Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

03-10/05/16 > 04/05/16 > Flashcards

04/05/16 Flashcards

1
Q

Conrad Aim

A

STM coding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Conrad Procedure

A

Acoustically similar/ dissimilar lists of letters with an acoustic confusion task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Conrad Findings

A

Most made more mistakes on acoustically similar

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Conrad Evaluation

A

Artificial task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Baddeley STM Aim

A

Coding- acoustic or semantic?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Baddeley STM Procedure

A

4 groups of 5 words (acoustically or semantically similar or dissimilar), had to recall in order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Baddeley STM Findings

A

Acoustically similar accuracy= 55%
Acoustically dissimilar accuracy= 75%
Semantic accuracy= similar but worse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Baddeley STM Evaluation

A

Artificial task, backed up by Conrad

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Baddeley LTM Aim

A

Coding- acoustic or semantic?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Baddeley LTM Procedure

A

4 groups of 5 words (acoustically or semantically similar or dissimilar), had to recall in order after doing a different task for 20 minutes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Baddeley LTM Findings

A

Semantically similar accuracy= 55%
Semantically dissimilar accuracy= 85%
Acoustic accuracy= similar but worse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Baddeley LTM Evaluation

A

Artificial task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Jacobs Aim

A

STM capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Jacobs Procedure

A

Serial digit span test, recall in order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Jacobs Findings

A 
Digits= 9.3 
Letters= 7.3
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Jacobs Evaluation

A

Artificial task,easy to replicate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Standing Aim

A

LTM capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Standing Procedure

A

2,560 pictures, shown for 10 seconds each, at the end show new and old pictures and had to say if they’d seen it before

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Standing Findings

A

90% recognised new pictures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Standing Evaluation

A

Artificial task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Peterson and Peterson Aim

A

STM duration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Peterson and Peterson Procedure

A

Given a trigram, had to count down from a 3 digit number, recall the trigram. Each trial had to count for longer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Peterson and Peterson Findings

A

76% correct at 3 seconds

10% correct at 18 seconds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Peterson and Peterson Evaluation

A

Artificial task, standardised, alternative explanation= displacement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Bahrick Aim

A

LTM duration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Bahrik Procedure

A

392 ex-students with a 50 year span shown photos from their yearbook- had to recognise, or recall name

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Bahrik Findings

A

Recognise after 15 years or less- 90%
Recognise after 48 years or less- 60%
Recall after 15 years or less- 60%
Recall after 48 years or less- 30%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Bahrik Evaluation

A

Meaningful stimulus, confounding variables

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

CW

A

Viral infection affected his hippocampus
Can’t transfer STM to LTM
Still understands world and remembers old memories
Different memory stores

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

HM

A

Hippocampus removed due to epilepsy
No new memories
Still has old memories
Different memory stores

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Tulving Aim

A

Types of LTM

32
Q

Tulving Procedure

A

Memory tasks whilst being scanned with a PET scanner

33
Q

Tulving Findings

A

Episodic and semantic situated in the prefrontal cortex
Semantic= left
Episodic= right

34
Q

KF

A

Poor STM, good visual- good procedural

35
Q

Braver

A

Central executive tasks whilst having a brain scan- electrical activity increased

36
Q

Baddeley

A

Visuo-spatial sketchpad: track light and class angles in F

37
Q

Henk Schmidt Aim

A

Influence of retroactive interference

38
Q

Henk Schmidt Procedure

A

Random 700 names from Dutch elementary school- 211 became participants, ages ranged from 11 to 79 years. Renamed roads in Molenburg with numbers and had to remember names. Also did a questionnaire about how many times they’d moved

39
Q

Henk Schmidt Findings

A

Number of times moved was proportional to the accuracy of names

40
Q

McGeoch and McDonald Aim

A

Similarity of memories affects interference

41
Q

McGeoch and McDonald Procedure

A

Learnt 10 words until 100% accurate recall, then learnt a new list, then had to recall the old list

42
Q

McGeoch and McDonald Findings

A

Synonyms= lowest recall
Antonyms= 2nd lowest recall
No relationship= highest recall

43
Q

McGeoch and McDonald Evaluation

A

Artificial task, standardised

44
Q

Godden and Baddeley Aim

A

Context dependent forgetting

45
Q

Godden and Baddeley Procedure

A

Divers learnt and recalled words under water or on land- 4 variations

46
Q

Godden and Baddeley Findings

A

40% lower in non-matching conditions

47
Q

Carter and Cassidy Aim

A

State dependent forgetting

48
Q

Carter and Cassidy Procedure

A

Antihistamine given or not, learnt and recalled words- 4 variations

49
Q

Carter and Cassidy Findings

A

Worse when mismatched conditions

50
Q

Loftus and Palmer Aim

A

Effect of leading questions of EWT

51
Q

Loftus and Palmer Procedure

A

Film of car crash- asked at what speed they think the cars hit/ smashed/ collided/ bumped/ contacted

52
Q

Loftus and Palmer Findings

A 
Smashed= 40.8mph
Contacted= 31.8mph
53
Q

Loftus and Palmer Variation Procedure

A

Asked if there was any broken glass

54
Q

Loftus and Palmer Variation Findings

A

Smashed- 32% said yes

Hit- 14% said yes

55
Q

Loftus and Palmer Variation Evaluation

A

Controlled setting, artificial task

56
Q

Gabbert Aim

A

Post event discussion

57
Q

Gabbert Procedure

A

Saw the same crime video from different angles, then discussed it, then took individual recall tests

58
Q

Gabbert Findings

A

71% mistakenly recalled things they hadn’t seen

Control group- 0%

59
Q

Gabbert Evaluation

A

Controlled, artificial task

60
Q

Johnson and Scott Aim

A

Weapon effect- anxiety

61
Q

Johnson and Scott Procedure

A
  1. Heard argument when sat in the ‘waiting room’, a man came out of the next room with a pen and grease on his hands
  2. Heard argument when sat in the ‘waiting room’, a man came out of the next room with a paper knife and blood on his hands
62
Q

Johnson and Scott Findings

A
  1. 49% accurate in identifying the man out of 50 other photos
  2. 33% accurate in identifying the man out of 50 other photos
63
Q

Johnson and Scott Evaluation

A

Natural setting, ethical issues

64
Q

Yuille and Cutshall Aim

A

Anxiety

65
Q

Yuille and Cutshall Procedure

A

Gun shop in Vancouver, the owner shot a thief dead
13/21 took part in the study 2-5 months later
Rated stress on a 7-point scale

66
Q

Yuille and Cutshall Findings

A

85% accurate in recall of details in high stress

75% accurate in recall of details in low stress

67
Q

Yuille and Cutshall Evaulation

A

No demand characteristics, ethical issues

68
Q

Geiselman Aim

A

Effectiveness of cognitive interview

69
Q

Geiselman Procedure

A

Watched police training crime videos

89 students

70
Q

Geiselman Findings

A
  1. 5 items recalled using cognitive interview

29. 4 items recalled using normal interview

71
Q

Geiselman Evaulation

A

Similar error rates

72
Q

Holliday Aim

A

Cognitive interview on children

73
Q

Holliday Procedure

A

4-5 year olds and 9-10 year olds watched a 5 minute video of a birthday party

74
Q

Holliday Findings

A

Cognitive interview= more correct results

75
Q

Holliday Evaluation

A

Artificial task

03-10/05/16 (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions