(BRB) cognitive pack 3 Flashcards
what was the reason for tulving to create his LTM model
- he argued that the LTM represented in the MSM was to simplistic and inflexible
- he asserted that there were at least 2 types of LTM systems which contained different types of memory
what is the episodic memory and whats it often referred to as
referred to as a mental diary
- receives and stores information about events or experiences that occur in our lives
what is the semantic memory and whats it often referred to as
- referred to as a mental encyclopaedia
- stores facts, words, rules as an organised body of knowledge
what type of memory did tulving focus on
- declarative
how are semantic and episodic memory different in terms of time referencing
- semantic memories are detached from any time referencing and info can be recalled without linking it to when it was learned
- episodic memories are dependant on time referencing as memories about events that happen to you are linked to the time they happened
how are semantic and episodic memory different in terms of retrieval
- semantic retrieval does not depend on the context in which the info was learned
- episodic retrieval depends on the context in which the event was initially learned as we mentally re-experience a moment to retrieve it
how are semantic and episodic memory different in terms of independence
- semantic memory ca operate independently of episodic
- episodic memory is unlikely to operate without semantic memory as we need to be able to draw on previous knowledge of objects, people and events
how are semantic and episodic memory different in terms of forgetting
- semantic memory trace is more robust and less susceptible to change
- episodic memory trace can be transformed/ changed when we retrieve it
what did tulving importantly say about the nature of the 2 stores
- despite this and the 2 systems possibly overlapping, they can be treated as 2 separate stores
what is the supporting evidence when evaluating Tulving’s theory of LTM
- case studies of brain damaged patients
- e.g after a motorcycle crash K.C’s episodic memory was damaged but his semantic memory was intact
- supporting evidence from brain scans, these show which parts of the brain are involved in episodic and semantic memory
- e.g semantic retrieval uses he left hemisphere but episodic retrieval uses the right hemisphere
- shows that neuroimaging supports the idea of 2 stores
what is the evidence against when evaluating Tulving’s theory of LTM
- research has shown that LTM may include more than semantic and episodic memories
- tulvings explanation of LTM may be limited
- e.g H.M and clive wearing both had brain damage that affected the ability to retain and recall episodic memories but could remember how to perform tasks such as playing the piano + could learn new skills
- suggesting there may be a 3rd store which tulving added in 1985 showing how the original theory is limited
how is methodology a strength when evaluating Tulving’s theory of LTM
- use of brain scanning techniques to investigate tulvings model of LTM increases scientific credibility
- shows that different areas of the rain were used when the different memories were working
how is methodology a weakness when evaluating Tulving’s theory of LTM
- methods of testing semantic and episodic memory lack validity because they vant be studies in absolute isolation
- e.g learning a list of words could use both episodic and semantic memory
- also using case studies lack control of variables as there is limited knowledge about the persons memory before the damage
- cant necessarily make meaningful comparisons reducing validity
what is the alternate theory of tulvings LTM
bartletts theory of reconstructive memory
what are the applications when evaluating Tulving’s theory of LTM
- practical applications of old people with specific memory problems
- belleville worked to improve peoples episodic memory, as it was a success it can be used to help people with a specific memory problem live a normal life
what did bartlett argue and what memory does he propose
- that memory was not like a tape recorder and could be changed and transformed
- he demonstrated reconstructive memory
what was the story called that bartlett used and why did he use it
- ‘the war of the ghosts’
- it was culturally unfamiliar to participants
- it lacked any rational order
- the dramatic nature of the story would encourage visual imaging
- the conclusion was supernatual and bartlett wanted to see how p’s would perceive this
what did bartlett find happened when p’s repeated the story back over time
- the story transformed over time
- the story became shorter through omissions
what did bartlett conclude and what are the 3 things memory is prone to
- memory is rarely accurate and prone to
- omissions-> leaving out parts that don’t make sense
- rationalisation-> make the story more logical to p
- transformation-> putting story in different order or changer words to more familiar words
what did bartlett argue after his study
-that people use effort after meaning
- this means we spend time trying to connect something to a memory or some previous knowledge or experience
what are schemas
- mental constructs that form the structural or hardware components of the human memory
- parcels of stored knowledge
what is the evidence in support a strength when evaluating bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
- brewer and treyans had p’s stand in a office and then asked them to recall items they had seen in the office
- they recalled expected items but not unexpected items, some recalled expected items that weren’t there
how is methodology a weakness when evaluating bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
- experiments lacked control and standardisation in their procedures
- his findings were also qualitative which may be open to subjective interpretation and thus lack validity
- war of the ghosts story has been criticised for not being relevant to everyday life lacking validity
how is methodology a strength when evaluating bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
- bartletts research is more similar to real life than a lot of memory research that involves people remembering artificial materials like trigrams
how are applications a strength when evaluating bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
- practical applications as it can explain why eye witness testimony can be unreliable
- people drawing on a schema to remember a crime may add in or miss out vital information
how do individual differences relate to bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
our unique experiences will cause our schemas to be different from one another
how does issues of social control relate to bartletts explanation of reconstructive memory
- it may be possible to deliberately influence peoples memories e.g through leading questions
what is the title of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- developmental pattern of digit span in spanish population
what is the aim of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- to investigate the development of the phonological loop in children between the ages of 5-17 using digit span as a measure of phonological capability
- to compare findings to their previous research of adult aged dementia patients
what was the sample of part 1 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- 570 volunteers selected from public and private pre-schools and secondary school in Madrid
- none had any impairments
what was the procedure for part 1+2 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- tasks given to p’s individually
- started of with sequences of 3 digits which were read out by experimenters at a rate of 1 p/s
- p’s asked to listen carefully and recall them in the same order as presented
- an additional digit increased the length of the sentence each round
- example was give to ensure they understood what they had to do
what is digit span
- maximum length that p’s could recall at least 2 out of 3 series with no errors
what were the 5 results from part one of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- digit span increases with age
- digit span increases steadily between ages 5-11
- increase in digit span slows around 11 years
- digit span between 15-17 is stable
- lower digit span for spanish speaking children than for english speaking children
what are the 2 conclusions drawn from part 1 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- digit span increases with age, especially when children are able to sub vocalise at around age 7
- digit span in Spanish children is lower than English children due to word length effect
what was the aim for part 2 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
to compare results from part 1 to results from a previous study they had done which looked at older patients with dementia
what were the results from part 2 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- elderly group had a higher digit span than 5-6 year olds
- digit span of elderly group was not significantly different than other year groups
- p’s with Alzheimer’s was higher than 5 year olds but did not significantly differ from other age groups
- patients with another type of dementia had a digit span that was similar to 5-6 year olds
what are the conclusions from part 2 of the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- phonological loop is affected by age in general, not so much by dementia
what is the generalisability like in the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
+ high as it took data from all types of p’s, differs in age, sex, culture
+ very large sample used
+ selected from public and private
- didnt use p’s with learning issues
- was volunteer sampling
what is the reliability like in the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
+ standardised procedures used, controlled experiment, allows for isolation of variables
+ can be repeated easily
+ data can be compared with other studies
what is the applicability like in the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
+ has wide applications to learning as things are easier to memorise in shorter chunks
+ supports the word length effect
what is the internal validity like in the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
+ high as lots of scientific and objective measures used
+ many controls used e.g eliminating p’s with hearing difficulties helps to control the extraneous variable
what is the ecological validity like in the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
+ can use the finding to stimulate further research with other parts of the WMM
+ experiment carried out in a school so the environment is natural and familiar
- relatively artificial tasks used
what are the 3 individual differences for the contemporary study by sebastian and hernandez gil (2012)
- processing speed
- schemas
- episodic memory
