The Interference Theory - Essay Example

Interference Theory and Decay Theory: Why do we forget? Interference Theory and Decay Theory: Why do we forget? Introduction This paper aims to evaluate the question concerning act of forgetting among individuals with the evidenced based context of the theories including Interference theory and Decay Theory. In this regard, theoretical underpinning was undertaken, in accordance with the science of memory, remained under the categorical model and framework of associative learning patterns. The paper will inhibit a number of studies that were conducted in the past to understand the implication of the theory and the limitations. In addition, further development in its assistive implication will also be discussed in the paper. Interference Theory Talking about the Interference theory of forgetting, it is noted that on its assumptive ground, individual tends to forget a material because of the interruption of other material in the mind. The assumption or the statement of the theory has been put forward on the basis of A-B and A-C paradigm that has allowed many researchers to make experimental underpinnings. On a deeper evaluation of the theory, it comes to understanding that the second learned material is C that is a competitive one when it comes to the cluster of material A-B (Bower, Thompson-Schill, & Tulving, 1994). The theorists of the interference theory clearly remarked on the processes of human learning and memory intrusion by dividing the whole phenomenon into retroactive and proactive interference. The former interference method applies that in case the human brain does not recall of the initial information then the host tends to forget that material because of new material. On the other hand, proactive interference shows that forgetting takes place because of the intrusion of the material that was present in advance. The previous material is probable to affect the present or newly entered material within the human memory (Anderson, 2003). The founders of the interference theory namely Barnes and Underwood (1959) have been widely acclaimed by a number of researchers on the basis of their theoretical underpinning. As per the research conducted by Bower, Thompson-Schill, and Tulving (1994), it was observed that the study by Barnes and Underwood serves the basis of groundwork for theories within the domain of animal memory testing, short-term memory, etc. The list of theorists who have defended the theory of interference makes a long list. For instance, Lewandowsky, Geiger, and Oberauer (2008) have clearly mentioned in their research work that the interference theory is the reason behind cognitive psychological theories. Storm, Bjork, & Bjork (2007) in their respective research pointed out that the paradigm that is the base of Interference theory needed development. At the same time, the authors mentioned that it is extremely imperative for the present material in the memory to get dissolved to make room for the new materials. It is the manner in which humans are supposed to act. Humans would not be able to learn new ways or facts if the material that were learned in the first place do not fade away. Therefore, the authors Storm, Bjork, & Bjork (2007) seemed to allow the interference theory to behold the new hypothesis (Storm, Bjork, & Bjork, 2007). Melton (1963) in his research accounted the critique for the research by Barnes and Underwood (1959) about interference theory. The author pointed out that the stance of the interference theory is not just applicable but also has a root for the new developments that should be undertaken in next few years (Melton, 1963). The author has confirmed the retrospective statements of the theory because it proves that the presence of the first-hand knowledge is present in the consciousness of humans for a little period. Furthermore, the experiments that were conducted to understand about animal memory and the way in which they dissolve their prior knowledge also work on the paradigm of A-B and A-C competition of new and old materials in the memory. Trace Decay Theory Trace Decay Theory is based on the assumption that memories leave a trace in the brain and are stored in short and long term memory systems of the brain. The theory states that the human brain can retain short term memory for a period of 15 to 30 seconds and if it is not rehearsed it eventually decay or fade away. It is because the human is exposed to the series of events and experience that are retained in the human brain with the series of neurons that creates neurological memory trace. The constant changes and additional series of neuron result in chemical structural changes in a human brain. Hence, if the memories that are not rehearsing decay with the passage of time that causes automatic decay resulting in forgetting (Reidhman, 1971). Number of past researchers is conducted using trace decay theory to determine how human forget. Baddeley, Chincotta & Staddord (2002) in an experiment in which the two sets of disyllabic words were assessed to determine the word length effect in short term memory using two auditory representations and visual presentation in order to test recognition implying trace decay theory. The outcomes of the study concluded that the word length effect retention of the memory (Baddeley, Chincotta, & Stafford, 2002). In the research conducted by Cowan, Nugent & Elliot (2000) in order to investigate the problems associated with the memory by using same sets of word for a longer and short period with different lengths of pronunciations (Cowan, Nugent, & Elliott, 2000). In the experiment, it was observed that the words that were repeated with the long pronunciation were impairing to recall. Hence, it was evident from the outcomes of the study the word length and repetition of words results in forgetting in short-term series recall. Plancher & Barrouillet (2012) in their study implied trace decay theory to explain the forgetting from working memory using serial in a box model (Plancher & Barrouillet, 2012). The researcher made use of two predictors to test the model using the series of experiments. The outcomes of the study conclude the recalling of the performance in the complex task testifies that the unrecalled tasks are forgotten (Lewandowsky, Geiger, & Oberauer, 2008). Chater (20007) in the study make use of the model of memory to observe the governance of retrievals from the memory over a different span of time. The study stresses on the memory performance of the individual over a certain timescale using the qualitative study. The outcomes of the study show that there is a difference between short and long term memory, as the span of period has a great impact on the retrievals principles of a memory due to which the recalling has no impact on the memory (Chater, 2007). The outcomes of the study confirm that with the passage of time the individual is likely to forget because of the series of life event occurring in individual’s life. In the similar manner, the Burgess and Hitch (1999) claim the short and long term memories decay with the passage of time (Burgess & Hitch, 1999). Conclusion From the above information, it can be concluded that the human’s memory decays with the passage of time. However, there are number of factors that affects the retention of memory. It can be determined that the time, life events, time duration, and the repetition have a significant impact on the memory. The short and long-term memory of an individual is affected by the real life situation, time and encoding and recalling of the information results in forgetting. As studied the interference theory concludes that the intrusion between old and new information and material results in forgetting. The study and experiment indicate the capacity of a human mind is dependent on the time of rehearsed. Hence, the reason that human forgets are because of the number of factors, series of event and period that results in memory decay. References Anderson, M. C. (2003). Rethinking interference theory: Executive control. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 415–445. Baddeley, A., Chincotta, D., & Stafford, L. (2002). Is the word length effect in STM entirely attributable to output elay? Evidence from serial recognition. Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 353-369. Bower, G. H., Thompson-Schill, S., & Tulving, E. (1994). Reducing Retroactive Interference: An Interference Analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memoiy, and Cognition, 20, 51-66. Burgess, N., & Hitch, G. J. (1999). Memory of Serial Order: A network model of the phonological loop and its timing. American Psychological Association, 106(3), 551-581. Chater, N. (2007). A Temporal Ratio Model of Memory. American Psychology Association, 114(3), 539-576. Cowan, N., Nugent, L. D., & Elliott, E. M. (2000). "Is there a temporal basis of the word length effect? A response to Service. he Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 647-660. Lewandowsky, S., Geiger, S. M., & Oberauer, K. (2008). Interference-based forgetting in verbal short-term memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(1), 200-222. Melton, A. W. (1963). Implications of Short-Term Memory for a General Theory of Memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1, 1-21. Plancher, G., & Barrouillet, P. (2012). Forgetting from working memory: does novelty encoding matter? Journal of experimental psychology: learning, memory and cognition, 1-16. Reidhman, J. (1971). Mechanisms of Forgetting in Short-Term Memory . Cognitive Psychology, 185-195. Storm, B. C., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2007). When intended remembering leads to unintended forgetting. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1-7. Read More