December 30, 1899

PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTICAM
Experiment #3: Retroactive Inhibition

Submitted to: MS. Bakhtawar

Submitted by: Beenish Afzal
Date of submission: 13-12-2024

Institute of Professional Psychology

Bahria University
Karachi.

1
 December 30, 1899

Work division:
Introduction by: Beenish and Manahil
Historical background by: Beenish and Manahil
Method and procedure by: Beenish and Manahil

2
 December 30, 1899

Experiment #3: RETROACTIVE INHIBITION

Introduction
Definitions:
 Memory:
1. Memory involves the mechanisms through which information is acquired, stored,
maintained, and later retrieved. It is fundamental to cognitive processes, allowing for
the continuity of experiences and supporting the capacity for learning. (George A.
Miller, 1956)
2. The concept of memory refers to the collection of processes that facilitate the storage,
retention, and retrieval of information. This can be understood through a model that
comprises sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory. (Richard
Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin, 1968)

 Retroactive inhibition
1. Retroactive inhibition takes place when recently learned information disrupts the
retention or retrieval of information that was acquired earlier, resulting in a
diminished capacity to recall the prior knowledge. (McGeoch, 1932)
2. Retroactive inhibition refers to the occurrence in which the acquisition or rehearsal of
new information disrupts the recall or execution of information that was learned
earlier, mainly because of interference. (Underwood, 1957)

Explanation:
 What is memory?
Memory serves as a fundamental cognitive capability that permits individuals to
accumulate, preserve, and later access information from their past experiences. It is
integral to learning, decision-making, and perception, empowering individuals to
navigate new situations based on their prior knowledge. Memory is not merely a singular
function; it encompasses a range of interconnected processes and systems that
collectively manage the storage and recall of information.
Endel Tulving asserts that memory can be understood as a system that categorizes and
preserves information in multiple formats for later retrieval. He identified different types
of memory, particularly episodic memory, which involves the recall of personal
experiences and events, and semantic memory, which relates to general knowledge and
facts. Tulving emphasized that memory is not a singular construct but a sophisticated
system in which various types of information are processed, stored, and retrieved in
unique ways. (Endel Tulving, 1972)

 Three processes of memory:

Memory involves three key processes: encoding, storage, and retrieval. These processes
are essential for the retention and use of information, ensuring that experiences and
knowledge can be accessed when needed.

3
 December 30, 1899

1. Encoding:
Encoding refers to the procedure of transforming sensory information into a format
suitable for storage in memory. This process encompasses the selection, organization,
and conversion of data into neural codes that the brain is capable of interpreting. The
effectiveness of encoding is influenced by various factors, including the level of
attention, the emotional relevance of the information, and the depth of processing
involved. (Craik & Lockhart, 1972)
2. Storage:
Storage involves the retention of encoded information over time. This information
can be stored in multiple memory systems, such as sensory memory, short-term
memory, and long-term memory. Whether information is maintained in long-term
memory or lost is influenced by the way it is processed. (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968)
3. Retrieval:
Retrieval is the process through which stored information is accessed. The success of
retrieval is contingent upon the availability of retrieval cues and the strength of the
memory trace. (Tulving, 1983)

 Diagram (stages of memory):

 Memory types:
Memory is generally categorized into three distinct stages: sensory memory, short-term
memory, and long-term memory. Each stage corresponds to different processes of
memory encoding and retention.

1. Sensory Memory:
Sensory memory serves as a temporary repository for sensory information, including
visual and auditory stimuli. It enables individuals to hold onto raw sensory input for a
brief duration before determining whether to transfer this information to short-term
memory. (Neisser, 1967)

4
 December 30, 1899

2. Short-term memory:
Short-term memory is responsible for retaining a limited quantity of information for a
short duration, typically ranging from 20 to 30 seconds, unless the information is
actively rehearsed. The capacity of short-term memory is restricted, but it can be
enhanced through techniques such as chunking. (Miller, 1956)
3. Long-term memory:
Long-term memory functions as a more enduring storage system, capable of
accommodating substantial amounts of information over extended periods. It
encompasses the retention of acquired skills, factual knowledge, and personal
experiences. (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968)

 Types of long-term memory:

Long-term memory can be categorized into two distinct types: declarative and non-
declarative memory, each fulfilling unique roles in the retention of information.

1. Declarative Memory:
Declarative memory, often referred to as explicit memory, encompasses the
intentional recollection of information. It is further divided into episodic memory,
which pertains to personal experiences, and semantic memory, which relates to
general knowledge and information.
a) Episodic Memory:
This category of memory captures personal experiences and specific events,
including contextual details such as time, location, and emotional significance.
An example would be recalling the day of one’s wedding or a memorable
family trip.
b) Semantic memory:
Semantic memory pertains to the retention of general knowledge and facts
about the world, including names, concepts, and word meanings. This type of
memory is independent of personal experiences and is based on acquired
information.
(Tulvin, 1972)
2. Non-Declarative Memory:
Non-declarative memory, also known as implicit memory, involves the unconscious
recollection of skills and habits, such as riding a bicycle or playing a musical
instrument. This category includes procedural memory, which is essential for the
learning and execution of motor skills.
a) Procedural Memory:
This type of memory is responsible for the retention of skills and actions, such
as cycling or typing. These abilities are developed through practice and
repetition, allowing them to be performed automatically once mastered.

(Squire, 1992)

5
 December 30, 1899

 Theories of forgetting:
Forgetting is the loss of information from memory, and several theories aim to explain
why forgetting occurs.
1. Decay Theory:
Decay Theory posits that memories diminish over time because of the mere passage
of time and insufficient rehearsal. In the absence of reinforcement or recall, these
memories gradually fade away. (Thorndike, 1914)
2. Interference Theory:
Interference Theory asserts that forgetting is influenced by interference from other
pieces of information. This theory identifies two forms of interference: proactive
interference, where older memories hinder the recall of newer ones, and retroactive
interference, where newer memories impede the retrieval of older ones. (McGeoch,
1932)
3. Retrieval Failure Theory:
Retrieval Failure Theory suggests that information may be stored in memory yet
remain inaccessible due to a lack of retrieval cues. This theory indicates that while
information may still exist within memory, it cannot be retrieved without the
necessary cues. (Tulving & Pearlstone, 1966)
Historical background:
 Old research
Title: The Effects of Interference on Learning and Memory
Author: J. A. McGeoch (1932)
In 1932, J. A. McGeoch conducted a significant study examining the impact of
interference on memory, particularly how the acquisition of new information can disrupt
the recall of previously learned content. His research provided compelling evidence for
the concept of retroactive inhibition, indicating that new learning can hinder the retrieval
of older memories. The experiments revealed that when participants encountered new
material following the initial learning phase, their ability to remember the original
information was notably reduced. This investigation built upon the foundational work of
Müller and Pilzecker (1900) and played a crucial role in establishing retroactive
inhibition as a fundamental phenomenon in the field of memory research. Additionally,
McGeoch’s findings contributed to a more comprehensive understanding of interference
theory, which asserts that forgetting is often a result of interference from either prior or
subsequent learning experiences.

 Recent research:
Title: The Mechanisms Underlying Interference and Inhibition: A Review of Current
Behavioral and Neuroimaging Research
Authors: Kliegl, O., & Bäuml, K.-H. T. (2021)
Recent studies have enhanced the comprehension of retroactive inhibition by utilizing
advanced neuroimaging methods to investigate the underlying neural mechanisms. In a
review published in 2021, Kliegl and Bäuml emphasized the significant involvement of
the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex in retroactive inhibition. Their findings indicate
that retroactive inhibition is not simply a passive interference with memory; rather, it is

6
 December 30, 1899

an active, goal-oriented process in which new information can effectively hinder the
retrieval of previously learned material. This research offers valuable insights into how
specific brain regions may manage interference and posits that the mechanisms of
retroactive inhibition could be vital for understanding memory-related conditions,
including Alzheimer's disease. The authors advocate for additional research to explore
how these neural mechanisms operate over time and under different cognitive
circumstances, highlighting the intricate nature of retroactive inhibition and its wider
implications for memory and learning.
Problem:
To study the phenomena of retroactive inhibition by means of the experimental method
Hypothesis:
The subject will forget more when he/she spend the time interval between learning and recall in
learning another list.
Independent variable:
1. The list of nonsense syllables.
2. The interpolated activity i.e. the learning of list B
Dependent variable:
1. The amount of saving/ retention or forgetting of the first list.
2. The number of re-learning trials
Method and procedure:
1. Particulars of the subject:

NAME AGE GENDER QUALIFICATION

Manahil 20 Female Undergraduate

2. Material and apparatus:

List of words, stop watch, pencil, and memory drum
3. Controls
 Syllables should not repeated
 Noise should be avoided with in the room
 difficulty level of each list should be same
 List must be kept hidden from the subject

7
 December 30, 1899

Procedure:

There are two distinct conditions in this experiment: a control condition and an experimental
condition. In the control condition, the participant is tasked with learning List A, which
comprises nonsensical syllables. Subsequently, the participant undergoes a 10-minute rest period
during which no learning occurs. Following this interval, the participant is required to recall List
A, allowing for the assessment of material retention without any intervening activities. In the
experimental condition, the participant initially learns List B. This is followed by the learning of
List C, which acts as an interpolated task that induces retroactive inhibition. This phenomenon
arises as the new information from List C disrupts the recall of List B. After the completion of
List C, the participant is prompted to recall List B, and the performance in this recall task is
evaluated. The comparison between the two conditions illustrates the detrimental effect of
retroactive inhibition on memory recall.

 Control condition

Learn list A> rest for 10 minutes> recall list A

 Experimental condition

Learn list B> interpolated activity learn list C>recall List B

Instructions to subject:

A series of non-sense syllables will be shown to you through a window in the memory drum. A
non-sense syllable is a combination of three letters without any meaning. After the list has been
presented once, the syllables will be shown again, but this time your task is to anticipate each
syllable i.e. to spell it out before it appears in the window. You are to spell out the first syllable
before it appears then second and so on through the entire list. We shall continue this procedure
until you have spelled out each syllable correctly on the same trial.”

Introspective report:
 Control condition:(Subject: Myself)
In the control condition, I was tasked with memorizing List A, which consisted of
nonsensical syllables. Upon completing the learning process, I was afforded a 10-minute
rest period, enabling me to consolidate the information prior to attempting recall.
Subsequently, I was prompted to retrieve List A from memory. During the learning
phase, I employed visualization mnemonics by linking each syllable to an image or a
familiar object, believing that this technique would facilitate a mental connection with the
material. Additionally, I repeated the syllables several times, rehearsing them throughout
the rest period. Despite these strategies, I encountered difficulties in recalling all the
syllables, as their nonsensical nature rendered them more challenging to remember.
Although the 10-minute rest period aided in retaining some of the information, it became
evident that memory was not entirely effective without meaningful associations.
 Experimental condition: (Subject: Manahil)
8
 December 30, 1899

In the experimental condition, Manahil began by learning List B. Following this, she
immediately engaged in learning List C, which served as an interpolated task intended to
induce retroactive inhibition. This phenomenon occurs when new information interferes
with the recall of previously acquired knowledge. After completing the learning of List
C, Manahil was asked to recall List B. To learn List B, Manahil utilized a combination of
chunking and visualization techniques. She organized similar-sounding syllables into
groups and visualized each group as a unique object or scene. However, after the
introduction of List C, she had trouble in recalling List B. She attributed this challenge to
the interference created by the new learning task, which obstructed her ability to retrieve
the earlier list. This situation clearly illustrated the impact of retroactive inhibition, as her
recall was significantly impaired by the intervening learning activity.
Both conditions highlight how different factors, such as mnemonic techniques and
interference, affect memory recall. In the control condition, I was able to retain some of
List A using visualization and repetition, though the abstract nature of the material still
presented challenges. Meanwhile, in the experimental condition, Manahil’s performance
was significantly affected by retroactive inhibition after learning List C, supporting the
concept that new learning can impair the recall of previously learned information.
Hypothesis:
The subject will forget more when he/she spend the time interval between learning and recall in
learning another list.
Proof of hypothesis:
The hypothesis was proven true, as the subject who spent the interval between learning and recall
in learning another list experienced more forgetting. The experimental condition demonstrated
how retroactive inhibition led to poorer recall compared to the control condition, confirming the
impact of interference on memory retention.

Discussion of the results:

The experiment aimed to explore the phenomenon of retroactive inhibition, based on the
hypothesis that "the subject will forget more when they spend the time interval between learning
and recall in learning another list." To test this, two conditions were set: the control condition
and the experimental condition. In the control condition, the subject learned and recalled List A
followed by a 10-minute rest period before recalling it. In the experimental condition, the subject
first learned List B, then learned List C, and subsequently recalled List B. The hypothesis
predicted that learning List C would interfere with the recall of List B, resulting in greater
forgetting in the experimental condition.
The results supported the hypothesis. The subject's recall of List B in the experimental condition
was significantly poorer than the recall of List A in the control condition, suggesting that the
intervening task (List C) caused interference and retroactive inhibition. The subject struggled to
recall List B, with many items from List C interfering with the original material, which
highlights the impact of retroactive inhibition on memory recall.

9
 December 30, 1899

This finding is consistent with the early work of McGeoch (1932), who first demonstrated
retroactive inhibition, noting that new learning could interfere with the recall of previously
learned material. Similarly, Underwood (1957) found that retroactive inhibition was more
prominent when the new material shared similarities with the original material, further
supporting the idea that the interference between List B and List C led to the observed forgetting.

Comparison of both conditions:

CONDITION LEARNING TASK INTERFERENCE RECALL

PERFORMANCE
CONTROL List A (followed by No interference Relatively higher recall
10 min rest)
EXPERIMENTAL List B (followed by Retroactive Inhibition Significantly lower recall
List C)

This comparison supports the hypothesis that the learning of a second list during the retention
period can lead to greater forgetting of the first list. The experimental condition showed a clear
decrease in recall performance compared to the control condition, demonstrating that
interference caused by the intervening task was detrimental to memory retention.
Support from Literature
The results are consistent with previous research on retroactive inhibition. McGeoch (1932) first
introduced the concept, suggesting that when new information is learned soon after a previous
learning task, it can disrupt the ability to recall the first list. This finding is supported by other
studies, such as those by Underwood (1957), who concluded that retroactive interference is a
significant factor in forgetting, particularly when the intervening material is similar in nature to
the original information.
In the context of this experiment, the nonsense syllables used in both lists represent material that
lacks inherent meaning, making them more susceptible to interference. As Manahil’s recall of
List B was impaired after learning List C, it aligns with the idea that retroactive inhibition is
stronger when the material being learned is abstract or difficult to form strong associations with,
which makes it more prone to interference.
Conclusion:
The hypothesis was confirmed: learning a second list (List C) between the learning and recall of
the first list (List B) resulted in more forgetting. The subject's performance in recalling List B
was hindered by the interference from List C, aligning with the theory of retroactive inhibition.
These findings suggest that interference plays a crucial role in memory retention, particularly
when new information disrupts the recall of earlier learned material. The results reinforce the
understanding of memory as a dynamic system that is sensitive to interference, supporting
previous research on retroactive inhibition.

10
 December 30, 1899

LIST A
Experimental Condition
Key: + = learned, - = not learned

LIST A LEARNING PHASE RECALL (after

learning list B)
T1 T2 T3 TRIAL 1
Toc + + + +
Vik - + + +
Zul + + + +
Rim - + + +
Mes + + + -
Kop + + + +
Baj + + + -
Neb + + + +
Luz - + + +
Fal + + + -
Time 5 min 10 sec 3 min 45 sec 1 min

LIST B

LIST B TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2 TRIAL 3

Tiz + + +
Mup + + +
Lop + + +
Kes + + +
Rad + + +
Wam - + +
Pon - + +
Jas + + +
Bir + + +
Gus + + +
TIME 1 min 57 sec 54 sec 23 sec

11
 December 30, 1899

LIST C
Control Condition

LIST C LEARNING PHASE RECALL

PHASE (after
10 min break)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 T1
Yal + + + +
Del + + + +
Tob + + + +
Fum - + + +
Pir + + + +
Nex - + + +
Pox + + + -
Juk + + + +
Hil + + + -
mel - + + +
Time 1 min 34 sec 30 sec 22 sec 15 sec

LIST OF NON-SENSE SYLLABLES:

LIST A LIST B LIST C

Toc Tiz Yal
Vik Mup Del
Zul Lop Tob
Rim Kes Fum
Mes Rad Pir
Kop Wam Nex
Baj Pon Pox
Neb Jas Juk
Luz Bir Hil
Fal Gus mel

12
 December 30, 1899

References:
1. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. (H. A.
Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). The Psychological Review, 3(1), 1-57.
2. McGeoch, J. A. (1932). The effects of interference on the learning and retention of
verbal material. Psychological Review, 39(6), 441-457.
3. Underwood, B. J. (1957). Interference and forgetting. Psychological Review, 64(1),
49-60.
4. Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-
6613(00)01538-2
5. Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In Organization of memory (pp.
381-403). Academic Press.
6. Schmeichel, B. J. (2010). Self-regulation and the extended control of action. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(4), 617-634.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019011
7. Wixted, J. T. (2004). The psychology and neurobiology of forgetting. Annual Review
of Psychology, 55(1), 235-269.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141503
8. Lupien, S. J., McEwen, B. S., Gunnar, M. R., & Heim, C. (2009). Effects of stress
throughout the lifespan on the brain, behaviour and cognition. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 10(6), 434-445. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2639
9. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on
our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158

Memory Drum/ picture of memory drum

13