riUV A, UIVI I u

DA 11, PAPTR D,
of 28 words. They were n

asked people to memorize lists

wordicly generall
Tulving and Thompson (1971) But when the first
three letters of the "forgotten"
remember only about 20% of the words.
of the list. The
researchers corvcluded th of
remembered more than 50%
as a hint these same people unalble to retrieve them. Tylving ale
from they were just tennporarily
lost the words storage, l
had not
prescnce of same cuesduring oriqiral
theencoding specificity principle, wherebyrecall inmprovesby the
from studies of Stale_dependency ard
Evidence for this hypochesis comes
anae ec test.
RNIKa Statedcpcndency (Eich, 1980) ig thefact that recallimproves
when peopie try to recallinforna
were when they first learnt the information.1Thus, what people lesearn
D the sanme physiological state as they intoxicated; what they learn under the influence c
while they areintoxicated is better recalled when they are information learnt standing or lying down, is
manjuana is better remembered under the influence of marijuana;
better recalled standing and lying down respectively; and information learnt in a happy or sad mood is best

remembered in the same moodkContext dependency refers to_the fact that memory IS also influenced by
used 16 members of a diving club as
COnextualcues from the environment: Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Suoecslhey demonstrated that when lists of words were learnt on land, ihey were better recalled on land and
***

tthey werelearnt under water, theywere.better recalled underwater.

ANASSOCIATIVE APPROACH: DECAY VS. INYERFERENCE
Gven the associative orientation, the problem of forgetting could be restated in another way: How is a
asodiation between two verbal stimuli broken? Traditionally, researchers accepted one or two conflicting
theories. Either we forget simply because the passaqe of time weaken the associative bond (decay theory) or
forgetting results when the formation of one bond interferes with another (interference theory).

DECAY:
Decay is
major theory of forgetting. These theorists assume that lapse of time is
a

ACCording to this iew, the memory trace deteriorates unless it is used, possibly responsible for forgettinD9
as a
metaboliC action of the cells of the nervous system. Hebb (1949) discovered that an activeresult of the contiriuOus
Will decaY, while J structural trace (similar to LTM) is a fixed memory trace (Similar to SlM)
that has been worked upoii io stop it
being
forgotten. He says: "There is clinical evidenc to support the conclusion that some forgetting is due to disuse.
The human child who has normal vision for the fîrst
two years of life and then becomes blind will have
the time he has grown up, all his visual lost by
learning and will be indistinguishable from one who has been
blind from
birth, It might be suggested that this also is due to retroactive inhibition, the effect of all the
blind child must do. But if he does not become blind until the other learning the
age of five he does not lose al/ the effects of visua
learning, although retroactive inhibition should have its effect here as well as with the child who becomes blind
earlier. Retroactive inhibition undoubtedly has some effect, but it does not
who becomes blind at the younger age" caplain the whole loss in the child
(Hebb, 1966, P. 129) More formally, the Decay theory holds thata
physical memory trace gradually fades as time passes. Like a message drawn in sand and the beach, a
memory first fades and then disappears altogether. În some ways, this is the simplest possible phýsical
explanation of
Ebbinghaus's famous for forgetting curve. Many researchers argue for a decay theory at least in short-term
memory.{When information enters memory, neLirons_are activated. These memories are retained long as thee
as
neurons remain active. Activation can_be maintained through rehearsal or frequent recall. If activation is not
maintained, the memory trace fades and decays.It is difficult to explain, on the Bbasis of interference principles
alone, why so much information is lost over a period of just a few seconds. Such research leads supporters of
the decay theory to stress: (1) the notion of a limited information-processing system, and (2) the vievw that
rehearsal prevents decay. It is assumed that a person can process only so much information
during a given
period of time and also that rehearsal is, in itself, one form of delaying or preventing the decay process.
Rehearsal is means for keeping the material active in memory. When the individual becomes involved in an
unrelated task,he must stop the rehearsal process and decay begins, quite independent from any interference
While it is difficult to provide clear evidence for decay, it is also difficult to demonstrate that there is no
deterioration of the memory trace with time.

Forgetting in sensory memory is largely dueto decay. The icon disappears within a second, and echoic mémory
lasts about 4 seconds. Since meaning is not processed, there can be no interference.
orgetting in STM Occurs dueto decay as well as interference. The experiment by Peterson and Peterson (1956)
CIPTLrISraierl low orgetting increaser with n increase in the r:tcntion ir:terval. On eac: ef a e v . fie
 subjects to remember a non word -

hsted the subjectS from any consisting of three consonants

type of rehearsal
ackwards by threes from an arbitrarily (such as XRZ). n
(repeating the trigram to oneself) by
The number instructing
after the subject saw the trigram. Each selected Pumber (such as
657).
subject was tested with six retention was tlasne
is. At the ena or tne retention
interval,
f Substantial ana rapla iorgeitung occurred the subject was intervals- 5,b,9,
asked to recall the trigram. Ihe lt
e lcngth of tihe retention interval.
in each retention interval. The amount esu
d more than 90% after 18 Nearly 10% forgotuen 1s aireu
seconds, This is oftenforgetting occurred after three seconds,nA
taken as evidence for decay.
is hardiy any experimental evidence either of decay in
LTM, Bahrick and Hall(1991) claim that people ca
ber the aigeord uney iearnt from school many years later,
standard very quickly. They also found that a delirious A refresheruse course brought their sKIl Dacr
hen since their childhood. In fact person can a
language na 0121
findings
hat a poem was recalled better after two contradict the idea of decay. For example, Da effect found called
days rather than immediately. after learning o
eiisceNCE Fayne (1987) found evidence for hypermnesia when he found that subjects repeatealy e on
the same material, may recall material on ta
later tests that they did not recall earlier. These finding su h
consolidation of the trace probably occurs with time. Although there is as yet no
condius
memory raçe decays with time alone, there is speculation that certain conditions obliterate dence is as
fo!iows: dvskhn/v9ul
ectro convulsive shock (ECS): Electro convulsive shock (ECS) is sometimes used in the treatment
mental patients. In theseshock treatments, a weak electric current is passed through the bralnp
of electrodes placedon theskull, and the.patient experiences a mild convulsion roio en
unconsciousness.. Usually, a series of such treatments is given, several days or wecks part aetor
tney are helpful in leading to recovery. However, such patients usually forget the trip. to the nospid
Cinaic and even the preparations preceding the shock (White, 1956). Several studies have indicated uiat
due to ECS. Electro convulsive shock immediatey
E ne interval is particularly important in forgetting than the same shock adminisicred after a
dire.earningproduces more forgetting of a given experience following the original learning9
delay. in a study with rats, ECS was given at several different intervals
and a test of retention twenty-five hours later showed that the sooner the ECS
was administered, thne * * * * *

greater the disruption (Pinel and Cooper, 1966). of memory by

Another series of studies has focused upon disruption
EXperiments in_protein synthesis: the ten or 15 years
past several experiments
within the organism. In
preventing the synthesis of protein in the chemical basis of memory. In one
have suggested that protein is of particular importance at one end
in a shuttle box which was lighted alternately
experiment, goldfish were placed individually went on, the
and then the other. When an electric shock always
appeared twenty seconds after the light
the derker area. After this task was learned,
fish eventually lear d to avoid it by quickly swimming to
Puromycin, a substance which interferes with routine synthesis, and it was found
some fish injected.with obliterated.
after traininig,memory for the task was virtually
that if puromycin was injected immediately protein, memory was unaffected,. and
If the experimenter waited an hour and then destroyed the in an immediate memory loss (Agranoff,
the training resulted
injection approximately one-half hour after * *** ** ** *******"* *"****'** *****""

1967). retention. Generally people have

shock has comparable effects on
Emotional_shock: An emotional Harden (1930) made college
In an experiment in the laboratory,
amnesia after an emotiomnal upset. After the baseline recall test, they were sometimes
undergraduates learn a list of nonsense syllables. upset- the back of
given mild jokes.to.read, while at other times theyY were given.unexpected emotional
and the lights went off,
chair collapsed, scrap metal fell from the celing, a pistol shot rang out,
the the subject was. asked to recite all the
producing total darkness. As soon as the commotion.ceased,. latter condition, as
expected, retention.was.poorerfolowing thedecre:
syllables he could remember. Ascondition. se in retention;
In some cases, there was a very large
compared to the previous control
in the list.
onesubject forgot every syllable directly related to thelength of
These resylts provide interesting parallels. In all cases the amount of memgry is
and the onset of the disruptive stimulustData indicate that time is necessary
thetime interval between learning
When this obliteration idea is compared with the interference theory, it should be
for consolidation of the trace
noted that:
I n interference permanent memory traces interfere
with one another, but in obliteration, the engram is
disrupted before it becomes permanent.

- ----~-
 StLI IUN A,
UNII II
occur (as shown in ECS studies) dies), even if
DA 11,
PAPEK D,
obliteration
can
interference, but
important for
Activity is
that all experis
subject is inactive.
be answered. It
was rejt initually
revealectt
erlenci
is yet to However, rigorous
research
thet
located? This question
acivity. O. Specific ar
trace
Where is the memory trace the engram. -

T h e r e a r e . c h a n g e s . i n .prain
memory
are encoded in the
brain in the form of a In ii
associated with them. leave.no races.penind,
liave no specific neurons
permanent and
experiences these changes are not of a rats brain affected his
is being processed, but removing specific parts
asthe information
(1950) mentions that stored inthe brain,
DoOK n search ofan engram Lashley specific memories. He concluded that if at althey. are to the theory of
eliminate there might be more
behaviour, but did not totally findings show that
throughout the brain. These
a e aistributed
trace decay in our memories.
INTERFERENCE:
it
this, of why do you suppose Orten
hundreds of new associations evervday., In light
AYoung Child ormust learn
of periodic diligent practice for a child to learn the addition and multiplication tapies to, tne
o otns years into account the fact that
are not required? Taking
e r e couning on fingers and other circumlocutions and X + 0, X+1, XXU ang xx are
Ooon and multiplication are commutative (X + Y = Y +X and XxY to=YxX) order to master both tne
easy
rdtner learn, there are less than 100 remaining associations be learned in
to
addition and multiplication tables. So why should they be so difficult to learn?

The reason is interference. One is forming an association between a stimulus consisting of two digiis and a
operator symbol (+ or x) and a number response. The same ten digits and the same two operator symbois
appear over and over again in diferent compound stimuli associated to different responses. If you give a childa
Single addtion problem, such as 5+8 13, you can teach this association in very little time, and it will be
emembered very well, so long as you do not attempt to teach a lot of other addition facts. But as soon as you
begin teaching that 5+6 =11 and 9+8 = 17, you are beginning to establish competing associations to each of
theelements of the original compound stimulus. The formation of these associations to the same stimulus
Droducesa variety of interfering effects on both the strength of the original assoclation between 8 +5 and 13 in
storage and the ability to retrieve an answer correctly using the association between 8 + 5 and 13.

Interference theory holds that people forget information because one memory prevents ariother rrom Deing
recovered.
Forgetting in STM as well as LTM OcCurs mainly due to interference- proactive as well as retroactive (also called
proactive and retroactive inhibition). Old learning can interfere with the memory of new learning (proactive
interference), or new learning can interfere with the memory of old learning (retroactive interference). Proactive
inhibition occurs when information is forgotten because of interference from material that was presented before
the learning. of the learning task. Retroactive inhibition occurs when information is forgotten a_ a result of
interfererce from material that was presented after the learning task. If
you memorize the information on
economicS and then study psychology, the interference from the
psychology study will be retröactive
interference. However, if you study psychology first and then economics, the interference from the
study will be proactive interference. psychology
Before the 1950s memory researchers focused on the
working on the retroactive inhibition. In a typical study,
Melton and Irwin (1940), subjects learnt a list of nonsense
syllables and then relearnt it 30 minutes later. During
the half hour delay, some subjects simply rested while others were
from 5 to 45 times. This task interfered with the
exposed to a second list of nonsense syllables
memory of the first list. In fact the more times people had
heard the second list, the more trouble
they had remembering the first.
In 1957 Underwood
emphasized that interference could also work in the other direction in a classic study of
proactive interference He directiy compared the performance of old proslike Ebbinghaus (who memorized
iterally thousands of nonsense syllables with volunteers who were encountering nonsense syllables for the first
time. The latter
consistently performed better. In fact people
list second best and so on. generally recalled their first list best, the second
Thus, the more you know the more likely you are to forget,
Potrnartive inhibition: The generäi desiqi of experiments o1 rctro2rtive inhibition is as
folws
 LEARN
LEARN
Task A
Task B RECALL
Task A Task A
Task A
netiment, a large group of subjects learns
vided itno two equal or matched Task A and on thhe basis of
ns Task B while the control groups, an experimental and a conuoI their performance these
group rests or group. Ine
cxperimenta
IS,
or does
5,
TOupSattem,
Sometning else that is unrelated to Task A.to After
mpt to recall Task A. Under
prevent them from
f rehearsing Task
the experimental group has
A tels
learned lask
much lower than that for the control these circumstances the recall score for the experimental group
s
group,
T a classic
Stuay (JenKInS dnd Dallenbach, 1924) twoapparently due to the interfering activity of
groups of subiects memorized lists of
learning ask
then e1gaqcu YdiosdCUVITies or went to sleep. nonsense
Retention was tested at intervals of one, two, Tour,syllaoes
cht hourS. t was TOUna tnat anu
retention was better after any amount of sleep than after a
timespentin wakingactivity, compardDE ao
Proactive innibiton:J MOst of us have
discovered that it is sometimes difficult to recall recently learned matera
because of the intrusion of
information acquired earlier. The earlier learning interferes with re
earning. n n e laboratory, this phenomenon, known as proactive inhibition, is studied by the following oesig

LEARN LEARN RECALL

Experimental group Task A Task B Task B
Control group Task B Task B

The experiment group learns Task A and then a different task, B. The control group rests and theniearnsas
without previously learning Task A. In a test of retention for Task B, the control group usualy 1S SUperior e
learning of Task A by the experimental group seems to interfere with the retention of Task B. nisc n
especialy likely if the two tasks have a fairly high degree of similarity, such as that between lists or three-eter
in
nonsense syllables. If the similarityis so high that the subject is effectively recalling the same material, as
trying to reçall Chaucerian vocabulary after reading the Pardoner's Tale end Miller's Tale, facilitation rather than
interrerence_willresult. When_the task is extremely dissimilar as in_playing tennis and memorizing German
the most demonstrations ofr
impressive
one of
VOcabulary, there is relatively little effect one way or the other. In
studies by more than a dozen different
the importance of proactive inhibition, Underwood,
1957 compared
The studies were selected for the analysis on the basis
of several stringent criteria, and two
investigators.
features of each investigation were record: the amount of recall
of a certain list of verbal material twenty-four
hours after the original learning and the average number
of lists previously learned. The more lists that were
This finding together with subsequent research
learned earlier, the poorer was the recall (Underwoo, 1957).
has led to much interest in this type of interference.

A major factor in interference is similarity:| interference increases due to similarity

ofthe two tasks. Retroactive
with old learning. Gunter et al (1980) performed experiments to
interference occurs when new learning interferes
watthed a number of news bulletins and when they recalled old
show retroactive interference. Their subjects interferes with new learning.
news stories they were
distorted. Proactive interference occurs when old learning
similar subjects at the same time often experience interference.
Chandler (1989) stated that students who study
interference by varying the similarity between the original material
"In...studies, researchers have controlled
material studied in the intervening period. Interference is assumed to be
given to subjects (test material) and the
is most similar to the test material. Decreasing the similarity should reduce
greatest when intervening material of the intervening material is
interference and cause less forgetting (D Amato, 1979)." As the similarity
due to reduced interference.
decreased, the amount of forgetting also decreases
If dissimilar.material is introduced in an experiment on any trial, the level of retention for that trial rises to the
same high level as for the first trial. The proactive interference built up over the previous trials disappears. This is
called release from_proactive interference (Wickens, 1972). Release from proactive interference, demonstrated in
STM, may have even more relevance in LTM, LTM being semantically organized.

The hypothesis that interference from prior and subsequent learning is a cause of forgetting is about as old as
the scientific study of human learning and memory. Sometimes one hears it referred to as the interferente
theorv ot torgetting but there are many differeni iiterierence theories.There are at ieast five difíerent
 DA 1, PAP:R U, SCLIIUIV A, UINII I
unlearnina,
ng, res.O
competition, blocking
memory theorists; so that it mav
may De ne
proposed by not mutually
exclusive,
interference mechanisms load. (These five mechanisms are associative memorY)
Suppression, and storage in
contribute to forgetting
.

mechanisms
several different interference

Competition.
ends with ra, and means mysteriousl
the five-letter word that begins with w, sure whetier the order.of the
Do you know how to spell but you may not be
Doubtless you know that it is either weird or velrd, interference factor that occurs at the
strange"? of competition, an
third letters is ie or ei. This is an example or concept
Second and associations to both the le form and
the ei form from the word
of You have strong
time retrieval. definition and structural information
concerning the initial
representative that is activated in this case by giving a
and terminal letters of the word. '..

recall experiments by
Ompeiton has been studied in the laboratory setting with conventional paired-associate
naving Subjects first learn an AB list and then an AC list (AB-AC) paradigm). Subsequent to learning both lists,
when subjects are asked to recall the Bassociate of Afrom the first list, they can sometimes recallboth 5 and
but they are not able to remember which was the correct associate for the first list and which for the secona,
mmediatey after learning the second list, list differentiation, the ability to distinguish between the responses
n e irst ist and those from the second, is typically quite high, over 95 percent accuracy, buta week later it
ve ecined to perhaps only 80 percent accuracy, not because of competition between a correct and an
ncorrectassociation with the same stimulus, but rather because of competition between associationn wit wO
ghly Similar compound stimuli: "A+ first list" and "A+ second list". As long as the difference between the
strength of association of the compound stimulus "A +
association with the incorrect C first list" with. the correct B item and the strength or
item is high enough, competition need not
However, as the associations decline in strength during the markedly
Correct recall. reduce the percertage or
emerge as a more significant factor. retention interval compeition
may

Blocking
If one has learned two different
associations to highly similar stimuli
to recall associates B and (A and A), then although one may bé able
C, one may not be able to tell which is correct
the time of retrieval. in to A. This is
However, another possible interference mechanismresponse
that could
competition
at
retrieval is the blocking of one association operate at the time of
by another that is, retrieving C as an associate to A
-

recall of B, so that one would not think of B at all. might block the
Barnes and Underwood
(1959) invented a test that logically avoids
The test, called modified modified free
recall (MMFR), involves competition but is still subject to blocking.
the A stimulus following an AB-AC allowing the subject to give two associations
to
paradigm.
associate to the same stimulus, all other factors
If the recall of one
associate tends to hlock the recall of another
being equal, one might
say, the probability is that a subject would recallexpect a negative correlation in the recall
of B and C. That is to
than the probability of C given the recall of B wculd
recalling C given the non-recall of B. There are a number of be lower
in such.
analyses,but the present evidence confounding
certainly cannot be considered favorable to factors involved
interference mechanism. Blocking has not blocking as an
yet been definitely ruled out, but there is no
Support the idea that it is an interference factor. compelling evidence to
Unlearning
In 1940, Melton and Irwin proposed that, in addition to
learning of an AC pair produces a reduction in the retrieval interference via
competition, the subsequent
reduction of the strength of an strength of the originally learned AB
pair. They called such a
associaiion in storage unlearning.
Jnlearning requires fairly high degree of
a
roduce significant effects, since no significantsimilarity between original and
retroactive interference is
interpolated learning in order to
omparison to AB-Rest paradigm. (Rest is a produced in an AB-CD
paradigm by
ehearsal of the AB associations via non-learning control group that is nevertheless prevented from prior
some task such as
earning other (CD) pairs of words unrelated to the reading jokes on crossing out letters in text material).
AB words produces no unlearning of the AB association.
 Fraser (1963) proposed a new
.nd list Cresponses are primed by interference mechanism to the effect that
oriming are actively suppressed. some
or selector mechanism, while during interpolated
Over first list B responses
slist responses. a perlod about 20 minutes or so either
spontaneously
.cvations that support recover from their
this idea for retauve following interpolated
recall but not for suppression. inere are a consiaderaoie
recognition.
1967) tried to explain
forgetting an interaction between
as
describes the procesS of forgetting interference and decay. His gcd-Rau
as
,Osive acid. The degree of disintegration of analogous to the disintegration of metal when it is
1Ountot the time_the the metal is a function of both placed in à vato
metais_sübmerged-in-acid. In human memory, the
the strengthof.the acia.ana. u
affects ntererence nucn IKe the degree of similarity betWeen jte
means more interTerence.)But time strength
is also
of_acid affects corrosion of metal; more similarity
betweenre
important. Interference will be
highBy interfering items will do little harm togreater
in memory storage. Ihus even the longer it workS on an
a new item removed
t
immediately. Alternatively, dissimilar (non from acla odu
time, with itde forgetting. The thrust of interfering) items may remain in the acid bath for a relativey o
their hypothesis is that the larger the number of
storage, the greater the acidity of the local simlar rades
environment for a trace, and higher the acidity, the faster
decay ror a memory trace. The idea is
similar to unlearning in that it postulates an interfering errect
the rae
strengtn or.the trace in storage that is, it is permanent
-
on
like response suppression, like unlearning, and is not merely a ractOr
n i
competition and blocking.
nciusion n the early experiment contrasting the effects of interference and decay, Jenkins and Dallenbach
924) asked people to memorize lists of nonsense syllables just before they went to sleep. When subjects were
awakened one, two, four, or eight hours later, those who had skepi longer had forgotten more People who
memorized the same lists in the morning and were tested after equal periods of staying avwake had forgotten
more than the 'sleepers' at every interval. The simplest interpretation is that the passage of time thus indeed
Caused some forgetting.(Decay), but the interference of other intervening activity causes even more forgetting.
Baddeley (1990) considered the ecological validity of the interference experiments that have been made. He
States that the.tasks given to subjects are too close to each other and, in real life, these kind of events are more
spaced out. Solso (1995) also considered experiments performed in this field. He said that Proactive Interference
experiments use nonsense syllables and this would be difficult to demonstrate in real life.

The Displacement Theory suggests that human memory has a limited capacity. New items of memory tend to
displace' old items of memory (similar to retroactive interference). Waugh and Norman (1965) tested this theory
y performing the 'serial probe task. This involved a list of letters being read.to subjects. After hearing this list
he experimenter. would call out one of the letters and the subject would have to remember the letter after this
one. They found that when the list of letters was read out more quickly the recall was much better. However,
his finding süggests that decay is a better explanation for the lack of recall when the list was read at a slower
ace. They also discovered that, when there were more intervening items between the probe and the end of the
st, subjects fouhd it harder to recall the target item (the letter after the probe). Glanzer et al (1967) tested the
race decay, displacement and interference theories. They found that the displacement theory was a major factor
forgetting, but time delay in these experiments suggests that decay is also an important theory. Therefore, as
ecay can also explain memory loss during displacement experiments, the displacement theory is not a strong
nough theory. to explain memory loss alone.

he hypothesis that interference plays a major role in forgetting does not preclude the possibility that other
ctors als0. produce forgetting, such as passive temporal decay (that is independent of the nature of prior or
Jbsequent leárning). There is considerable evidence to support both interference and
ntributors to storage loss. Due to the temporal decay ass
many experiments that have occurred in order to determine why we
rget, it can be concluded that the human mind forgets items in
metimes peöple also forget things that cannot be memory for many different reasons. However,
explained by any of the theories devised so far.

. - ****** * * * * * * ******** 1**-*

 ELIIUV A, UrNI I I
TAt CR 6,
DA I1,

FACTORS AFFECTING MEMORY

operate. threc Ihe stace

the stage in which they c e r t a l n general.facto.
to
be classified according There are, however, ors
Ihe factors affecting memory may storage, and retrieval.
as mentioncd
carlier are: acquisition, cOnCIiainy secuo
ui tue
memory are inpoitant in all the three staqges. They are mmenuonea

too thal

Factors affectingacquisition: in verbal learning.

acquisition are the similar to those
implies learming, the factors affecting
nce acquisition
These factors are: material, found that the
Ebbinghaus (1885) using words from Don Juan as meaningful the ;factor of
ningruness:
faster and retention was superior for meaningful
material. It is to control
erning rate was syllables. Meaningfulness has been assessed in
edningruiness that Ebbinghaus (1885) invented the nonsense
frequency or OCCUrrence
paired assOciate tasks through various indices such as number of associates generated, be assessed ror pcture
rea ramlarity, etc, all of which are highly inter-correlated. It can
pronounciability,
wigs as well. studies show that sensory memory functions for ecologically valid stimuli, only. .ested witn
pictorial stimuli, no evidence for priming of structurally imposslble objects is observed (Schacter, Cooper ana
n 90). Direct priming also does not occur for pseudo-words among amnesics (Diamond and.KOZin,
Mearing is extracted from the information in a very rudimentary way in STM, and probably as soon as this
s done,the information passes into the
long-term memory. What people already know affects tne encodig
inrormation
were
in LTM as well.
Bransford
and Johnson (1972). asked their subjects to réad a paragraph. hose wno
not told what the paragraph was about, remembered fewer ideas than those who knew what tfhe paragrapn
was about. In fact the second group remembered almost twice as many ideas as the first
why we retain more information if the teacher group. Perhaps this iS
or a book outlines the
the information, before the plan of the or gives a
previeW or chapter,
information itself is presented. The
learning be due to
may superiority intentional learning over
of
similar reasons. Bartlett (1932) believed .incigentdi
that an active organization of past
experience takes place, and thus we acquire a
schema at the time of encoding inforniation.
reactions ana
2.
Similariiy: Apart from meaningfulness, the
ofsimilarity are quite complex. It may enhancetask variable having a great influenceis similarity. The effects
as well as retard encoding and
Von Restorff (1933). subsequent_retention.
interesting phenomena is the Von Restorff effect described An
item in an otherwise by He found that an
isolated
homogeneous list is better recalled than other items. For
words printed in black, if one word in
printed red, it will be
in recalled better.
example, in a list
consisting of
3.
Length
list increases
of the list: Since the time of
Ebbinghaus (1885) it has been known that the difficulty of
disproportionately with list length. Although learninga
retained better than short ones, In part this may be becauselonger lists are harder to learn they appear to be
shorter lists to be learnt to the same lists longer receive
greater amounts of practice than
criterion. Woodworth
(1938)
are so hard to learn,
subjects may search for meaningful relations amang suggested another reason: because
long lists
approached with a rote learning set. list items, whereas shorter lists may.be
4. Time spent on
and the amount learnt learning:
as measured
Ebbinghaus (1885) found a linear relationship between the
time spent learning
time and effort spent in by the trials required for relearning the same
over-learning is never wasted and does increase the retention of extent. He indicated that the
imeprinciple suggests that a fixed amount the material.
The total
he number of trials into which that of time is necessary to learn a fixed
time is divided, Thus massed vs. spaced amount of material
regardiess of
amount that is learnt. In verbal learning at least, practice has no effect on the
etention due to any of the other equating for degree of learning eliminates
factors (Postman, 1971).
earning or memory is the time spent on learning. Thus, the most important factor fordifference in
long lasting
Serial position effect: A powerful determinant of the
ems, is the serial position of the item. It is the ease with which a
specific item is learnt in a list of
he last few a little lesS tendency the
of subjects to learn the first few items most
ecall of initial
rapidly,
items is called the
and items just
beyond the middle, the least rapidly. The superior rapidly
primacy effect,
alled the recency effect. Always evident in a whereas superior learning and recall of the last few
the learning and
ecall or paired associates, when the serial learning task, it is also shown in other methods such items is

Mnemonics; Mnemonics aré the stimuli are

presented in a specific order. as free
here are various types of basis of many' books and commercial
mnemonics: the method of the link method, andprograms
to improve
memory.
29 Word technique is
perhaps the most
loci, the peg word
)cund that the use of peg worcds cdoeswidely. used techrnique.
mnemonic devices. Extensive investicgations. y The
increase nmerior, cipiy Wond
Gicatiy lo illember tne order ot items
 Ust
create eradicating
the
inieOTCCdOr the
probtems ecause the items
items positioned
in the
ed very oftn, performance tne peg words
themselves require time middle. Nevertheless, peg word techniquue
aterial that is more deciines
complex tian a list
over
successive Uses. Above to be learnt, and if the same peg list Is
of all mnemonics may not be
Imagery: Many mnemonics depend unrelated words. appicdDIE
stimuli as imagcs. Paivio (l971) holds that on the use of imagerv. It refers
abstract concepts (e.g.,
truth, frecdom)
coNcrete concepts
(e.g..
to the
tree)
representation or wor e
images, and nence because norse, are easier to

representations. Ihe
nave the advantage of dual concrete words are
codina, remembered both as worasiedrn d
o ntal
documentea, particulariyefficacy of imaging as an whereas abstract words may
have ony, ve
al
if the effective
images are interactina, stratecqy in learning paired associaes s
memory experts, bizarre
images do not necessarily lead However. contrary to the suggestions orn
19/2; WOlien et al., to
have been suggestions better learnina than commonplace ones uy
1972). There
prctures dre more distinctive
than words (Nelson that imagery may enhance
Controlled, and Reed. 1976). Tnterestingly, learning of
if the degreesiy
1.
the picture superiority effect
works for learning but not learningi i

ArOUsal or affectivity: A major factor in memory

encoding of information (Hasher
et
evidence for this factor al., 0
comes from a in LTM is activation or aroud
memory. AS early as 1927, Zeigarnik showed variety of sources. Generallv,
areater the arousal level Deer
pErndps Decause the tension to complete thethat task
incomplete tasks are better recalled than
competea o
Snows detter results than incidental learning. stil exists in the individual. Intentional learning
However. the difference between the two tends to cerldY
certain types of orienting instructions, which ensure a similar amount of arousal and attention
vdnis
ne suoject (Mechanic; 1964). The fact the self-referenced paid to he tdsk D
De
taken another example of the effect of arousal on verbal
as material is more easily learnt and better retdined ay
provide another kind of evidence for the superior learning (Tulving, 1970). Flashbulb menone
memory of information encoded in a highly
ielnsmith and Kaplan (1963) found that the arousal arousea stdte.
associated
Seems nave an effect on memory. Their results showed poorer response for
O with specific items in a verbal
learning task
Dut this high arousal words arter 2 mins
relationship gradualily reversed itself to show better recall of high arousal items as With increasing
time
Factors
he
in storage
storage stage is the warehousing of the information acquired. The quantity and the quality of the materiaito
be stored in the warehouse, both are important. And since there is often
of the a difference in the quantity and quality
informationthat goes into the store and later comes out of the store, researchers assume that
processing
of information continues even when it is in storage. The important factors are:
1. Capacity: As early as 1885, Ebbinghaus reported that the longest list of nonsense syllables that he could
recall coIrectly after having studied them
only once and therefore having taken them into short term memory
was 6 or 7.
Jacobs (1887) reported the immediate memory span to be 6 or 7 numbers. Most students can
accurately répeat strings of 6 or 7 numbers. In 1956, Miller published a classic paper entitled The Magical -

number 7, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity

STM has a mmony span of 7+2 items. The items may be letters,
for processing information. According to Miler (1956)
STM may be
numbers, NSS, words, etc. the capacity of the
hicreased by chunking. A collection of items. may be represented together as a single item known as
chunk. Thus' it would be more accurate to say that STM has a memory span of 7+2 chunks. The capacity cf
5TM may also.be increased by grouping items using rhythm, movements etc.
Grouping is different from chunking
n that the
individual items retain their distinct identity in the collection formed due to grouping, whereas they
are subsumed in the new node that represents a chunk. LTM does not
appear to be limited in storage capacity. It
as an unlimited capacity. Ordinary people can retain
extraordinaily large amounts of information in long-term
nemory. Shepard. (1967) presented subjects 540 words, and found that they could later recognize 88%
orrectly. Others, correctly recognized between 600 and 1200 sentences they had studied to the same extent.
'eople were 97% accurate in recognizing 600 color advertisements that they saw. Standing
eople correcty recognized 73% of the 10,000 pictures they had seen earlier. These findings as(1973)
found that
well as our own
xperience suggests that it must be extremely difficult if not impossible to reach the full capacity of long term
emory.
2. Time limits: It is the time for which information is retained that is the
etween sensory, short term and long term
primary basis of the distinctions
memory. There is a rapid decay in sensory memory. The experiment
y Peterson, and Peterson (1956) demonstrated how
terval. Nearly:10% forgetting occurred after three
forgetting increases with an increase in the retention
seconds,
Conds. Though the time limit associated with STM is 30
50% after 6 seconds, and more than 90% after 18
seconds, information can be retained in STM
definitely if the subject uses maintenance rehearsal, i.e.,repeats the cognitive activity on the informatioit aa
i a Tre is no fune livnit in
g-term meImory. Tlicoreticailv, if other informatinn does rot intorfnr it

. ..
 uf tine
D, C L
IIUV A,
UiVII 1
information
over long peiods ine. (i
11,
PAPER
retain
ordinary people
DA

Even
there forever.
in LTM is
maintenance_rehearsl
information uses
it, if the subject in STM
STM indefinitely the
intormation
et a, 1975).
Information can be retained in and again.
However,
Rehearsal: information again and more thoroUgh analysis
3. on the deeper
cognitive activity that involves a
repeats he the L1M through elaborative rehearsal
to of the world as
transferred Lockhart, 1972). veridical representation
and It is
information. (Craik
not encode the
information. a
though other
kinds
of codino
Sensory memory does (sound) codes Conrad (1964), a c o u s t i c . Of
these,
4 Coding: is stored in STM primarily in acoustic semantic, VIsual,
and
iS. Information at least three ways:
also be used. Information
in LTM is coded in
may
maximum use is made of semanticcodesS. order from the order
in which they
the items in a different
often recalls show the influence
5. Organization ofmaterial: The subject variables, or it may
of material may be dictated by the task often, however, Ciustering
are presented. Ihis organization the serial position may show its effects. More
or
subjective variables. Some times, common Concept or category
are mutual associates (BOY, GIRL)
or members of a
words oT _ubjective
oCcurs because Miller (1956) used the term chunking to describe the developrment
CARROI, LETTUCE, BRINJAL). memory can hold only 7+2 chunks
ata time. ulving
orgahizations of various sorts, and held that the short-term settie down. to a Ixed
(sbo) demonstrated that on successive free recall trials of the same set of words, people Each individuals
order on each trial.
Sequence in recall even though the list itself is presented in a different
Mandler (19/0) argues
sequence is different and reflects the principles of organization unique to that person. dictated by
tat most people show a consensus in subjective organization and follow the organization thne naure
Or tne taSK, despite the fact that memory is hierarchical in organization. It is for this reason the cued recall is
better than free recall. Another evidence for organization of stored material is reconstruction studied
extensively by Bartlett (1937). Reconstruction refers to the way a subject organizes a lengthy, ambiguous plece
ofinformation, by inventing links and details that make the memory more coherent and logical. (In Englíish this is
called reminiscence, though the term has an altogether different meaning in psychology). Researchers are not
Sure whether reconstruction occurs during storage with consolidation, or it takes place at the time of retrieyal.

Factors in Retrieval:
Retrieval is the process of bringing information out of memory.
A number of factors are important at this stage:
1. Search strateay: The
kind of strategy used for memory search in short term memory was investigatd
Sternberg (1966) using a probe technique. He foiund that as the length of the list increases, the time takeñ by by
the subject to respond also increases.
Corisequently he_concluded that search in SIM was serial rather than
parallel. He also found that time taken to respond was not affected by the position of the probe item in the.list.
This suggests that memory search is exhaustive and not
self-terminating. The retrieval of information from LTM
has to be through a parallel, self-terminating search process and depends on retrieval cues.
.

Retrieva Cues: Retrieval of information from the huge warehouse that is LTM is largely with the 'help of
retrieval_ cues. Retrieval cues prompt people to remember hy specifying the goal of memory search, and by
directing their generation and evaluation of possible answers. Information may be available in memory
accessible (as happens during blackout in because
but.not
exams) cues are not specified for the memory search.
Sometimes the cues specified may not be appropriate because they are not specific enough and this may result
retrieval inhibition or blocking (Stern, 1985). Then people use secondary retrieval cues,.
3. Encoding specificity: Experiencing an event implies that a number of aspects of the event are
xample, the time, location, features of the setting, people involved, actions during the event, andencoded
so oh.. The
encoding specificity hypothesis says that retrieval cues will be effective to the extent that they
ncodings. Evidence for this hypothesis comes from studies of_state dependency and context match these
dependency.
lependency (Eich, 1980) is the fact that recall improves when people try to recall information the' same State
in
hysiological state as they were when they first learnt the information. Thus, what people learn while they are
toxicated is better recalled when they are intoxicated; what they learn under the influence of
marijuana is
etter remembered under the influence of marijuana; information learnt standing or lying down, is better
anding and lying down respectively; and information learnt in a happy or sad mood is best recalled
remembered in the
ame mood. Context dependency refers to the fact that memory is also influenced by contextual cues from.the
vironment. Godden and Baddeley (1975) used 16 members of a
diving club as subjects. They demonstrated
iat when lists of words were learnt on land, they were better recalled on land and if they were learnt
ater, they were better recalled underwater. under
4. RecencY: It is no secret that
forgetting
occurs, and the probability that an item will be reproduced
th an increase in the interval of time since it is
learnt. In fact, so great is the effect of rerency as decreases
hal arning that the subjc.ct fharclly ever responis w.i sho4
that is ioi iii iie ist he:ng earnr h
 d, tendency supposedly governed by a
WIi 30 subjects selector mechanism. Underwood
!fic made
uitse eTors was a word that 1424 errors during 15 trials of (1964) cites an
unpu ished
spnse was carnary did not practice
appear elsewhere in the list.
on 16
pairs of common one
Someone said yellow cori rect
whereas the O
ecioic
eca orgetting in sensory memory is
memory lasts about 4 seconus. largely due to decay. The icon disappears and
Since meaning is not within d
seo
OCCurs due to
decay as well as interference. The processea, tnere can De no
Eonstrated how
forgetting increases with
experiment by Petersoninterne
and Petersorn 1956)
diter three an increase
seconds, 50% after 6 seconds, and more than in the retention interval. Nearly 10%%
TOr
decay. 90% after 18 seconds. This is oftenforgeting O
'Tt was initially that all experiences are encoded in the
felt taken
as Evue
Qrdn. However, brain in the form of a
memory trace e
rigorous research revealed that experiences have no
nere are
changes in brain
activity of specific areas as the
specific neurons associated WItn them.
not
permanent and leave no traces behind. In his book Ininformation is being processed, but these changes are
search of an engram Lashley (1950) mentions
einoving specific parts of a rat's brain affected his behaviour, but did not totally eliminate that
oncudea that if at all they are stored in the brain, memories are distributed throughout specific memories.
the brain. There He
is
nardly any experimentàl evidence either of
decay in LTM. In fact findings contradict the idea of decay. For
example, Ballard (1913) found that a poem was recalled better after two days rather than immediately
Edning;an effect calledreminiscence. Payne (1987) found evidence for hypermnesia when he found arter
SuDjects repeatedly tested on the same material, may recall that
These finding suggest that a material on later tests that they did not recall
earlier.
consolidation of the trace probably occurs with time.
.
nterterence: Forgetting in STM as well as LTM occurs mainly due to interference proactive as well as
retroactive: Interference refers to the influence of one task on another task. Interference increases due to
Similarity of the two tasks, greater amount of learning, etc.
interferes with. old learning. Proactive interference Retroactive interference occurs when new learning
occurs when old learning interferes with new learning. If
dissimilar material is introduced in an
experiment on any trial, the level of retention for that trial rises to the
same high ievel as for the first trial. The proactive interference built up over the
called previous trials disappears. Thisis
releasefrom_ proactive interference (Wickens, 1972). LTM being semantically organized, release from
proactive interference, demonstrated in STM, may have even imore relevance in LTM.

General factors:
These factors are studied irrespective of the stages of memory:
1 Pathological conditions: Loss of memory may be shown because destruction of brain tissueor diseased
conditions, e.g., Shock, amnesia, Korsakoff's syndrome, Alzheimer's disorder etc. this loss of memory mat be of
two kinds: In anterograde
amnesia, the person remembers old experiences, but cannot learn from new
experiences In retroqrade amnesia he does not remember the past, but can function quite effectively in the
present. Amnesia may be total or partial.
2.
Psychodynamicfactors: Freudian theory divides mind not according to temporal stability of the memories
therein, but according to the levels of consciniusness. The TOT or
information is available but not accessible. Psychoanalysts believe tip-of-tongue phenomenon shows that often
in the subconscious, but it has not crossed the
that, in such cases, the information is available
threshold to consciousness. According to
of forgetting is Freud, the major cause
repression. It implies the relegation of psychologically harmful material to the unconscious. It is
the unconscious suppression of
negative desires, experiences, emotions etc. repression is however, seldom
Cornplete and/or permanent, and the repressed material keeps trying to gain admission to
showr by slips pf tongue, slips of pen, dreams, etc. a more serious evidence is functional consciousness which
as

extensive loss of memory due to no apparent amnesia, is a,

that he is amnesic for the period involving that
physiological reason. The person is so fearful of the experience
3. Type of
experience.
method: The type of method used can also be a factor in memory. Luh (1922) conducted a study to
compare the various methods of memory to find that
relearning is the most sensitive method of assessing
memory because it can show even those small amounts of retention that are
not shown by recognition or recall
ests. Generally, relearning is the most
4. Type of
sensitive, followed by recognition, followed by
recall
memory: The type of memory being tested can also be a factor in memory. Amnesics, for example,
show intact memory on certain kinds of
nemories. Squire (1985) distinguishes tasksTuing. 1972) distinguishes hetween episodic and semantic
distinction between explicit and
between procedural and declarativë memories. Schacter
(1987) makes
implicit memory. Procedural and implicit memories, often considered
spects of semantic memory, remain intact in amnesics.

inenory is a (neY nspert of human !ehavin lat is orn!ly beginniy to Ee idrstO0d yel.
 retentiou is calle: inierierence. The inte:ference '
g a e inpact of connpEting intonmation
on
i H e fo:get information h to competition from olher matcria
inte:ference: (a ses VCiTHY oS%.
ü er:acd (192 orientecd vi the ton U

givi p::1i corthS syli: So: Di j C s SI aiLr

::y Oi itcicrtice
G S y C atake hid a poor recal! of tlie syllalse, Wlle li sirciing s i i c : l s 1enienereo ihe syij
bt 7hscoukthaveocured by the fact that the slccpling subjecis had no i.ke.crernce during tne experini

and the other subjecsdid.

Thus, interference refers to the influence of one task on anotner task.

araner et al (1972) discovered that interference causes problems with the retrieval process in memory
a n CncOdi . rel
They found that, if someone was given hcadings to a list of words that thcy had to remiCnott, t
adc dierence ta the numb:er
of words tli: they recalled later in tie exp::rimerit.

The io of the retention curve depends in pa.1 on what ieasure is ised. The h:e most freauenruseu
nes ere recali, reiearning, and recognition.

Lon hang
**

Shas

- ****** "

(
.