Running head: RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE 1

The Effect of Retroactive Interference on Short-term Memory Recall

Ella Marie Florida

Angelica S. Galang

Janela Danica R. Gutierrez

Elizabeth Gail S. Hernandez

Kaye Angeline H. Jimenez

Junyeon Kim

Nikki P. Lacayanga

Lance Reiner P. Layton

University of Santo Tomas

2 RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

Abstract

The experiment determined the effect of interference on the retrieval of short-term memory. The

tested hypothesis was that the number of recalled words by the experimental group is less than

the average of the control group due to the interference of reading materials. The participants

consist of 44 third year psychology students separated into two groups. They had a number of

words flashed to them, with the time interval between the flashing of words being the same for

both groups. After that, the experimental groups read some short articles (in the form of comic

strips) for five minutes after the flashing of words, while the control group was simply asked to

remain seated. Then, the participants received a piece of paper in which they were to write down

as many words as they can recall from the flashcards that were previously shown to them. The

hypothesis was non-significant due to the obtained value being lower than the critical value. The

results showed that, despite having no interference, the number of words recalled by the control

group did not significantly differ from the number of words recalled by the experimental group.

Keywords: Interference, memory recall, short-term memory

RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE 3

Imagine you are taking up a psychology course that is very similar from the one you took

last term. You may have difficulty in remembering the concepts in the course you are currently

taking due to the interference with similar information that you learned in the psychology course

you took last term. You may also have a hard time remembering how your former math teacher

taught you on how to divide fractions because your current math teacher teaches you a different

way to do it. Proactive interference explained the first situation while retroactive interference

explained the second.

There are several different causes for forgetting (Wood, E.G., Wood, S., & Boyd, D., 2013).

First is encoding failure wherein information was never stored in the long-term memory which

caused the inability of recalling information. Second is the decay theory which assumes that

memories fade with time when not used. The third and the last factor, interference, is the major

cause of forgetting (Wood, E.G. et al., 2013). In interference theory proposed that newly encoded

information hinders the retrieval of previously encoded information (Alduais, 2015). The two

types of interference are proactive interference and retroactive interference. Proactive

interference happens when there is a difficulty in acquiring new information due to previously

learned knowledge. The latter type, which is retroactive interference, happens when new

information intervenes in the retrieval of an old learning (Alduais, 2015).

Glassman and Hadad (2013) further discussed retroactive interference mostly based on

works of Jenkins & Dallenbach (1924). It states that, in this experiment, students are more likely

to experience retroactive interference when they find that the new learning intervenes with

remembering the past learning. In the experiment, two groups of people underwent a recall

testing. One group went to sleep after the learning session while the other group went about their

daily activities. The sleep group showed better recall after they were tested with the same
4 RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

interval of time. This is due to the fact that daily activities created more interference than

sleeping (Glassman & Hadad, 2013).

Moreover, creating and storing new long-term memories, before it appears in your brain as a

well-established form, requires a period in which memories undergo an important process known

as consolidation- the more permanent establishment of memories (Ashcraft & Radvansky, 2014).

However, too many competing associations may lead to difficulty in retrieving informations

even though these informations are stored in the long-term memory (Glassman & Hadad, 2013).

Meanwhile, Keresztes and Racsmny (2012) studied the interference resolution in retrieval-

induced forgetting. In this experiment, the participants went through four phases; a study, a

retrieval practice, a delay, and a test phase. For the study phase, the participants were shown 44

category-member pairs and were asked to remember the members with the help of category cues.

After the study phase, the participants now received instructions for the retrieval practice phase.

The instruction was to press the response button as soon as they have recalled a correct answer.

A 5-minute two-back task was given as a delay before the test. Finally, the test phase, which

consisted of 44 trials, tested the memory for all of the category members. After the experiment,

results showed that retrieval of target memories induced forgetting of competing items only

when the targets were recalled with moderate retrieval.

This suggests that processes resolving interference during recall lead to forgetting (Keresztes

& Racsmny, 2012).

This experiment aims to determine the difference between the accuracy in the recall of

previous information when interference or recent information is presented, and when there is a

lack of it. In line with the results of previous studies aforementioned, it is hypothesized that the

rate of recall is reduced when participants are presented with new information.
RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE 5

Method

Participants

The participants consist of 44 undergraduate psychology students from the college of science in

the University of Santo Tomas. The study included 14 males and 33 females, randomly assigned

to either experimental or control group.

Materials

The experiment used 20 different stimulus words printed on 20 different cards. In addition to the

20 stimulus words and five different articles or reading material. A pen, response sheets, and a

stopwatch were also used for the study.

Procedure

The participants divided into two groups, one set of participants stayed inside the room, while

the other set of participants left the room and waited for further instructions. Before the

experiment began, consisting of six to seven people per group the participants grouped into three.

The general instruction was to write the response in all capital letters. Afterwards, the

participants read each stimulus word silently with an interval of two seconds per word. The

participants silently read an article for five minutes. When the time was over, the participants

passed the articles and with a pen, the participants wrote on the response sheet their names,

section, and date of the experiment. For one minute, the participants wrote all the words they

could remember in any order. Afterwards, the participants left the room through the other door

and waited for further instructions. Subsequently, the next set of participants entered the room.

Thereafter, the participants also read the same set of stimulus words silently under the same

interval of two seconds. After which, the participants relaxed and waited for five minutes.
6 RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

Participants wrote down their names, section, and date of the experiment in the response sheets.

Then the participants wrote all the words they could recall in any order as much as they could

remember. The participants stopped writing after one minute and passed their paper in front. All

the participants went inside to check the papers.

Design

The study used Between-group design, with two groups (control and experimental). The

independent variable (IV) manipulated in the study was the presence of the article or reading

material to be read by the experimental group. The experiment measured the number of correctly

recalled words for both control and experimental groups making it the dependent variable (DV)

for this study.

Results

The experimental group (N = 22) that was presented reading material got the mean of

score of 6.68(SD = 2.64). By comparison, the control group (N = 22) got the mean of score of

7.45(SD = 1.65). To test the hypothesis that the rate of recall is reduced when participants are

presented with new information, an independent samples t-test was conducted. Our hypothesis

was non-significant because the obtained value was less than the critical value

(1.76<2.018).
RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE 7

APPENDIX

TABLES

Table 1
8 RECALL AND RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

Table 2