Cognitive Flashcards
Explain one model of memory with reference to one study.
Model of memory: A memory model is a way of organizing and defining how memory behaves. It provides a structure and a set of rules for you to follow when you configure how addresses, or regions of addresses, are accessed and used in your system.
There are three types of model of memory.
1) Sensory memory
2) short term memory
3) long term memory
**LANDRY AND BARTLING **
Aim: Investigate the effects of “multi-tasking” when both tasks utilize the same working memory system - in this case, the phonological loop.
Procedure:
-Participants were randomly divided into two groups - the “multi-tasking” group and the “single task” group
-All participants were shown 10 letter strings, each consisting of 7 random letters (eg. GHKALKE). Participants had to memorize each string of letters, then write their answer down on an answer sheet
-The participants in the “multi-tasking” group were also told to repeatedly say the numbers “1” and “2” at a rate of two numbers per second, while they were trying to memorize the string of random letters.
Findings: The participants in the “multi-tasking” group performed significantly worse, recalling the letters with 45% accuracy compared with 76% in the “single task” group.
Conclusion Repeating the numbers “1” and “2” made it more difficult to mentally rehearse the string of letters, resulting in diminished memory.
This study suggests that multi-tasking leads to impaired working memory, especially when both tasks utilize the same working memory system (in this case, the phonological loop).
Explain schema theory with reference to one study
Schema theory - Schemas are cognitive frameworks or concepts that organize and interpret information about the world around us. Schemas help us to organize memories & help in recall and help us guide behaviour.
BARTLETT
AIM- Investigate how cultural schemas can influence memory
**Procedure ** -British participants read a Native American fold story called “War of the Ghosts” twice, then asked to reproduce it from memory soon after, as well as on a later date. (On another variation of the study, participants told the story to someone else, who then had to remember the story and write it down).
-The content and style of the story was unfamiliar to the British readers, as it was not written according to the storytelling conventions of English literature.
Findings: -When the participants recalled the story, the length of the story became shorter, and the story became more conventional. Unusual details (such as the unfamiliar names, or the revelation that the warriors were actually ghosts) were left out or distorted (for instance, some participants remembered “boats” instead of the unfamiliar “canoes”)
- No matter how much the recollection of the story differed from the original, it remained a coherent, complete story. This suggests that participants tried to remember the story as a whole, rather than trying to memorize specific details individually
Conclusion - Participants found it difficult to remember the “War of the Ghosts” because the story does not fit any of our cultural schemas. It is neither a typical horror story or war story, and hence it is difficult to relate to our existing knowledge of the world
- Cultural schemas can lead to memory distortions, as we try to “fit” the new information to our existing schemas
Describe/Outline/Explain the multi-store model of memory.
Model of memory - A memory model is a way of organizing and defining how memory behaves. It provides a structure and a set of rules for you to follow when you configure how addresses, or regions of addresses, are accessed and used in your system.
Multi store model of memory = describes flow between three permanent storage systems of memory: the sensory register, short-term memory and long-term memory
GLANZER AND CUNITZ:
AIM: tested the hypothesis that short term memory and long term memory are two separate stores in a free recall experiment.
Serial Position Effect: the observation that when given a list of items to remember, we tend to remember the first and last better than the middle items.
PROCEDURE: -
Two groups of Participants composed of 240 Army enlistees
- Same list of 20 words (common, one-syllable words)
Group 1: control; recalled the words immediately after presentation in a free recall (any order they wish)
Group 2: experimental; had to memorize words while counting backwards in threes, making rehearsal very difficult. Afterwards, they had to recall 30 seconds after rehearsal in a free recall.
RESULTS:
Group 2 could only remember a few words and while the first words had been rehearsed, delaying the recall by 30 seconds prevented the “recency” effect.
CONCLUSION:
Group 1 was able to remember the words a lot better than Group 2, supporting the fact that there are different memory stores; long term and short term.
Describe/Outline/Explain the working memory model.
The working memory model, devised by Baddeley and Hitch in 1974, proposes that short-term memory (STM) is a collection of multiple stores which actively process different types of STM. According to the 1974 model, it consists of 3 components; the central executive, the phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad.
The second part of the model is the phonological loop which processes auditory information. This slave system is often referred to as ‘the inner ear’. The final system, known as the visuo-spatial sketchpad, processes visual and spatial information. This slave system is often referred to as ‘the inner eye’. All three of these components are temporary storage systems of STM with a limited capacity. In 2000, Baddeley added a fourth component which he named the episodic buffer. He proposed that this store is responsible for integrating information from the other slave systems and works as a link between working memory and long-term memory.
BADDELEY ET AL:
AIM: To investigate the influence of acoustic and semantic word similarity on learning and recall in short term and long term memory
PROCEDURE: A laboratory experiment designed to test sequential recall of acoustically and semantically similar words. An independent groups design was used.
List A - 10 acoustically similar words
List C - 10 semantically similar words
RESULTS: Recall in the acoustically similar condition (list A) and the acoustically dissimilar control list (list B) were very similar, including at the retest.
In LTM, acoustic similarity did mot affect the recall of the word order.
REcall in the semantically similar list condition (list C) was much worse than in the semantically dissimilar words control condition (list D).
Semantic similarity affected recall in the LTM.
CONCLUSION: LTM is affect by semantic similarity but not acoustic similarity.
LTM uses largely semantic encoding unlike short term memory that uses acoustic.
Also shows that encoding in the STM is different from Encoding in the LTM.
Describe/Outline/Explain one study related to thinking and decision-making.
Dual Process Model - argues there are two systems of thinking.
System 1= is an automatic and intuitive way of thinking based on shortcuts called “heuristics.” Heuristics focus on one aspect of a complex problem and ignore others. Often System 1 works with what is believed to be a “correct” answer.
System 2 = thinking is slower and requires more effort. Rational thinking allows us to analyze the world around us and think carefully about what is happening, why it is happening, what is most likely to happen next, and how we might influence the situation. Often System 2 works with what is believed to be a “probable” answer.
TVERSKY AND KHANEMAN
AIM:
PROCEDURE: high school students as participants. Participants in ‘ascending condition’ were asked to quickly estimate the value of 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 in five seconds.
Those in the “descending condition” were asked to quickly estimate the value of 8 X 7 X 6 X 5 X 4 X 3 X 2 X 1.
The researchers assumed that group 1 would use “1” as an anchor and predict a lower value that the group that started with “8” as the anchor. The expectation was that the first number seen would bias the estimate of the value by the participant.
RESULTS: The researchers found that the median for the ascending group was 512; the median for the descending group was 2250. The actual value is 40320.
CONCLUSION : the anchoring effect is the disproportionate influence on decision makers to make judgments that are biased toward an initially presented value.
Describe/Outline/Explain one example of rational (controlled) thinking.
The Dual Process Model argues that we make two types of decisions. System 1 thinking is intuitive; it is good for quick decisions and requires only a small amount of effort.
System 2 is rational thinking that consciously uses existing information to logically make a decision.
System 1 thinking makes use of cognitive “shortcuts” called heuristics.
rational thinking = the process of using logic and reason to evaluate information and make decisions
intuitive thinking = a form of thinking that allows us to make decisions without the need for analysis, reason, or logic.
Englich and Mussweiler.
AIM: To examine the role of experience in decision making in trial judges.
PROCEDURE: 24 senior law students were given a case file for a rape case. They were asked to read through the case and recommend a prison sentence. The average sentence was 17 months.
In one group they were told that the prosecution recommended a 34-month sentence; in the other group a 2-month sentence. They were given 15 minutes to make a decision based on the penal code and the information of the case. They were also asked to rank their confidence in their decision.
RESULTS: When given the suggestion of 34 months, the students recommended on average a longer sentence.
CONCLUSION: experience does not impact the influence of anchoring bias in the courtroom; thus, judgmental anchoring bias has a strong effect on criminal sentencing decisions
Describe/Outline/Explain reconstructive memory.
Episodic memory is reconstructed.
Schema theory says that memory is based on schema. When we encode and retrieve episodic memories, we are influenced by our perceptions, past knowledge, and personal beliefs.
Some argue that there is a different type of memory, called flashbulb memory.
Flashbulb memory: the result so of powerful emotions, so some argue that it is not reconstructed, but vivid, accurate, and not open to distortion in the way that normal memories are.
Neisser & Harsch
AIM: To test the theory of flashbulb memory by investigating the extent to which memory for a shocking event (the 1986 Challenge disaster) would be accurate after a period of time.
Procedure: Students given questionaire - asked to describe how they heard news of the Challenge disaster less than 24 hours after the event.
-seven questions related to where they were, what they were doing, etc., and what emotional feelings they experienced at the time of the disaster.
two and a half years later, and were asked to rate their confidence on a scale of 1 to 5 in terms of the memory accuracy.
RESULTS/ CONCLUSION- The results of the study challenge the theory of flashbulb memory and the reliability of memory, as participants were highly confident they remembered the event correctly and could not explain the difference between their first and second accounts.
-Memories were possibly affected by post-event information (reconstructive memory).
Describe/Outline/Explain one bias in thinking and decision-making.
HEURISTIC: Mental shortcuts which system one comes up with short effortless answers. Heuristics help System 1 come up with a decent guess to a question with little mental effort. However, their use leads to biases in decision making.
ANCHORING BIAS= a cognitive bias that causes us to rely heavily on the first piece of information we are given about a topic. When we are setting plans or making estimates about something, we interpret newer information from the reference point of our anchor instead of seeing it objectively. This can skew our judgment and prevent us from updating our plans or predictions as much as we should.
KAHNEMAN AND TVERSKY
Aim: To investigate how anchors influence thinking and decision making
Procedure: Participants spun a wheel with numbers ranging from 1 to 100. However, the wheel was fixed so that the wheel would always land on either the number 10 or 60
Afterwards, participants were asked to estimate what percentage of U.N. member countries were African countries
Findings: Participants who spun the number 10 tended to give a significantly lower estimate for African membership in the U.N. than participants who spun the number 60
The mean estimate for the “low anchor” group was 25%, compared to 45% for the “high anchor” group
Conclusion: The random number had an anchoring effect on participant’s estimates for African membership in the U.N., even though it clearly had no relation to the topic
Describe/Outline/Explain the influence of emotion on one cognitive process.
Brown & Kulik believed that strong emotional experiences led to memories that are detailed, accurate, vivid, and resistant to forgetting.
Two key components to the creation of a flashbulb memory. (element of surprise. The researchers proposed the “special mechanism” hypothesis that suggested that there were biological factors that led to the creation of these memories, although they did not know what those mechanisms were. Secondly, the researchers argued that the event had to have “personal meaning” for the person. If there was a combination of a strong emotional response based on surprise and personal meaning, then the result is a flashbulb memory.)
Neisser & Harsch
AIM: To test the theory of flashbulb memory by investigating the extent to which memory for a shocking event (the 1986 Challenge disaster) would be accurate after a period of time.
Procedure: Students given questionaire - asked to describe how they heard news of the Challenge disaster less than 24 hours after the event.
-seven questions related to where they were, what they were doing, etc., and what emotional feelings they experienced at the time of the disaster.
two and a half years later, and were asked to rate their confidence on a scale of 1 to 5 in terms of the memory accuracy.
RESULTS/ CONCLUSION- The results of the study challenge the theory of flashbulb memory and the reliability of memory, as participants were highly confident they remembered the event correctly and could not explain the difference between their first and second accounts.
-Memories were possibly affected by post-event information (reconstructive memory).
