Editing Decay theory (section)

==History==
[[File:Decaycorrect.svg|right]]
[[File:Interferencecorrect.svg|right]]

The term "decay theory" was first coined by [[Edward Thorndike]] in his book ''The Psychology of Learning'' in 1914.<ref name="kevone">{{cite book | vauthors = Thorndike EL | title = The Psychology of Learning | location = New York | publisher = Teachers College | date = 1914 | page = 4 }}</ref> This simply states that if a person does not access and use the memory representation they have formed the memory trace will fade or decay over time. This theory was based on the early memory work by [[Hermann Ebbinghaus]] in the late 19th century.<ref name="kevtwo">{{cite book | vauthors = Ebbinghaus H | date = 1885–1913 | title = Memory. A Contribution to Experimental Psychology. | location = New York | publisher = Teachers College/Columbia Univ. }}</ref> The decay theory proposed by Thorndike was heavily criticized by McGeoch and his [[interference theory]].<ref name="kevthree">{{cite journal | vauthors = McGeoch JA | title = Forgetting and the law of disuse. | journal = Psychological Review | date = July 1932 | volume = 39 | issue = 4 | pages = 352–370 | doi = 10.1037/h0069819 }}</ref> This led to the abandoning of the decay theory, until the late 1950s when studies by John Brown and the Petersons  showed evidence of time based decay by filling the retention period by counting backwards in threes from a given number. This led to what is known as the [[Interference theory#Proactive interference|Brown–Peterson paradigm]].<ref name="kevfour">{{cite journal | vauthors = Brown J | title = Some tests of the decay theory of immediate memory. | journal = Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology | date = February 1958 | volume = 10 | issue = 1 | pages = 12–21 | doi = 10.1080/17470215808416249 | s2cid = 144071312 }}</ref><ref name="kevfive">{{cite journal | vauthors = Peterson LR, Peterson MJ | title = Short-term retention of individual verbal items | journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology | volume = 58 | issue = 3| pages = 193–8 | date = September 1959 | pmid = 14432252 | doi = 10.1037/h0049234 }}</ref> The theory was again challenged, this time a paper by Keppel and Underwood who attributed the findings to [[Interference theory#Proactive interference|proactive interference]].<ref name="kevsix">{{cite journal | vauthors = Keppel G, Underwood BJ | title = Proactive inhibition in short-term retention of single items. | journal = Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior | date = October 1962 | volume = 1 | issue = 3 | pages = 153–61 | doi = 10.1016/S0022-5371(62)80023-1 }}</ref> Studies in the 1970s by Reitman<ref name="kevseven">{{cite journal | vauthors = Reitman JS | title = Mechanisms of forgetting in short-term memory. | journal = Cognitive Psychology | date = April 1971 | volume = 2 | issue = 2 | pages = 185–95 | doi = 10.1016/0010-0285(71)90008-9 | hdl = 2027.42/33676 | hdl-access = free }}</ref><ref name="keveight">{{cite journal | vauthors = Reitman JS | title = Without surreptitious rehearsal, information in short-term memory decay. | journal = Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior | date = August 1974| volume = 13 | issue = 4 | pages = 365–77 | doi = 10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80015-0 | hdl = 2027.42/22300 | hdl-access = free }}</ref> tried reviving the decay theory by accounting for certain confounds criticized by Keppel and Underwood. Roediger quickly found problems with these studies and their methods.<ref name="kevnine">{{cite journal | vauthors = Roediger HL, Knight JL, Kantowitz BH | title = Inferring decay in short-term memory: The issue of capacity | journal = Memory & Cognition | volume = 5 | issue = 2 | pages = 167–76 | date = March 1977 | pmid = 24202808 | doi = 10.3758/BF03197359 | s2cid = 23092825 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Harris made an attempt to make a case for decay theory by using tones instead of word lists and his results are congruent making a case for decay theory.<ref name="kevten">{{cite journal| vauthors = Harris JD | title = Pitch discrimination. | journal = The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America | date = November 1952 | volume = 24 | issue = 6 | pages = 750–5 | doi = 10.1121/1.1906970 | bibcode = 1952ASAJ...24..750H }}</ref> In addition, McKone used implicit memory tasks as opposed to explicit tasks to address the confound problems. They provided evidence for decay theory, however, the results also interacted with interference effects.<ref name="kevelev">{{cite journal | vauthors = McKone E | title = Short-term implicit memory for words and nonwords. | journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition | date = September 1995 | volume = 21 | issue = 5 | pages = 1108–26 | doi = 10.1037/0278-7393.21.5.1108}}</ref><ref name="kevtwel">{{cite journal | vauthors = McKone E | title = The decay of short-term implicit memory: unpacking lag | journal = Memory & Cognition | volume = 26 | issue = 6 | pages = 1173–86 | date = November 1998 | pmid = 9847544 | doi = 10.3758/bf03201193 | s2cid = 9058460 | doi-access = free }}</ref> One of the biggest criticisms of decay theory is that it cannot be explained as a mechanism and that is the direction that the research is headed.