COGNITIVE - MODELS OF MEMORY Flashcards
MSM - Atkinson & Shiffrin (1986)
info/stimulus -> sensory memory -(attention)-> STM -(elaborative rehearsal)->LTM
->the sensory register encodes information from the senses (eg. auditory info)
–>when attention is paid to this information it is passes into the STM store
–>the short term store is a temporary store, with a capacity of 5-9 chunks of information
–>the STM store capacity can be increased using maintenance rehearsal (eg. chunking)
–>the rehearsal becomes elaborative (eg. using a mnemonic as a memory technique) the info is transferred to LTM
–>the LTM is a potentially permanent store for material that has been rehearsed over a long period of time
–>we can transfer information from our LTM to our STM through retrieval (eg. using cues)
–>forgetting in the sensory memory happens due to decay, forgetting in the STM happens due to decay and displacement, forgetting in the LTM happens due to retrieval failure and interference during rehearsal
AO3: EVALUATION
E-> (strength) Peterson & Peterson provide evidence to support the process of rehearsal as a key component of MSM
–>they gave ppts trigrams to recall with an interference task: after 3 secs ppts recalled 90% of trigrams, after 18 secs only 6% were recalled, and after 30 secs 0% were recalled
A-> (strength) the MSM gives us an understanding of the structure and process of the STM
–>we can apply this knowledge IRL as it teaches us how we remember things, eg. using cues to retrieve memories from LTM to STM
–>students can use this information to aid their revision
C-> (weakness) the WMM (Baddeley & Hitch, 1974) actually suggests that the STM has multiple components
–>the WMM suggests that STM is much more complex than the MSM states, eg. the STM includes a central executive, phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad, and an episodic buffer
–>therefore suggesting that the MSM is inaccurate/incomplete
H-> (weakness) the research into MSM is weak as it uses case studies (eg. CW)
–>although case studies are highly valid, they are not reliable or generalisable and they are not representative as they are highly unique to the individual being studied
–>therefore, we cannot say that the MSM represents how everyone’s memory works as the findings are exclusive to the individual studied
WMM - Baddeley & Hitch (1974)
-the WMM is only a model for STM and was constructed based on findings from dual-task studies
CENTRAL EXECUTIVE:
->central control system that has a “supervisory role”
->an attention process which focuses, divides, and switches attention
->monitors incoming data, makes decisions & allocates tasks to subsystems
->does not store any information
PHONOLOGICAL LOOP:
->deals with auditory information
->preserves the order in which the info arrives
->2 sec capacity
->phonological store = stores auditory info
->articulatory loop = maintenance rehearsal in a loop format (repetition as rehearsal)
VISUOSPATIAL SKETCHPAD:
->temporarily stores visual & spatial info
->allows us to create images we’ve seen in the past
->limited capacity of 3-4 objects
->visual cache stores visual data
->inner scribe = records arrangements of objects in the visual field - allows rehearsal of visual/spatial info to maintain it in the visual cache
EPISODIC BUFFER:
->the episodic buffer was added in 2001
->it is a temporary store that integrates the acoustic, visual and spatial info processed by other subsystems with the LTM
->it maintains a sense of time sequencing - records episodes that are happening
->holds either auditory or visual
->limited capacity of 4 chunks
AO3: EVALUATION
E-> (strength) Baddeley’s 1986 dual task expts support the existence of separate systems in the WMM
–>ppts were asked to perform 2 tasks using different stores simultaneously and found that both tasks (visual and auditory) could be performed at the same time
->this therefore supports that STM has multiple components
A-> (strength) the WMM applies to real life tasks such as reading (phonological loop) and problem solving (central executive) and navigations (visuospatial sketchpad)
–>we know that learning difficulties like dyslexia can affect either the phonological loop or the visuospatial sketchpad
–>therefore, strategies can be put into place to help with reading or writing
C-> (strength) there is evidence of the WMM in brain damage patients
–>neuro-imaging studies with healthy people suggests that the phonological loop consists of a phonological store and articulatory loop located in different brain regions
–>the evidence comes from the case study of KF (1974) who suffered STM damage due to an accident damaging his parietal lobe
H-> (weakness) the research into WMM has low validity
–>Baddeley added the episodic buffer in 2001, making the model more complex than it was originally in 1974
–>this means that the model is evidently incomplete and requires further examination
reconstructive memory - Bartlett (1932)
AO1:
->schemas: Bartlett drew on the concept of schemas to explain his findings. Schemas are little parcels of knowledge. Therefore, schemas can cause people to distort unfamiliar or unconsciously unacceptable info in order to fit better with our existing knowledge
->rationalisation: this is when ppts tend to change the order of the story to make more sense of it using terms more familiar to the culture of the ppts. They also added more detail and/or emotion to the story (War of The Ghosts)
->simplification: the recall of memory can become less detailed as time goes on, as a person will omit information until only the central details remain (eg the War of The Ghosts story was shortened from 330 words to 180 as ppts cut out the unimportant details)
->transformation/confabulation: when the story becomes more consistent with the ppts own cultural expectations (eg. War of the Ghosts: ppts unconsciously changed details to fit British culture)
AO3: EVALUATION
E-> (strength) Bartlett’s 1932 “War of the Ghosts” study provides evidence to support the reconstructive memory theory
–>ppts were asked to recall the “War of the Ghosts” folk tale. Very few ppts could accurately recall the story: some left out details or forgot the order of events, whereas other ppts added false details. The story was simplified from 330 to 180 words
–>this therefore supports the idea of reconstructive memory as ppts recalled and reconstructed the story, meaning it wasn’t the same as the original memory stored
A-> (strength) this theory has IRL application as it is useful in understanding how our memory can be manipulated by post event information, which is important for EWT
–>we know that gaps in our memory can be filled in with schemas, making the memory inaccurate (eg. the Innocence Project 2015 found 72% of wrongful convictions were a result of EWT)
–>this is useful to the police in ensuring that they don’t contribute to witnesses reconstructing events and making sure they give their own account rather than being influenced by leading questions
C-> (weakness) Yuille and Cutshall (1986) provide evidence that suggests the reconstructive memory theory is inaccurate, opposing Bartlett
–>their study involved real eye witnesses of a shooting in Vancouver, recalling the shooting 6 months later. Although there was a 6 month gap between the event and the recall, and leading questions were asked, recall remained highly accurate
–>therefore opposing Bartlett’s reconstructive memory
H-> (weakness) the research is not the most valid
–>the “War of the Ghosts” story (used to formulate the theory) is a folk tale, which are usually written in an unusual style
–>therefore, the research may not be representative of how memory works in everyday life. The study also lacks mundane realism as we are not commonly asked to recall folk tales, further decreasing the validity of the research
Tulving’s LTM (semantic & episodic) (1972)
AO1:
->SEMANTIC: semantic memories are associated with other facts that link concepts together (eg. facts, number, general knowledge), they are processed by the temporal lobe
–>ENCODES acoustically
–>RETRIEVAL of semantic memories can occur without learning, it is not reliant on cues, but they can be used
–>FORGETTING: memory is strong and less susceptible to transformation (eg. 2+2=4 will always remain the same)
->EPISODIC: episodic memories are autobiographical, they are personal to each individual based on our unique experiences (emotional knowledge), they are processed by the hippocampus
–>uses all forms of ENCODING (acoustic and semantic), stored in terms of temporal links (when) and spatial links (where)
–>RETRIEVAL occurs by using cues which are encoded at the point of learning (using prior knowledge to access the memory)
–>FORGETTING can occur as memories can be changed/distorted in context as linked to previous memories, forgetting happens due to RETRIEVAL FAILURE
AO3: EVALUATION
E-> (strength) CW supports Tulving’s idea of different types of LTM
–>his hippocampus was damaged so his episodic memory was damaged, but he can still play the piano so his procedural memory was still in tact
–>therefore, this shows that LTM can be split into different stores which are episodic, semantic, and procedural
A-> (strength) understanding of episodic and semantic distinctions has given rise to real life applications
–>Belleville Et Al (2006) improved the episodic memories of older people with mild memory impairment
–>this is a benefit of identifying different types of LTM as it can be used to help people with specific memory problems to lead more normal lives
C-> (weakness) Tulving failed to explain other types of LTM
–>both CW and HM were able to learn skills (eg. CW played the piano and HM was able to complete the star task) showing that they could learn new motor functions
–>it was later found that there may be a third store called procedural memory, which this theory does not consider
H-> (weakness) it is hard to test the 2 separate stores
–>episodic and semantic memory rely on each other, so a list of words intended to test semantic memory may also accidentally include episodic memory
–>therefore, making it difficult to verify separate stores in experimental evidence
