Memory: Retrieval Failure.
Forgetting- retrieval failure
DEFINITION-
Cue- dependant forgetting (also, context-dependant forgetting) or retrieval failure, is the failure to recall a memory due to missing stimuli or cues that were present at the time the memory was needed. Encoding is the first step in increasing and remembering a memory.
EXAMPLE-
You’re sitting on your bed next to your phone and realise that you need to get the charger from downstairs. You walk downstairs, to the kitchen where you keep it and suddenly forget why you are here, and walk back up to your room.
As you sit down again, you look at your phone to your side and remember the initial reason you headed downstairs. ~ can you spot the cue that caused the remembrance of your charger?àIt was the sight of your phone.
ENVIRONMENTAL CUES-
This example required a ‘trigger’ or ‘cue’ to prompt the memory. The memory of the phone’s charger first occurred in the bedroom and again prompted when you returned.
APPLICATION-
You are an eyewitness to a murder, you see the criminal attack the victim, and then flee. You notice it’s a particularly rainy day, and the criminal slips in the rain.
The police conduct a ‘cognitive interview’, in which they ask you the every minute details of the crime, they ask you about the weather.
You recall that it was raining, and so you also recall that the criminal slipped and clutched his knee as he ran off.
The police are able to apprehend the correct suspect because of the cut on his knee.
RESEARCH SUPPORT-
Research for this study has been conducted by Godden and Baddeley (1975) suggesting that cues can affect the recall of information.
The ‘levels of processing theory’ states that the deeper you think about information the more likely it is to be recalled, supporting this theory of forgetting as the cues provide a richer level of detail and the chance of recall is increased.
EVALUATION-
:) Much of this theory is laboratory based and therefore lacks ecological validity
:) The studies also don’t test ‘everyday memory’ and therefore it could be argued that the evidence lacks validity
:( The examples given are relatable situations that occur frequently, suggesting reliability.
:( It is supported by lab experiments which are high in internal validity
