Fractatious
Posts: 103
Joined: May 2006
|
| Quote (sir_toejam @ May 28 2006,07:00) | | do you have the full reference to Eysenck, 2004?E |
Eysenck, Michael W. (2004). An international perspective. New York: Psychology Press Ltd. (ISBN: 1-84169-361-8).
Chapter 9 - Human Memory (Theories of Forgetting).
Interference Theory
Interference theory can be traced back to Hugo Munsterberg in the nineteenth century. For many years, he kept his pocket watch in one particular pocket. When he started keeping it in a different pocket, he often fumbled about in confusion when asked for the time. He had learned an association between the stimulus, "What time is it, Hugo?", and the response of removing the watch from his pocket. Later on, the stimulus remained the same but a different response was now associated with it.
According to interference theory, our ability to remember what we are currently learning can be disrupted (or interfered with) either by what we have previously learned or by subsequent learning. When previous learning interferes with our memory of later learning, we have proactive interference (as shown in the case of Munsterberg and his pocket watch). When later learning disrupts memory for earlier learning, there is retroactive interference. Proactive and retroactive interference are both maximal when two different responses have been associated with the same stimulus; intermediate when two stimulus reponses have been associated with the same stimulus; and minimal when two different stimulus are involved (Underwood & Postman, 1960). (p. 306).
The role of conceptual recoding in reducing children's retroactive interference.
Howe ML.
Lakehead University, Department of Psychology, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada. mark.howe@lakeheadu.ca
Reductions in children's retroactive interference were examined with conceptual recoding. Children learned two 10-item lists of toys; items on the 2nd list could also be classified as vehicles. Some children were not told about this 2nd category, whereas others were told either at the end of acquisition or just prior to the retention test 24 hr later. The results showed that (a) children benefited from the recoding instruction, (b) younger but not older children failed to benefit from the recoding manipulation when it occurred just prior to the retention test, and © recoding reduced retroactive interference primarily through affecting storage processes. These results provide new evidence concerning the importance of making information distinctive in storage in children's retention. (© 2004 APA, all rights reserved) (Source)
I'm just currently reading through my Clinical Child Psychology (Walker and Roberts) book (3 inches thick) yay me.
|
