Running head: RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL

The Implication of Retroactive Interference in Memory Retrieval

Anna Margarita A. Hernandez
Fatima Ariesa Ulyzziz U. Hussin
Andrea Luisa C. Javier
Czarina Mae B. Labrador
Rose Ann B. Licup
Mary Grace B. Magalong
Alyxia G. Mapue
University of Santo Tomas

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 2

Abstract
The experiment aims to determine whether interference affects short term memory recall. To
test this, participants were divided into two groups namely the experimental group and control
group. Both groups were presented 20 stimulus words one at a time, with each word displayed
for two seconds. Afterwards, the experimental group was given articles which served as the
interference while the control group received none. Both groups were then instructed to write
down all the words they can recall from the presented list of words for one minute. The results
showed that the difference between the average number of words recalled by the experimental
group (M=5.69, SD=3.79) and the control group (M=7.20, SD=3.99) was minimal; (t (30) =
1.425, p>.05)There is no significant difference between the average number of words recalled
by the two groups. Thus, interference does not greatly affect short term memory recall.
Keywords: short term memory, interference, recall

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 3

The Implication of Retroactive Interference to Memory Retrieval
Memory plays a vital role in everyday life. According to Poirier et al. (2014) one of the
most fundamental functions that memory performs is allowing the past to support and guide our
present interactions with the world. Although, Occasional memory lapses are common at any
age, some types of memory stay the same or even continue to improve with age and time, such
as semantic memory (WHO, 2012). Time plays a prominent role in determining how well we
remember but, forgetting does not depend on time, but on interfering events that occur in time
(Oberauer & Lewandowsky, 2008). With that knowledge, it is important to note the different
factors why forgetting occurs and why memory retention decreases with certain interferences.
Mental tasks, such as reading, done in between the experiment could generate
forgetting. Regardless if the mental tasks and the recalled stimuli were dissimilar, the said
effects would still arise. This phenomenon was later termed as retroactive interference or RI,
which is one of the variables in this experiment (Dewar et al., 2007). To make it simple,
retroactive interference is when subsequent learning encompasses previous learning due to
interfering stimuli presented to the participant. During short-term recognition tasks, the last item
presented is accessed at a faster rate than all earlier items. The object last accessed might be
more available than the other objects simply because it was more recently used and therefore is
still activated highest (Oberauer & Bialkova, 2009). Both of these statements should support the
fact that recall of previous learning should increase if there was no retroactive interference
introduced and if interference was thus presented, memory retention would significantly
decrease.
In 2007, Dewar et al. stated that forgetting occurred due to the passage of time
accompanied by the decay of the previously learned material. Without rehearsal and the
accompaniment of interference tasks which were then labeled as retroactive interference, the
material learned became degraded which would then lead to a phonological representation so

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 4

as to reinforce the memory or material being recalled (Poirier et al., 2014). This could lead to
inclusion of certain words that is not in the assigned list but within the articles read (RI) and thus
resulting in a decreased memory retention in experiment one than in experiment two.
Items that are dissimilar to information already in memory are encoded more strongly
than items that are similar to existing information (Oberauer & Lewandowsky, 2008). Without
rehearsal, learnings rapidly become degraded in seconds due to interference or the passage of
time (Poirier et al., 2014). From these two statements we can conclude that, the participants in
the second group had more time to rehearse the materials leading to better recall than the
participants from the first group, who had no time to rehearse the materials due to interference.
To sum it up, the factors in this experiment is retroactive interference, the passage of
time and rehearsal. The purpose of this research is to determine if there is in fact a correlation
between retroactive interference and memory retention.
Method
Participants
The participants were 32 college students from the University of Santo Tomas ages 18 to
20 years old. They were randomly distributed to two groups, experimental group and control
group.
Materials
The materials used were 20 flashcards containing one stimulus word each which was
encased in laminated plastic, timer, pencil, literatures and response sheets per participant.
Design
The design used for the experiment was between-groups designs, comparing the
interference group, the experimental group, and to the non interference group, control group.
The independent variable for the experiment was the reading materials presented to the
experimental group that serves as the interference for this study while the dependent variable is

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 5

the short-term memory recall measured by number of correct words recalled by the members of
each group.
Procedure
The 32 participants from 3 Psychology 2 were equally divided into two groups through
the use of fishbowl method. The participants in interference group was first instructed to look
and remember the words that were presented to them. Twenty stimuli words were shown,
displaying each word for two seconds. The members were then given reading materials after
the last word was shown. The articles were read for five minutes only, but the participants were
not informed of the five minute limit in reading the article but instead were told that:" Just read
the articles until I give the signal to stop." After five minutes, the participants were given a
response sheet and were asked to write down in an all-capital-letter, shorthand manner, the
words they can recall from the list until they were asked to stop after one minute.
Non- interference group was given the same instructions with that of the first group, except they
did not receive any article after being shown the twenty stimulus words. Instead, they were
asked to do whatever they wanted for five minutes except for reading. The papers were
checked by the assistant experimenters. The total score of each participant was recorded.
Results
As presented in Table 1, the number of recalled words of the non interference group (M
= 7.20, SD = 3.99) is greater than the number of recalled words of the interference group (M =
5.69, SD = 3.79). t-test revealed no significant difference between the groups, t(30) = 1.425, p
> .05. Thus, interference does not greatly affect ones ability to recall.
Discussion
The aim of this experiment is to determine if interference has an effect in the ability of a
person to recall. Memory is where storage and retrieval of information takes place. Sometimes,
information is retained for long periods of time. However, recently obtained information affects

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 6

the previously learned materials. This simply means that forgetting takes place because of
interference from older memories based on the proactive interference theory.
The finding of the experiment is that interference does not affect the ability of the
participants to recall the 20 stimulus words. However, this is contradictory to the research
stating that the given stimulus could easily be degraded due to the absence of rehearsal,
through weather decay or interference (Poirier et al., 2014). Oberauer and Lewandowsky (2008)
stated that information, which could be repeated immediately after being received, is forgotten
only seconds later. Time plays a prominent role in determining how well we remember.
Forgetting does not depend on time per se but on interfering events that occur in time. The
materials and the task that intervene between presentation and recall may interfere with the tobe-remembered items, and they named this phenomenon retroactive interference.
To explain the difference between the research findings and that of other research,
thereis a limitation in this study that needs to be considered in evaluating the findings. The
gathering of data was conducted to the population of 40 students of 3rd year psychology. The
small number of respondents could be a factor to a poor result. It would have benefitted the
results if there were a larger population. For future researchers, it is recommended to take this
limitation and the previous research for the betterment of the experimentation and findings.
Brutus, Stphane et al. (2015) explained that it would be difficult to find significant relationships
from the data if there are only a small number of participants because to be able to guarantee a
representative distribution of the respondents, a larger size of respondents is required.

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 7

References
Dewar, M., Cowan, N. & Della Salla, S. (2007). Forgetting due to retroactive interference: A
fusion of early insights into everyday forgetting and recent research on anterograde
amnesia. Cortex, 43(5), 616-634.
Oberauer, K. & Bialkova, S. (2009). Accessing information in working memory: can the focus of
attention grasp two elements at the same time?. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
General, 138(1), 64-87.
Oberauer, K. & Lewandowsky, S. (2008). Forgetting in immediate serial recall: Decay, temporal
distinctiveness, or interference?. Psychological Review, 115(3), 544-576.
Poirier, M., Saint-Aubin, J., Mair, A., Tehan G., & Tolan, A. (2014). Order recall in verbal shortterm memory: The rate of semantic networks. Memory Cognition, 43(3),489-499.
World Health Organization. (2012). Are you ready? What you need to know about ageing.
Retrieved from http://www.who.int/world-health-day/2012/toolkit/background/en.

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE AND MEMORY RETRIEVAL 8

Table 1
Mean scores, Standard Deviations, and t value of the Experimental Group with Interference and
Control Group without Interference

Experimental Group

Mean

SD

5.69

3.79

t-value
1.425*

Control Group
7.20
3.99
Note. * No Significant Difference ; t value < cv ; cv = 2.042 at 0.05 level of significance with
df = 30.