Anyone? I can't find answers for it anywhere and it's part of the SD.
For ebbinghaus, it's not really a theory of forgetting as such, it's just his results which kind of link in with decay theory (nonsense syllables faded if they weren't rehearsed).
Motivated forgetting: strength-this one is common sense, people who experience traumatic shiz recall it less than positive events
limitation-people do not always forget traumatic shiz, as much as they might want to they just can't
retrieval failure: strength-tip of the tongue phenomenon, suggests retrieval is not all or nothing
limitation-we can't be certain we actually encoded information, like you might try to recall something and use cues to try recall it, but perhaps you never even encoded what you were looking for, we can't show this though.
decay theory: strength-it is about the physical action of neurons, therefore more measurable scientifically than the other theories
limitation-doesn't explain why an old person may not be able to recall a memory which occured recently-ish but can for some reason recall a specific childhood memory better
interference theory: strength-can be shown through experiments
limitation-doesn't account for shit the other theories do
semantic network theory: strength-research has shown people usually take longer on questions such as like 'does a crab has claws?' in comparison to taking longer for 'is a crab a verterbrate?' (because verterbrate is likely to be a distantly linked concept to crab, conversely claws are very closely linked)
limitation-activation direction depends on the strength of the link, not necessarily the heirarchy
Dunno, pretty basic rundown, this stuff is rarely on exams (which is quite surprising considering it's labelled so explicitly on the study design).
edit: disregard semantic network theory, forgot you said forgetting theories
)