Theories of Forgetting

I. Introduction
II. Decay Theory
III. Consolidation Theory
IV. Interference Theory
V. Retrieval Failure
VI. Repression
VII. Conclusions

I. Introduction

A. Focusing on Forgetting from LTS

Forgetting from SIS: decay, masking
Forgetting from STS: displacement
Forgetting from LTS?

B. Multiple Factors

II. Decay Theory

A. Definition: Spontaneous loss of information over time.
Classic Shape of the forgetting curve (Woodworth, 1938)

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Retention Interval

Page ‹#›
 Woodworth & Schlosberg (1961)

II. Decay Theory

B. Jenkins & Dallenback (1924)

Two subjects studied non-sense syllables
They were tested either immediately, 1, 2, 4 or 8 hours
later
During the retention interval they either were awake
doing daily activities, or they slept.

If decay is the primacy source of forgetting, then the

rates of forgetting should be similar in the awake and
the sleep conditions.

Jenkins & Dallenback (1924)

10
9 Sleeping
8 Awake
Number 7 These result suggest that
Recalled 6 factors other then time
5 significantly contribute to
4 forgetting.
3
2
1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Retention Interval (hours)

Page ‹#›
 II. Decay Theory (cont)

C. Studies of Very-Long-Term Memory

Is there a permanent memory that doesn’t decay?
1) Bahrick et al. (1975)
Studied retention of names and faces of high school
classmates.

Bahrick et al. (1975) Results

100
90
80
70
60
50
40 Free Recall
30 Name Recognition
20 Picture Recognition
10
0
0.25 0.75 2 3.8 7.5 14.5 25.8 34.1 47.6

Years

Studies of Very-Long Term

Memory (cont)
2. Bahrick (1984)
Studied retention of Spanish Vocabulary

Page ‹#›
 Studies of Very-Long Term
Memory (cont)
Bahrick’s research suggest that long-term memories are
resistant to decay.

However, Wixted (2004),

argued that Bahrick’s
(1984) results could be
fit with a three
parameter forgetting
model, in which long-
term memory decayed,
but at a slower rate
then sensory store and
short-term memory.

D. Conclusions of Decay

1) Shape of the forgetting curve is greatly influenced by

the activities during the retention interval.
2) A simple, constant decay model, cannot fit the data.
3) Memories appear to be increasingly resistant to loss
with increasing passage of time.

Jost’s (1897) Law: If two

memories are of equal
strength but different ages,
the older memory will be
forgotten less quickly. (from
Wixted, 2004)

Page ‹#›
 III. Consolidation Theory

A. Consolidation: As a result of experience, certain neural

activities responsible for permanent memories are set into
motion. Disruption of these activities leads to poorly formed
memories, and thus, forgetting.
B. Consolidation processes may continue for long periods of
time, providing an explanation for Jost’s law.
C. Evidence: temporally graded retrograde amnesia (older
memories are less likely to be disrupted)
Brain Trauma

Retrograde Amnesia Anterograde Amnesia (common)

time

III. Consolidation Theory

C. Retrograde Amnesia: Anecdotal Evidence

By NICOLAS MARMIE .c The Associated Press
PARIS (Sept. 19, 1997) - Bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones, the sole survivor of
the accident that killed Princess Diana, does not remember the
circumstances of the crash, a judicial source said today.

Doctors had said all along that the large doses of anesthesia given to Rees-
Jones during surgery, along with the trauma of the accident, might affect
his memory.
D. Retrograde Amnesia: Laboratory Evidence
Passive avoidance training - training animals not to
make a response

Passive avoidance apparatus

Page ‹#›
 Passive avoidance

100
Results: Chorover & Schiller (1965)
90 Control (no ECS)
80
Percent of 70
Subjects
Showing 60
Avoidance 50
Learning 40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30
Time between learning and ECS (sec)

III. Consolidation Theory (cont)

E. Consolidation and Sleep
Kelly, Kelly, & Clanton (2001)
College GPA associated with self reported sleep
Short sleepers (6 or fewer hours) gpa M = 2.74
Long sleepers (9 or more hours) gpa M = 3.24

Stickgold et al (1999)
Optimal learning of laboratory tasks required 6 hours of sleep

Plihal & Born (1997) Sleeping during a retention interval led to

better memory than wakefulness:
early sleep (non-REM slow wave sleep)
aids declarative memory
late sleep (REM)
aids procedural memory

Consolidation and Sleep

Rasch, Buchel, Gais, & Born (2007, see Rasch & Born, 2008)

Participants learned location of card pairs in “concentration” while smelling

the scent of roses. During the retention interval they sleep with either the
odor or a control odorless oil during slow wave sleep (S3 & S4). They were
then tested (w/out the odor) for the location memories.

Page ‹#›
 Consolidation and Sleep

The presence
of odor during
slow wave
sleep
improved
memory for
card location.

Consolidation and Sleep

Later fMRI study

demonstrated
that the odor
during slow
wave sleep
activated the
left
hippocampus.

F. Conclusions on Consolidation
theory
1. memory become increasingly resistant to loss with
the passage of time
2. trauma - disrupts consolidation
3. sleep - aids consolidation
4. Problem: consolidation does not address the role of
the “content” of the experiences during a retention
interval.

Page ‹#›
 IV. Interference Theory
A. Basic Assumptions
1. Forgetting is caused by interference between
information being tested and other information that
has been learned

2. Analysis of learning in terms of associations

between stimulus and response terms.
S R

IV. Interference Theory (cont)

A. Assumptions (cont)
3. a) Interference occurs when the same stimulus is
associated with more than one response.
S R1
R2
b) or, when similar stimuli (S and S’) are
associated with different responses.

S R1 S’ R2

IV. Interference Theory (cont)

A. Assumptions (cont)

4. Two mechanisms are responsible for interference:

response competition: multiple responses are

elicited by a stimulus

unlearning: new associations cause extinction of

the previous responses
S R2
R1

Page ‹#›
 IV. Interference Theory (cont)

B. Examples of interference in action:

phone numbers
tennis

IV. Interference Theory (cont)

C. Experimental Designs for Studying Interference

Retroactive Interference:

Interference Group Study A Study B Test A

Control Group Study A - Test A

Proactive Interference:

Interference Group Study A Study B Test B

Control Group - Study B Test B

IV. Interference Theory (cont)

D. Illustrative Experiment: Barnes & Underwood (1959)

1) Participants learned a list of eight paired-associates until

perfect recall: (nonsense sylabols paired with adjectives)
A-B (e.g., dax-fruitless)
2) Ss then studied a second list with the first terms paired with
new words:
A-C (e.g., dax-double)
They studied this second list 1, 5, 10, or 20 times

3) Ss then tested on memory for both response terms:

A- B , C (e.g., dax- fruitless, double )

Page ‹#›
 IV.
Interference
Theory (cont)

D. Barnes &
Underwood (1959)

Results:

IV. Interference Theory (cont)

E. Problems with Interference Theory

1. According to Interference Theory, Proactive

Interference (PI) is the result of response competition.
However, PI continues even when response
competition is removed.

2. Interference theory did not satisfactorily explain

retrieval failures.

V. Retrieval Failure Theory of

Forgetting
A. Basic Assumption:
Forgetting is caused by the inability to access
information that is represented in memory.

availability: the information is represented in memory

accessibility: the information that is available can be

retrieved at a specific time/place.

Page ‹#›
 V. Retrieval Failure Theory of
Forgetting
B. Demonstration:
1. occupation 7. a writing instrument
2. dairy product 8. a kind of animal
3. circus performer 9. a part of the house
4. type of seafood 10. a kind of flower
5. part of the body 11. an art form
6. a kind of bedroom furniture 12. a kind of vehicle

V. Retrieval Failure Theory of

Forgetting
B. Demonstration:
1. lawyer 7. pencil
2. butter 8. insect
3. acrobat 9. window
4. shrimp 10. daisy
5. heart 11. music
6. mirror 12. train

V. Retrieval Failure Theory of

Forgetting
C. Encoding Specificity Principle (Tulving)
Specific encoding operations determine the type of
memory trace stored in memory. The type of memory
trace determines what retrieval cues will be
successful at gaining access to the memory trace.

Overlap determines
success at retrieval
Operations Operations
at at
Encoding Test

Page ‹#›
 V. Retrieval Failure Theory of
Forgetting
D. Generate Edit Theory: An alternative explanation of retrieval
processes:
Generate: retrieval cues used to generate associates
Edit: recognize items generated based on familiarity

E. Encoding Specificity vs. Generate Edit theories

of retrieval.
encoding specificity: stresses study-test cue overlap
generate edit: stresses strength of cue-item association

Encoding Specificity
vs. Generate Edit
Thomson & Tulving (1970) experiment:
a) Subjects studied either:
strong associates: e.g., white-black
or weak associates: e.g., train-black

b) memory test contained either:

strong cues: e.g. white
weak cues: e.g. train

Encoding Specificity
vs. Generate Edit
Thomson & Tulving (1970) experiment (cont)

Results

Test Cues
Strong (white ?) Weak (train ?)
Study Strong 20.2 9.2
(white-black)
Cues Weak 13.9 15.7
(train-black)

Page ‹#›
 V. Retrieval Failure Theory of
Forgetting
E. Applications of Encoding Specificity

1) Context Effects on Memory

water
music
odor
2) State Dependent Effects on Memory
drugs
Mood

Look for congruence effects: when a match between

study and test leads to best memory performance.

Context Effects
Godden & Baddeley (1975) wet/dry study
Contexts: Wet: under 20 ft water
Dry: sitting on the dock

Results
Test Environment
Dry Wet
Study Dry 13.4 8.5

Environment Wet 8.4 11.5

Context Effects (cont)

Smith (1985) music and memory

Results

Music at Test
Mozart Jazz Quiet
Music Mozart 18.2 12.7 13.3
at Jazz 11.2 20.8 8.5
Study Quiet 16.3 15.3 11.7

Page ‹#›
 Context Effects (cont)
Schab (1990) Chocolate Study
Odors (chocolate, apple-cinnamon, moth ball)

Results

Test Cues
Odor No Odor
Study Odor .21 .17

Cues No Odor .13 .14

Herz (1997) Odor & Memory

2) State Dependent Memory

Eich et al (1975) marijuana study

Results

Test
No Drug Drug
Study No Drug 11.5 9.9

Drug 6.7 10.5

Page ‹#›
 V. Retrieval Failure Theory of
Forgetting
F. Conclusions:
Very rich description of memory failures
May be circular:
How could this theory be proved wrong?

VI. Repression

A. Multiple views of repression

– Freud’s original formulation:
seduction hypothesis (1895-1897)
– repression as a way of dealing with
motivational conflicts (Freud, 1910-
1939, rejection of seduction )
– The “common view” (Baddeley, 1999)
– Repression in mass media (talk
shows, fiction)

We will focus on the “common view” and

how it emerged from Freud’s original
formulation of the seduction hypothesis

Page ‹#›
 VI. Repression

B. The seduction hypothesis

Freud was looking for a (non-hereditary) cause of hysteria
Seduction hypothesis grew out of his analysis of Dora (Ida Bauer)
1. Early sexual seduction leads to unassimilated (unconscious)
memories
2. At sexual maturation, “self reproaches become attached to the
memory of the seduction”
3. Both the memory and the self-reproach are repressed
4. A period of health
5. Illness - return of the repressed memories.

VI. Repression
Nature of repressed memories (Freud’s original
formulation):
1) conscious process of burying memories to protect
the ego.

“In a statement of the theory of repression it should be

explained that a thought passes into repression owing
to the cooperation of two of the factors which
influence it. On the one side (the censorship of Cs) it
is pushed, and from the other side (the Ucs) it is
pulled . . . much as one is helped to the top of the
Great Pyramid (The Interpretation of Dreams, 1900, p.
18)”

VI. Repression

2) the emotions (anxiety) associated with the repressed

memory may be expressed.
dreams
hypnosis
free association

Page ‹#›
 VI. Repression

3) Memory is a constructive process

“It may indeed be questioned whether we have any memories at all from
our childhood: memories relating to our childhood may be all that we
possess. Our childhood memories show us our earliest years not as
they were but as they appeared at the later periods when the memories
were aroused. In these periods of arousal, the childhood memories did
not, at people are accustomed to say, emerge; they were formed at that
time. And a number of motives, with no concern for historical accuracy,
had a part in forming them, as well as in the selection of the memories
themselves.”
Freud, 1899, Screen Memories, p. 322.

VI. Repression (cont)

C. Repression - the “common view”

“retrieval of painful memories is actively avoided,”

(Baddeley, 1999, p. 143)

“emotionally unpleasant or otherwise highly charged

memories ... are repressed by the conscious mind into
the unconscious (Henderson, 1999, p. 76)

The common view has its roots in the seduction

hypotheses. It is the common view that has received
the most attention by memory researchers and the
mass media.

VI. Repression (cont)

D. Criticisms of repression (common view definition):

1. Research suggests strong emotions lead to vivid memories for

an event (e.g., Christianson et al., 1991)
2. Attempts to suppress traumatic memories actually lead to
enhanced memory for the trauma
Dalgleish & Yiend (2006)
Asked participants to name a traumatic experience from
their childhood. Half were then told not to think about it, while
the other half served as a control. Each group asked to make a
mark on their paper if they happened to think of the event during
a 9 min writing task.
Suppression Control
Intrusions 5.75 3.00
(depressed participants)

Page ‹#›
 D. Criticisms of repression (cont.)

3) Existence of repression accepted as a mater of faith,

incapable of disproof.

Example 1: “When someone asks you, “Where you sexually

abused as a child?” there are only two answers: One of them is
“yes,” and one of them is “I don't know.” You can’t say “no.” -
Roseanne Arnold, on “Oprah”
Example 2: “You may think you don’t have memories … you don’t
need the kind of proof that would stand up in a court of law…
Assume your feelings are valid. It is rare that someone thinks
she was abused and then discovers she wasn’t ... The
progression always goes the other way, from suspicion to
confirmation. If you genuinely think you were abused and your
life shows symptoms, there’s a strong likelihood that you were.”
The Courage to Heal,1994, p. 26. (first edition Bass & Davis,
1988)

D. Criticisms of repression (cont.)

4) Supporting evidence may reflect forgetting of prior
remembering.
People reporting a recovered memory may be
incorrectly claiming that there was a period of time
when the event was “forgotten.”

Geraert et al. (2006) (part of the larger study on

recovered memory) investigated cued recall in a study
- test - test design. If they could not remember the
word on the first test, they were reminded of it. On the
second test they were asked whether or not they
correctly recalled the word on the first test.

forgetting of prior remembering

Geraert et al. (2006) (continued)

Three groups of participants:
recovered memory: reporting recovered memory of
abuse
continuous memory: where abused, and reported
continuous memory for the abuse.
control: no history of abuse.

Page ‹#›
 Proportion of items recalled on test one correctly
judged as recalled on test 1.
Group
recovered continuous control
.36 .53 .51

Conclusions:
1. Generally, people not very good at correctly judging
prior recall.
2. People reporting recovered memories are worse than
others are correctly reporting prior recall.

D. Criticisms of repression (cont.)

5) Evidence for repression may result from
suggestive therapy.
Suggestive recovery techniques may lead clients to create a false
memories. These “memories” may help them understand their
anxiety, and for this reason the memories can be quite
compelling.

(Geraerts et al., 2007): Evidence for “recovered memories.”

Identified women (sampled from respondents to newspaper adds)

who reported childhood sexual abuse, and investigated whether
their memories of the abuse were continuous or
discontinuous(recovered?).

Those with discontinuous memories were further subdivided into

those who recalled the memory as a result of therapy, or recalled
the memories out of therapy.

Corroborative Evidence?

Geraerts et al., (2007) results

T ype of corroborative information
Others abused Others who Perpetrator
Memory by same learned of abuse of abuse
Type Uncorroborated perpetrator soon after

Continuous (n = 71) 55% 24% 14% 7%

Recovered out 63% 22% 10% 5%

of therapy (n = 41)

Recovered in 100% 0% 0% 0%
therapy (n = 16)

Page ‹#›
 D. Criticisms of repression (cont)
6. Famous case studies of repression are fraudulent.

Example: “Who Abused Jane Doe” (Loftus & Guyer 2002)

Case study of a young girl who apparently repressed and then recovered
memory for child sexual abuse.
Psychologist (D. Corwin) was evaluating a child as part of a
“a tumultuous, protracted, and vicious custody dispute”
• During a first interview (at 6 years old) she reported sexual abuse
by her mother.
• During a second interview (age 17) she had “forgotten” the
abuse, and then appeared to remember it.
• This case study was published and used to support the notion of
memory repression (Corwin and Olafson, 1997).

Corroborative Evidence?

Jane Doe (cont)

Further evidence suggests that:
Jane discussed the alleged abuse with others during
the period in which it was supposedly repressed.

The abuse probably didn’t take place. Rather it was a

hoax perpetuated by the stepmother to gain custody
of Jane.

VI. Repression (cont)

E. Repression and theories of forgetting

“Warning: The concept of repression has not been

validated with experimental research and its use may
be hazardous to the accurate interpretation of clinical
behavior.” (Holmes, 1990, p. 97)

Page ‹#›
 Repression and theories of
forgetting
Three ways in which memory failures are “mistaken”
for repression. (Loftus, Joslyn, & Polage, 1998)

1) Retrieval failures:
a) Lack of cue support
b) misunderstood experiences (e.g. child sexual
abuse) may be poorly remembered.
2) Distorted views of one’s own memory:
e.g., forgetting of prior remembering
3) False memories:
Created as a result of extended psychotherapy.

VII. Conclusions on Forgetting

Four different explanations:
decay: minimal role in LTS forgetting

consolidation: disruption occurs under special

circumstances

interference theory: explains some forgetting, but the

mechanisms need work

retrieval failure: richest, most complete explanation,

but may be circular.

Page ‹#›