects of interference has been used to explain how adverts from
competing brands presented to people in a short time affects purchasing. It was found that
both recall and recognition of the advertisers' message were impaired when pps were
exposed to competing brands within a week. A serious problem because the advertisers
spend a lot of money only to have their message diluted by the power of interference.
It was suggested should repeat their message on the same day rather than over a week,
reducing interference from competitors' adverts. Therefore, interference research can
