Coding, Capacity and Duration of Memory

Question 1

Research into Coding

Answer 1

Baddeley - gave 4 different lists of words to groups (acoustically similar/dissimilar, semantically similar/dissimilar) and asked them to recall in correct order. if recalled immediately, worst in acoustically similar. if recalled after 20 mins, worst in semantically similar

Question 2

Evaluation of Coding Research

Answer 2

Artificial Stimuli - low external validity as dissimilar to real life

made a distinction between memory stores, laid the foundation for the MSM

Question 3

Research into Capacity

Answer 3

Jacobs - studied digit span. gave P 4 digits to recall in correct order. if correct, gave 5 and so on. repeated until they got it wrong. mean digit span 9.3. for letters it was 7.3

Miller - observed things often come in 7s in daily life, so said capacity is 7 (+/- 2). also suggested chunking

Question 4

Evaluation of Capacity research

Answer 4

Jacobs - old - confounding variables - but replicated by Bopp and Verhaeghen in controlled setting so valid

Miller - overestimated. Cowan said capacity is 4 (+/-1).

Question 5

Research into Duration

Answer 5

STM - Margaret and Lloyd Peterson studied 24 students in 8 tests each. P given a consonant syllable and a 3 digit number. asked to count down from number for varying retention intervals, then asked to recall the consonant syllable. after 3 secs, recall 80%. after 18 secs, recall 3%

LTM - Bahrick studied 397 Americans aged 17-74. did a photo recognition test or a free recall test of people from their high school yearbook. if tested within 15 years, 90% in photo recognition and 60% in free recall. if tested after 48 years, photo recognition 70%, free recall 30%.

Question 6

Evaluation of Duration research

Answer 6

STM - meaningless stimuli so low external validity as dissimilar to real life

LTM - high external validity as used meaningful stimuli. Shepard did it with artificial stimuli and had lower recall rates. so Bahrick’s is a more real estimate