cognitive psychology Flashcards
define the term cognitive psychology
how behaviour is affected by cognitive processes
define the term memory
our ability to encode, store, retain and recall information and past experiences
The Multi-Store Model
who created this theory
Atkinson and Shiffrin
Multi- Store Model
define information processing
the idea that information is processed in a linear way meaning it flows through the brain in a way that is logical
Multi- Store Model
define encoding
the way in which information is registered as a memory e.g. sound or smell
Multi- Store Model
define storage
how the information remains as a memory once it is registered
Multi- Store Model
define retrieval
how we find and access stored memories
Multi- Store Model
define capacity
the size of the memory store - how much information can be held
Multi- Store Model
define duration
how long information remains in the memory store
Multi- Store Model
how do memories disappear from the STM
displacement or decay
Multi-Store Model
how do memories disappear from the LTM
inteference
Multi- Store Model
what is the duration, capacity, and encoding of the sensory store
- duration - o.5 to 2 seconds
- capacity - very large
- encoding - modality specific - the 5 senses
Multi- Store Model
what is the duration, capacity, and encoding of the STM
- duration - 18 to 30 seconds
- capacity - 5 +/- 2
- encoding - acoustically (sound)
Multi- Store Model
what is the duration, capacity, and encoding of the LTM
- duration - lifetime
- capacity - unlimited
- encoding - semantic
Multi- Store Model
positive evaluation points
- credible - most evidence used to support the MSM is obtained from highly controlled lab experiments - memory ability was measured objectively
- useful application - can help people with dementia to rehearse information via memory aids e.g. diaries or repetition
- supporting evidence - HM had a STM functioning normally but couldn’t rehearse information to LTM (no hippocampus) - shows the two seperate stores
Multi- Store Model
negative evaluation points
- alternative expanation - Working Memory Model better expanation for STM - explores both visual and verbal memories
- reductionist - isolates just three specific memory stores even though memory = very complex - ignores other ways memories could be created e.g. flashback memories
- refuting evidence - KF had a LTM functioning normallty despite his STM being damaged - shows that STM doesn’t transfer to the LTM
the working memory model
who created the theory and when
Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
working memory model
explain the model
- argued the model of STM in the MSM was too simplistic
- replaced ‘Short Term’ to ‘Working Memory’
- meant to temporarily store and manipulate information
working memory model
explain the central executive
- responsible for monitering and coordinating the slave systems
- decides which information should be attended by the working memoryand where it goes (phonological loop or visuo-spatial sketchpad)
- directs attention to particular activities
working memory model
explain the phonological loop
deals with verbal information (spoken and written) and is split into two parts - phonological store and articulatory loop
working memory model
explain the phonological store
part of the phonological loop
- linked to speech perception (inner ear) and holds for 1 - 2 seconds
- written words are converted into articulatory (spoken) code before entering the phonological store
working memory model
explain the articulatory loop
part of the phonological loop
- linked to speech production (inner voice)
- rehearses information from the phonological store by circulating information around e.g. remembering a telephone number
- also converts written material into articulatory code and moves to the phonological store
working memory model
explain the visuo- spatial sketchad
deals with the visual and spatial information (inner eye) to help keep track of where we are in relation to other objects
working memory model
explain the episodic buffer
acts as a ‘back-up’ store that communicates with both the LTM and the WM
working memory model
when and why was the episodic buffer added
updated by Baddeley in 2000 after the firat model failed to explain experiments
working memory model
positive evaluation points
- supporting evidence - KF - brain damage after motorbike accident - STM impared (mainly verbal, visual left unaffected) - shows seperate memory stores
- credibility - numerous experiments by Baddeley (1960s) - carried on and found episodic buffer (2000) - improvements using hypotheticodeductive approach
- useful application - supporting dementia patients with daily routines - no distractions while giving instructions - can’t do two verbal tasks at the same time
working memory model
negative evaluation points
- refuting evidence - Lieberman (1980) - blind people have excellent spatial awarness - but never have visual information - visual and spatial may be two seperate stores
- alternative explanation - multi-store model - claims that LTM first enter sensory store - must be paid attention and rehearsed - goes beyond the WMM
- reductionist - isolates two sub-systems - ignores how information is passed from the to components to the LTM
Baddeley classic study on the working memory model
when did the study take place
1966b (second experiment that same year)
baddeley classic study on the working memory model
descirbe the aim
to see if the LTM is impared by semantic similarities and to show that the LTM is not impaied by acoustic similarities
baddeley classic study on the working memory model
descirbe the sample
- 72 mainly houswives that were paid a small amount
- volunteer sample from the Applied Psychological Research Unit at Cambridge University
baddeley classic study on the working memory model
what was the experimental design and what were the IV
independent group design - 4 groups
* control groups - acoustically dissimilar words - semantically dissimilar words
* experimental groups - acoustically similar words - semantically similar words
Baddeley classic study on the working memory model
describe the procedure
- participants got split into one of 4 groups
- list of 10 words presented on a projector- 1 every 3 seconds
- interference task was used - listen to 6 sequences of numbers and write it down
- had 40 seconds to write words in the correct order
REPEATED 4 TIMES FOR EACH GROUP - interference task used again - copying digits
- surprise recall used - words placed randomly around the room (all participants ended with 5 scores each)
baddeley classic study on the working memory
describe the results
- no significant figure between group A and group B
- significantly fewer words recalled in semantically similar condition (group C and D)
baddeley classic study on the working memory model
describe the conclusion
- the STM and LTM have different coding systems
- STM used acoustic encoding
- LTM uses semantic encoding (impaired by semantic similarities)
baddeley classic study on the working memory
positive evaluation points
- volunteer sample - quick and easy
- highyl controlled - all words has same frequency in everyday life - increases internal validity
- standardised procedure - words show up every 3 seconds on a projector - increases reliability
baddeley classic study on the working memory
negative evaluation points
- all sample from cambridge - ethnocentric - not representative to TP - lacks population validity
- lab experiment - artificial memory exp. - lacks ecological validity
- independent groups design - individual differences (attention levels/ mood) - effects results of the IV
reconstructive memory theory
who proposed this theory
Bartlett
reconstructive memory theory
how do we make new memories
search through previously stored information by using schemas
recontructive memory theory
define ‘schemas’
menatl frameworks that help us to organise information and the relationships between them
reconstructive memory theory
how do we dvelop schemas
through previous experinces we have had (e.g seeing a dog for the first time and thinking it’s a cat)
reconstructive memory theory
what happens when we recall a memory
we reconstruct it
reconstructive memory theory
define the term ‘effort after meaning’
we can store information once we make sense of it and it gains meaning
reconstructive memory theory
define rationalisation
we may change the memory for it to make sense uncontiously
reconstructive memory theory
define confabulation
make things up to fill in the gaps unconsiously - this may come from a steryotype we hold
reconstructive memory theory
positive evaluation points
- supporting evidence - Loftus et al - car accidents speeds were changed when differenct verbs used - memory changed by schemas
- psychology in society - Devlin Report (1976) - we should not convict someone with only single eyewitness account
- supporting evidence - Bartlett’s ‘war of the ghosts’ - each production of the stroy was reconstructed differently
reconstructive memory theory
negative evaluation points
- lacks credibility - no scientific detail from the brain - other theories provide evidence e.g. brain scans for episodic and semantic memory
- lacks credibility - Bartlett evolved the theory off the study - all smaple from Cambridge - cannot be generalised
- reductionist - isolates schemas as the factor - ignores other concepts such as rehearsal
sebastian and hernandez–gil contemporary study
when did the study take place
2012
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
describe the aim
investgate the development of the phonological loop in children by testing verbal digital span and to compare results with previously obtained results from adults, elderly people ad dementia patients
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
describe the sample
- 570 participants (males and females)
- volunteer sample from the community of Madrid
- from public/ private schools - aged 5-17
- no hearing or writing impairements
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
describe the prcodeure
- divided into 5 different age categorises (cross-section study)
- allowed researchers to study differences between ages
- digital span task used to measure capacity of phonological loop (random sequence of digits read aloud one word per second)
- digit span was taken as the max length where participants could recall 2 out of 3 series
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
what were the mean digit spans for each group
- 5 yrs old - 3.76
- 6 yrs old - 4.16
- 17 yrs old - 5.91
Found that digit span increased with age
sebastian and hernandez-gil contempoary study
what were the comparisons between the Anglo-Saxon children
- (2012) increased until 17 but Anglo-Saxon peaked at 15
- (2012) figures were aroun d one digit below Anglo-Saxon
- (2012) highlighted the difference in word length (the longer it takes to say the word- more the trace would decay)
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
what were the comparisons of the study on elderly people in 2010
- 25 people without impairments - 25 with Alzheimers - 9 people with frontal temporal dementia
- elderly had higher mean (4.44) than 5 and 6 year olds
- no difference with other groups
- Alzheimer patients mean (4.2) was higher that 5 year olds but o difference with other groups
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
describe the conclusion
the phonological loop is affected by age but not so much by dementia
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
positive evaluation points
- population validity - 570 children from range of different schools - increases generalisability
- standardised procedure - all tested using digit scan task - easily replicated with other psychologist - increases internal validity
- application in society - findings of the development of the phonological loop - teachers can find ways to assist children with difficulties
sebastian and hernandez-gil contemporary study
negatives evaluation points
- ethnocentric - all from Madrid and born in Spain - not representative
- ecological valdity - remembering sequences of random digits - not used in every day life - artificial test of memory
- ethics (responsibility) - may not fully understand the purpose of the test - may feel they are not doing well on recalling digits - may feel distress
epsiodic and semantic memory
who created the theory
Tulving
epsiodic and semantic memory
define episodic memory
- recieves and stores information about past experiences and events at specific times - autobiographical in nature
episodic and semantic memory
what parts of the brain are linked to episodic memory
frontal lobe and hippocampus
episodic and semantic memory
what is episodic memory dependent on
- time-referencing memories about events
- context when the memory was learnt/ experienced (aids retrieval)
- semantic memory - need to draw up on knowledge to understand it
episodic and semantic memory
what did Tulving state about epsiodic memory
about the memory trace
memory can transform during retrieval - so the memory trace may change
episodic and semantic memory
examples of epsiodic memory
first day of school or remembering your 16th birthday
episodic and semantic memory
define semantic memory
memory of meanings and words - knowledge
episodic and emantic memory
what part of the brain is linked to semantic memory
temporal lobe
episodic and semantic memory
is the semantic memory dependent on anything
no
episodic and semantic memory
examples of the semantic memory
grass is green - how to use a phone
episodic and semantic memory
positive evaluation points
- credibility - brain scans how increased activity in the temporal lobe when semantic memories are recalled - obejective evidence of different stores
- supporting evidence - Irish et al (2011) - Alzheimer patients - remembered episodic but not semantic e.g. taking medication
- supporting evidence - patient HM - hippocampus removed and damaged temporal lobe - can’t make new LTM (epsiodic and semantic) - links between specific areas of the brain
epsiodic and semantic memory
negative evaluation points
- reductionist - isolates two main parts - no metion of procedural - ignores presence of STM to LTM
- credibility - semantic and epsiodic difficut to seperate - words can have semantic meaning and epsiodic meaning - impossible to determine whether a person is using only one type of these memories
- refuting evidence - Squire and Zola (1998) children and adults with amnesia - both semantic and episodic impaired - suggests two types of memory are linked
Patient HM
What happened to Patient HM
had surgery and got amnesia
patient HM
what parts of the brain were damaged
Hippocampus (removed) and temporal lobe
patient HM
what was patient HM unable to do
form new LTM - hippocampus believed to moving STM to LTM but could remember epsiodic memories from before
patient HM
what could patient HM still do
procedural skills (but forgot them within a day) and working memory
patient HM
how old was he and when did he have surgery
26 (1953)
case studies and patient HM
positive evaluation points
- avoids ethical issues of invasive investigation
- credibile - ultilises neuroimaging techniques (objective data)
- concurrent validity - collects large amount of data with several techniques
case studies and patient HM
negative evaluation points
- cause and effect - only study patient after damage - don’t know what he was like before
- low validity - neuroimaging may not pick up smaller sites of damage - e.g. mild traumatic brain injury
- population validity - unique cases - might not be generaisable to other brain damaged patients
case studies
what is a case study
research carried out on an individual/ small group over a long period of time
case studies
what data do case studies collect
quantitative and qualitative
case studies
examples of how to get quantitative data for brain damaged patients
IQ tests , memory tests, closed questions, brain scans
