Cognitive LOA Flashcards
Bartlett (1932)
Aim
To investigate the effect of repeated reproduction of an unfamiliar folk tale on participants recall
Bartlett (1932)
Procedure
A laboratory experiment using the ‘repeated reproduction’ technique (IV: time inverts of recall, DV: detail of reproduced stories) with 20 English Male participants
- Participants were not told the aims of the study and were asked to read the native American folk tale ‘The War of the Ghosts” twice
- After 15 minutes, PPs were asked to reproduced story out loud from memory
- PPs then left Bartlett’s laboratory and returned 20 hours later to reproduce the story again and many more times after that
Bartlett (1932)
Findings/Conclusions
Each participant’s recall of the story changed with each reproduction, story was difficult for people from Western cultures to reproduce because of its unfamiliar style and content, story became shorter i.e. the story reduced from 329 to 180 words after 6 reproductions, story remained coherent no matter how distorted it was from the original, story became more congenital to fit into the cultural background of the PPs (it started to resemble an English story e.g. ‘canoe’ was changed to ‘boat’)
Conclusion: people reconstruct the past by trying to fit into existing schemas – the more complicated the story means the more likely elements will be forgotten or distorted, schemas have a major influence in the way we encode story and retrieve memories, memory is reconstructive in nature and schemas influence our recall, study explains that people reconstruct the story to make more sense in terms of their knowledge and the culture in which they were brought up in
Connection: this study shows how the schema theory is useful to understand how people categorize information, interpret stories, and make inferences (it also contributes to the understanding of cognitive distortions in memory)
Bartlett (1932)
Evaluation
Strengths:
In spite of these methodological limitations, the study is one of the most important in the study of memory.
Limitations:
The results of the study confirm schema theory (and reconstructive memory), but it was performed in a laboratory and can be criticized for lack of ecological validity.
Participants did not receive standardized instructions and some of the memory distortions may be due to participants’ guessing (demand characteristics).
Bransford & Johnston (1973)
Aim
To examine the influence of context on the recall and comprehension of a reading passage
Bransford & Johnston (1973)
Procedure
They constructed some reading passages that would be difficult to understand in the absence of context. They then compared recall performance between a group of participants who had been supplied with contextual information (such as pictures) and a group who had not received this additional information
Bransford & Johnston (1973)
Findings/Conclusions
Bransford and Johnson found that recall is significantly better for the group that is given contextual information than for the group that had simply read the passage, showing that without the appropriate schema, accurate recall is more difficult
Bransford & Johnston (1973)
Evaluation
Limitations:
Cultural differences – would the same results be found in different cultures? Low ecological validity. However, the study does offer support for Bartlett’s (1932) study.
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Aim
To investigate the effects of schemas on visual memory
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Procedure
- 30 participants, one at a time were asked to wait in a room for 35 seconds
- The room was designed to look like an office and had 61 objects. Some objects were compatible with an ‘office’ schema, such as a desk, calendar, and typewriter, but others were not - such as a skull, a brick, and a pair of pliers
- After having been in the room, participants were given an unexpected call test
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Findings/Conclusions
· Participants were more likely to recall typical office items
· They were also successful at recalling incompatible items such as the brick, but eight participants recalled the really bizarre item – the skull
· Most errors in recall were substitutions - PPs falsely recall the presence of items such as books, pens, and a telephone, which have a high schema expectancy but were not present in the room
· Other errors involved the wrong placement of items e.g. the note pad was ‘remembered’ as being on the desk, rather than on the chair
· Findings suggest the PPs use schemas to ensure rapid encoding of visual information available to them their 35 seconds in the room, and at the retrieval stage, recall was influenced by schema so that typical items were recalled, even though they were not actual present.
Connection: study provides evidence to support how schemas can affect our cognition, in particular memory; our schemas influence what we recall in our memory
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Evaluation
Strengths:
Strict control over variables –> to determine cause & effect relationship
Limitation:
Lacks ecological validity
Laboratory setting artificial environment
Task does not reflect daily activity
Loftus and Palmer (1974) A
Aim
To investigate the role of leading questions in recall
Loftus and Palmer (1974) A
Procedure
An independent measures design was used
· 45 students shown video clips of car accidents
· they were asked “how fast were the cars going when they HIT each other?”
· ‘HIT’ was replaced with smashed, collided, bumped, or contacted
Loftus and Palmer (1974) A
Findings/Conclusions
the stronger the word (e.g. smashed, collided) meant a higher mean estimate for the speed compared to words such as hit/contacted
· ‘Smashed’ had the highest mean estimate with 40.8 mph
· speed estimates were influenced by the wording (verb) used
Conclusion:
· the use of different verbs activates different schemas in memory, so that the PP hearing the word ‘smashed,’ imagines the accident more severe than PP hearing the word contacted
· verbs used in various conditions activated slightly different schemas which influenced the speed estimation
· since the accident was reconstructed in the PPs mind, the schema that was influenced by the leading question relating to the different verbs associated with speech explains how reconstructive memory works
· when people witness complex events, they report inaccurate, numeric details
· this shows that memory is unreliable as when people witness complex events, they report inaccurate and numeric details
Loftus and Palmer (1974) A
Evaluation
Strengths:
The experiment was rigorously controlled so it was possible to establish a cause-effect relationship between the independent variable (the critical words) and the dependent variable (estimation of speed).
Limitations:
The experiment was conducted in a laboratory. There may be a problem of ecological validity.
Maybe laboratory experiments on memory are too artificial.
The fact that the experiment used students as participants has also been criticized because students are not representative of a general population.
The films shown in the experiment were made for teaching purposes and therefore the participants’ experience was not the same as if it had been a real accident.
Loftus & Palmer (1974) B
Aim
To see whether misleading post event information can lead to the creation of false
memories
Loftus & Palmer (1974) B
Procedure
● An independent measures design was used
● 150 students all shown a video clip of car accident
● Split into groups of 50
● 1st group asked “How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?”
● 2nd group asked “How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?”
● 3rd group was the control group – they were not asked to estimate the speed of the accident
Loftus & Palmer (1974) B
Findings/Conclusions
● One week later they were asked a critical question, “Did you see any broken glass?” (there was no broken glass in the video clip)
● The 2nd group who were initially asked “How fast were the cars going when they
● smashed into each other?”. On average gave higher speed estimates and that they recalls seeing broken glass
Overall Findings & Conclusions:
● Different words had an effect on the estimation of speed as well as the perception of the consequences of the accident.
● Loftus and Palmer (1974) explained that ‘smashed’ provides participants with verbal information that activates schemas for a severe accident.
● The higher rates of participants seeing broken glass is connected to this, the
● participant is more likely to think that there was broken glass involved when they were asked the leading question containing the word ‘smashed’
● This is also known as confabulation –confusion of true memories with false memories.
Loftus & Palmer (1974) B
Evaluation
N/A
Refer to study A
http://www.simplypsychology.org/loftus-palmer.html
Phelps (2004)
Aim
To investigate flash bulb memories
Phelps (2004)
Procedure
A study of New Yorkers who witnessed the horrors of 9/11
· Conducted 3 years after 9/11
· 24 participants who were in NYC that day
· PP brain activity was observed using fMRI
· After brain scanning, PPs were asked to rate their memories for vividness, detail, and confidence in accuracy, arousal, and valence (how emotional).
Phelps (2004)
Findings/Conclusions
Half of the participants reported greater vividness, confidence, and detail
· Those close to the destruction of the world trade center have more vivid memories of the attacks than do those who were in other parts of NYC
· Personal involvement may be important in engaging the amygdala when recalling 9/11 events
· Downtown participants also reported seeing, hearing, and selling
· The recollections of those were in lower Manhattan (closer to the world trade center), were described as more vivid, detailed, and confident than those who were further away.
Conclusions:
· The proximity to the World Trade center changed the nature of the experience of these events, such as the PPs who were downtown on 9/11 having greater personal involvement
· Amygdala plays a role in enhancing the feeling of remembering for emotional material, and is more engaged when events are experienced first hand
Connection:
· Identifies a brain circuitry related to BM
· Supports the FBM theory as memories produced by PPs closer to the world trade center had more characteristic qualities of FBM
· Memories have special qualities for a much broader range of individuals
· PPs closer to world trade center included more specific details in their written memories
Phelps (2004)
Evaluation
N/A
Kearins (1981)
Aim
To see the difference between the two groups on memory using visual spacial memory in the Aboriginal children and comparing them to Western children
Kearins (1981)
Procedure
● Kearins presented a memory puzzle (visual spacial) to Aborigines.
● In this test 44 participants (6-16 years of age: 27 boys, 17 girls) were shown a collection of 12 rocks, placed in specific orders.
● Memory array
● The rocks were then removed. After a few moments, participants were asked to reposition the rocks back to its original order.
● She was very careful and sensitive of the local culture and ensured that the PPs were comfortable to take part
● So they would not be intimidated by the experimental setting
Kearins (1981)
Findings/Conclusions
● Aboriginal children seemed to rely on their visual memories - do it slowly without having to say the words out loud and they did not get frustrated. They were 3 years ahead of white Australian children
● Concluded that in that environment they need to have a good sense of direction to survive
● Part of their upbringing and a product of some innate or genetic predisposition to have an effective visual memory
● White children used rehearsal strategies
● Found it difficult to put the rocks back and differentiate
● They struggled with the task
Kearins (1981)
Evaluation
Strengths:
● Added variety within her memory test. this shows that even if items are not localized and categorized in their brains, (culturally common) participants were still able to recall most positions. This shows us that these aboriginals have superior visual recall than that of Australian children.
● Great care was taken in order to make the test comfortable for the children. These kids had informed consent, as well as the act of volunteering.
Limitations:
● It is also not ecologically valid, because a memory experiment like this is not realistic in real-life situations.
Brown & Kulik (1977)
Aim
To investigate FBM and how it works (to support their theory)
Brown & Kulik (1977)
Procedure
80 American participants (40 white and 40 black)
● · they had to answer questions about 10 events, nine about assassinations of well-known American personalities (e.g. J.F. Kennedy), whereas the 10th was a self-selected event of personal relevance and involving unexpected shock
● · they were asked to recall the circumstances they found themselves in when they first heard the news about the 10 events
● · they were also asked to indicate how often they had rehearsed (overtly or covertly) information about each events
Brown & Kulik (1977)
Findings/Conclusions
● · the assassination of J.F. Kennedy in 1963 (over a decade before the study) led to the highest numbers of FBMs with 90% of PPs recalling its reception context in vivid detail
● African Americans reported more FBMs for leaders of civil rights movements (e.g. assassination of Martin Luther King) than Caucasian Americans
● Most PPs recalled a personal FBM which tended to be related to learning about the death of a parent
Conclusion:
This study supports the FBM theory whereby they were-
● Forms in situations where we encounter surprising and highly emotional information
● Are maintained by means of overt rehearsal (discussion with others) and covert rehearsal (private)
● Differ from other memories in that they are more vivid, last longer and are more consistent and accurate
● Requires the involvement of a specialized neural mechanism which stores information permanently in a unique memory system
Brown & Kulik (1977)
Evaluation
Strengths:
Many participants thus high ecological validity to American people
Naturalistic: the reactions and memories of events were from real life events
Interviews are not like questionnaires where questions are specific thus there is more flexibility in the results
Limitations:
Data is collected through a questionnaire, so accuracy is doubted.
Cannot be generalized to other population other than Americans
Very retrospective: hard to test memories and how vivid and accurate they are in comparison to when they were gained
Lacks reliability and hard to replicate
PPs might have been distressed thus no protection
There may be researcher bias being in an interview from (qualitative data), no quantitative data was collected.
Craik & Lockhart (1972)
Aim
N/A
LOP was proposed by Craik & Lockhart (1972), which predicts that how deeply people process information determines how well it is stored in memory
Craik & Lockhart (1972)
Procedure
N/A
Craik & Lockhart (1972)
Findings/Conclusions
● Deeper, meaningful processing creates longer-lasting memory traces
● Shallow processing leads to weaker memory traces
This model emphasizes memory process rather than the structure like the MSM model:
● This was proposed as an alternative to the MSM, as they rejected the idea of separate memory structures put forward by Atkinson & Shiffrin
Craik & Lockhart (1972)
Evaluation
Strengths:
Craik & Lockhart’s model has a number of strengths. It was the first theory to show that memory is actually improved when it undergoes deeper processing. This in turn explained why certain things are better remembered than others. It also proved that encoding is not a simple process.
Finally, brain imaging studies showed that higher levels of processing lead to greater activity levels in different parts of the brain which gives the theory some credence.
Limitations:
In terms of weaknesses, the theory is better described than explained. It seems to be a rather simple explanation for such a complex subject with the terms ‘deep’ and ‘shallow’ hardly an all-encompassing look into the theory of memory. The part of the theory which suggests that shallow processing equals a memory being quickly lost is not 100% accurate in all cases. Those with illnesses that affect memory cannot be included in the levels of processing theory.
Finally, this theory was espoused in 1972 but since then, various neuropsychological studies have suggested that there are specific systems of storage and structures contained in our memory.
