Cognitive-memory Flashcards
Baddeley, research on coding
interested in how memories in STM would be stored.
group 1 acoustically similar- cat,cab, can
group 2 acoustically dissimilar- pit, cow, bin
group 3 semantically similar- large, huge
group 4 semantically dissimilar- good, hot
ppts told to remember their words and then repeat them in the right order.
results- when told to recall immediately, group 1 did far worse than the others.
when told to do this after 20 mins group 3 did the worst.
shows STM encoded acoustically and LTM is encoded semantically.
evaluation-
high internal reliability- standardised procedure in lab setting
limitation- artificial stimuli instead of meaningful material
can’t be generalised
Jacobs, research on capacity
wanted to see how many numbers we could hold in our STM. Gave ppts 4 numbers to remember, if these were correct he moved onto 5, then 6 and so on. stopping once they can’t recall anymore.
results- he found that the mean average span was 7+/-2
evaluation-
low external reliability- results may not be valid because of confounding variables
limitation- a long time ago so lacks adequate control
high internal reliability- carried out in lab conditions, controlled.
Peterson and Peterson, research on duration
wanted to see if stopping rehearsal would lead to memory decay. ppts were given a trigram to remember(YCG). as they were told it they had to count backwards to 0. condition 1- count backwards from 3 seconds and then recall trigram
condition 6- count backwards from 18 seconds and then recall trigram
results- 80% of ppts could recall in the first condition. performance slowly declined. concluded our short term duration is under 30 seconds unless we rehearse things over and over.
evaluation-
low external validity- cant be generalised, as small amount of ppts
high internal reliability- conducted in a lab
limitations- conducted a long time ago so lacked adequate control.
Types of long term memory
Episodic memory- ability to recall events from our lives, like a diary and record of daily happenings
eg. food you ate, concerts you went to.
semantic memory- contains knowledge of the world, like a dictionary/encyclopedia. eg. meaning of words, what food tastes like. less personal and more about facts.
procedural memory- memory of actions, skills and how to do things. recall without conscious effort. eg. driving a car or riding a bike.
Explanations for forgetting, effects of similarity, mcgeogh and mcdonald
Effects of similarity, Mcgeogh and Mcdonald- list of words recalled until 100% correct. then learn the 2nd list until 100%. then recall the original list, in correct order, as best as possible.
results- if recalling synonyms recall of original list was worse, due to similarity of words confusing ppts. interference theory is more likely to happen if info is similar.
evaluation-
diff research- baddeley and hitch proved interference in rugby player study.
high internal reliability- control over variables and standardised procedure.
low external validity- low ecological validity as it wasn’t real life.
high external reliability- can be replicated with similar results
Explanations for forgetting, context dependent forgetting, godden and baddeley
had deep sea divers learn a list of words either on land or underwater and then recall on land or underwater.
results- recall was 40% worse in non matching conditions. concluded that it is the context and the fact that cues were missing.
evaluation-
low ecological validity- not real life setting, words were meaningless
high reliability- controlled experiment that can be replicated.
Explanations for forgetting, state dependent, Carter and cassady
gave ppts antihistamine tablets which made them slightly drowsy. ppts had to learn and recall words in different conditions.
results- recall was worse when mismatch between states of learning and recall. supported evidence that our state will act as a cue on memories stored.
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony, leading questions, loftus and Palmer
looking at ewt and the questions asked. 45 ppts were shown video of cars colliding. asked how fast the cars were going when they … into each other. Each group was told a different word, hit, contacted, smashed, collided and bumped.
results-
smashed- 40.8
contacted 31.8
how the question was worded influenced the ppts speed estimates. when the word smashed was used ppts predicted the highest speed
evaluation-
low ecological validity- ppts viewed clips meaning less emotional impact compared to if it was real life.
high internal reliability- method was a laboratory experiment following a standardised procedure.
low external validity- cant generalise the results to other populations. eg older drivers may have better judgement.
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony, post event discussion, gabbert at al,
ppts watched a video of a fight in a restaurant, they all viewed from different angles. each ppt could see different things. they discussed what they’d seen and had to recall events.
results- 71% of ppts recalled events incorrectly. the control group with no discussion recalled 100% correctly. witnesses often go along with others.
evaluation-
low ecological validity- results don’t reflect everyday examples of crime as witnesses are exposed to less information
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony, anxiety, Johnson and Scott- negative effect on recall
Ppts in a waiting room thinking they’re doing a memory test. an argument played out next door.
condition 1- man walked through holding pen with grease on his hands
condition 2- sound of breaking glass and man walked through holding paper knives with bloody hands.
results- when asked to pick the man out from picture 49/50 who saw a man with a pen could do it. Only 33% could recall who saw the man with blood.
Tunnel theory= witness attention narrows to focus on the weapon.
evaluation-
high internal reliability
low external/ecological validity
further research- yuille and cutshall
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony, anxiety, yuille and cutshall- positive effect on recall
interviewed 13 people who had witnessed a fatal shooting in a gun shop in vancouver. ppts had to rate their stress and anxiety at the time of the incident. they then had to recall all the details they could remember of the event.
results- ppts who recorded highest anxiety were the most accurate
evaluation-
too subjective- ppts own opinion on the levels
high ecological validity- ppts witnessed a real-life shooting
low internal validity- social desirability and demand characteristics
contradicts yerkes dodson law
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony, Valentine and mesout
wanted to test yerkes-dodson law in a real-life setting. ppts wore a heart rate monitor round london dungeons. H/R was read at the end of the maze putting them in 2 groups (high/low anxiety). They then had to complete a questionnaire, one question being describe a specific actor in the maze.
results- high anxiety group recalled less information than low anxiety group. 17% of high anxiety recalled the correct actor. 75% of low anxiety recalled the correct order.
evaluation-
can’t be generalised to wider population
high internal reliability- standardised procedure.
Improving the accuracy of eyewitness testimony,police cognitive interview, fisher and geiselman
report everything- recall info, even little bits
reinstate context- recall environmental and emotional context eg. weather and feelings
reverse the order- recall in different order
change perspectives- recall from different peoples perspectives
Enhanced cognitive interview
designed to build a trusting relationship between interviewer and witness. social acceptance- interviewees are more comfortable. links to yerkes dodson law
evaluation-
strength- social implications, EWT will improve, reliability of crime solving will increase. crimes solved more efficiently.
diff research- Y and C argue eyewitnesses need to be anxious to recall. ci suggests they should be relaxed.
can’t be generalised- doesn’t work for children as they cant imagine diff POV
