Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PSYCHOLOGY 1 memory > General. Notes > Flashcards

General. Notes Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® Psychology flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards Psychology 101 flashcards
1
Q

Brandimonte visual coding

A

Ppts given six line drawings of familiar objects and asked to memorise
Asked to form mental image and subtract specific part.
Asked to name resulting image
On average remembered half images, after distraction task, remember d better as it suppress d acoustic coding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Millers magic 7

A

Capacity 5-9 items

Chunk method used to take up lesser capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Peterson and Peterson trigrams

A

Recall series of trigrams (varied time interval) counted backwards whilst rehearsing, 90% after 3sec interval and 5% after 18sec
Show info is kept through rehearsal and stm has limited capacity when prevented
- low ecological validity and lack of mundane realism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Different types of memory proof

A

Clive Wearing
Lack of episodic but procedural still in place
Suggest separate stores

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Bahrick et al duration of LTM

A

392 graduates shown HS yearbook photos
Recognition group given group of names and photos and recall just given photos
Recognition group 90% accurate after 14yrs and 60% after 47
Recall 60% after 14 and 20% after 47

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Serial position effect Glanzer and Cunitz

A

20word list one at a time and asked to free recall any words
Primary and decency effect
With distraction task: recent words affected (in STM)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Evaluation of MSM

A

+ evidence of Clive Wearing supports existence of Sep stores
+ Glanzer and Cunitz only words in STM effected by distraction task
- criticised as reductionist and inflexible
- processes involved in encoding not explained
- Baddeley and Hitch WMM may be more comprehensive and detailed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Working memory model

A

Episodic buffer- links pieces of info together
Central executive- drives whole system and allocates info to PL and VSS , cognitive and problem solving tasks
Visuo spatial scratchpad- stores visual and spatial info, visual cache- form and colour info, inner scribe- space and movement info
Phonological loop- speech based info, and speech perception, articulatory control processes (inner scribe): speech production
End LTM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Coding throughout WMM

A

Central executive: processes info in all sensory forms
Phonological loop: auditory info and order of
VSS: temporary store for visual and spatial items
Episodic buffer: stores info combined together from CE, PL, VSS, LTM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Capacity of WMM

A

Central executive: limited and only deals with 1 piece, baddeley- hard for ppts to generate list of numbers whilst switching keyboard of nos and letters
PL: baddeley and the word length effect, recalled more short words in serial order, how long to say rather than no
VSS: limited
Episodic buffer: biological evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evaluation of WMM

A

+More detailed than MSM, can explain dual processing
+ brain scanning- different parts of the brain active when processing different types of info
- can’t rely too heavily on case studies- may not be representative
-central executive is main part but least known about

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Baddeley evidence of WMM

A

Word length effect disappears with articulatory suppr Saigon task- evidence of articulatory process
Visuo spatial scratch pad- difficult to follow moving spot of light with a pointer whilst envisaging an ‘F’ and each angle- ok with verbal task- demonstrates VSS ability to multitask

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Tulving long term memory

A

Injected with radioactive gold and asked to perform 8 successive trials of half semantic and half episodic
Lie face up and indulge in episodic or semantic LTM retrieval
3 ppts produced inconclusive data, 3 others consistent differences in blood flow patterns between semantic and episodic thinking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Evaluation of episodic memory

A
  • extent to which episodic and semantic memory differ is unclear
    + support from tulving
    + uses objective scientific techniques
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Clive Wearing

A

Demonstrates Sep stores: episodic and semantic still able to function yet maintained procedural memory of playing piano

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Evaluation of procedural memory

A

+ case study of HM- unable to form explicit memories yet could learn and remember perceptual and motor skills
- general lack of research, only through brain damaged sufferers
+ Clive wearing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

STM study baddeley

A

75 ppts presented with 1 of 4 word lists repeated 4 times:
Acoustically or semantically similar or dissimilar
Asked to present list in the original order when given list of in incorrect order
Did the same but with 20min interval before recall- performed another task to prevent recall
STM, confused acoustic- coded acoustically
LTM, coded semantically

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Describe interference theory

A

Assumes forgetting is due to info in LTM becoming confused with or disrupted by other info
Proactive interference- works forward in time, info previously stored interferes
Retroactive interference- works backwards in time, new info disrupts old

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Research of retroactive interference

A

Schmidt et al
Gave map of old neighbourhood in which ppts went to school and replaced roads with numbers, asked to recall, amount of retroactive interference assessed by no. Of times moved
Results: positive association between no of times moved and no of name remembered, learning new pattern of street names when moving makes recalling old ones harder
- no of extraneous variables such as if they walked to school
+ real life setting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Evaluation of the interference explanation of forgetting

A
  • only explains forgetting when two pieces of info are similar
    + research evidence such as Schmidt et al
  • low ecological validity- can’t generalise to real world
    + research conducted under controlled conditions, est cause and effect, increase validity, more replicable
  • studies suggest effect yet do not and cannot identify cognitive processes at work
  • more evidence for cue dependent forgetting
21
Q

Cue dependent forgetting

A

Either context or state dependent
Info in LTM but cannot be accessed
Dependent on retrieval cues

22
Q

Tulving cue dependent

A

Encoding specificity principle- recall likely to be poorer if context of recall is different to how it was at coding
Suggested effectiveness of a cue is now deep processing was and how well the cue fits with the info associated

23
Q

Context dependent failure research

A

External environment different @ recall from where info was originally learnt
Abernathy: ppts recalled less well when tested by unfamiliar teacher in unfam room than familiar, worse with lack of context dependent cues
Godden + Baddeley: scuba diver learnt material on either dry land or underwater- recall poorer when tested in diff context to coding- context cause of forgetting

24
Q

State dependent failure research

A

Internal retrieval cues (phys or emo state) are different
Overton: ppts learned in drunk or sober state, asked to learn material and then recall (half in same half in diff state), found those learned and recalled in same state were better
Darley et al: ppts given marijuana and asked to hide money, less able to recall where they had hidden when not high
Tulving and Pearlstone: headings of words acted as retrieval cues

25
Q

Evaluation of cue dependent forgetting

A

+ high control- high validity
-low ecological validity
- godden + baddeleys findings only occur with free recall yet could recognise words
+ fits with levels of processing theory- deeply processes info at coding less likely to be forgotten
+ supported with research evidence
+ real world applications eg crime scenes
+ improvement on interference theory

26
Q

Factors affecting encoding/ storage/ retrieval of EWT

A

Encoding- anxiety, substance influence, attention, emotions
Storage- age, interference
Retrieval- absence of retrieval cues, method of questioning

27
Q

Effect of misleading info on accuracy

A

1) leading questions encourage certain answers, inc likelihood of schemes influencing response
2) post event discussion- misleading info added following event

28
Q

Misleading information EWT Loftus and Palmer

A

Investigate whether leading questions distort accuracy of immediate recall
45 students shown seven films of different road traffic accidents and asked series of questions about what they had seen
Critical question: ‘about how fast were the cars gout when they…’
HSBCC: hit, smashed, bumped, collided and contacted
Verb used- IV speed estimates- DV

29
Q

Findings, conclusions and evaluation of Loftus and Palmer EWT

A

9mile diff between smashed and contacted
Leading questions can effect memory recall by distorting the memory being asked to recall of eye witnesses
+ highly controlled lab experiments
- low Eco val: specifically mundane realism
- use of students

30
Q

Loftus and Palmer second experiment

A

Ppt with ‘smashed’ 2x more likely to recall broken glass

17% recalled white barn if put in question

31
Q

Leading questions Loftus and Palmer

A

41% of ppts who had been asked misleading questions picked correct order of slides of a car stopping at sign
Suggest post even and misleading questions impact memory
Replication found little diff if slides presented in correct order

32
Q

Effect of blatantly incorrect info

A

Resisted blatantly incorrect info of a purse being brown when it was red; 98% correctly remembered in immediate recall test

33
Q

Conformity effect- post event discussion

A

Gabbert et al- put ppts in pairs and showed different videos of the same event so they saw different items
1/2 pair encouraged to discuss event before individually recalling to researches
71% of those who discussed video recalled items they hadn’t seen

34
Q

Evaluation of research evidence into EWT

A 
\+ high control
- low Eco val 
\+ real world application
- vulnerable to demand characteristics 
- more susceptible as don't expect to be misled by researcher 
- lack of fully informed consent
35
Q

Role of anxiety in EWT: Loftus et al (1979)

A

Effect of anxiety on ppts ability to accurately ID individual involved in the event witnessed
1) overheard low key discussion about equipment failure, ind came out holding a pen with grease on their hands
2) heated conversation, smash of glass and crashing chairs, ind came out holding paper knife covered in blood
Gave 50photos and asked to ID individual, 49% successfully identified man holding the pen and 33% identified man holding knife
Led to weapon focus phenomenon

36
Q

Evaluation of role of anxiety on EWT Loftus et al

A

+ supported by later Loftus and burns; ppts who saw violent film version (boy shot in the face) had less accurate recall than non violent

  • ethical issues- cause high anxiety
  • uses lab study to inv weapon focus- low Eco val and possibility of demand characteristics
37
Q

Research on EWT on real life witnesses

A

Yullie & Cutshall: 13 witnesses of real life shooting during armed robbery of a shop: found witness’s gave very accurate accounts several months later and those closest most a accurate
Christiansen and hubinette: questioned genuine bank robbery witnesses, victims provided better detail and superior recall several months later
Foster et al: role of consequentiality- when ppts told it was genuine event identification was more accurate
Yerkes Dodson inverted U hypothesis

38
Q

Evaluation of the effect of anxiety on EWT

A

+ lab studies such as Loftus (1979) have high control
+ use of real life witnesses mean high Eco gal
- inconsistency in research findings
- could be surprise rather than anxiety eg pickel found id least accurate in high surprise conditions rather than high threat
- studies potentially unethical- high levels of psychological harm
- individual differences et age/ personality may impact

39
Q

Cognitive interview

A

Suggested by Geiselmen et al (1985) that CI elicits more accurate info from eyewitnesses by police investigators

1) mental reinstatement of context
2) report everything
3) change of narrative order
4) change of perspective

40
Q

Differences in SPI and CI

A

Revolve around interviewer
Witness discouraged from adding extra info
Interviewer give fixed, specific questions
May ask unconsciously leading questions to confirm own beliefs
Disrupt natural process of searching through memory: thus making memory retrieval inefficient and potentially inaccurate

41
Q

Evaluation of cognitive interview

A

+ Geiselman et al found that CI procedure produce more accurate and detailed memories than SPI techniques or those conducted under hypnosis
Found that CI produces both more accurate and inaccurate detail
Geiselman found after 48hrs following showing a violent crime video to students that CI was more effective at getting correct info yet inc number of incorrect or confabulated items
+ Holliday showed two groups of children minute video of children’s birthday party- next day interviews: CI produced more accurate recall
- practical issues: more specialist training and time consuming, more expensive

42
Q

Role of anxiety in EWT: Loftus et al (1979)

A

Effect of anxiety on ppts ability to accurately ID individual involved in the event witnessed
1) overheard low key discussion about equipment failure, ind came out holding a pen with grease on their hands
2) heated conversation, smash of glass and crashing chairs, ind came out holding paper knife covered in blood
Gave 50photos and asked to ID individual, 49% successfully identified man holding the pen and 33% identified man holding knife
Led to weapon focus phenomenon

43
Q

Evaluation of role of anxiety on EWT Loftus et al

A

+ supported by later Loftus and burns; ppts who saw violent film version (boy shot in the face) had less accurate recall than non violent

  • ethical issues- cause high anxiety
  • uses lab study to inv weapon focus- low Eco val and possibility of demand characteristics
44
Q

Research on EWT on real life witnesses

A

Yullie & Cutshall: 13 witnesses of real life shooting during armed robbery of a shop: found witness’s gave very accurate accounts several months later and those closest most a accurate
Christiansen and hubinette: questioned genuine bank robbery witnesses, victims provided better detail and superior recall several months later
Foster et al: role of consequentiality- when ppts told it was genuine event identification was more accurate
Yerkes Dodson inverted U hypothesis

45
Q

Evaluation of the effect of anxiety on EWT

A

+ lab studies such as Loftus (1979) have high control
+ use of real life witnesses mean high Eco gal
- inconsistency in research findings
- could be surprise rather than anxiety eg pickel found id least accurate in high surprise conditions rather than high threat
- studies potentially unethical- high levels of psychological harm
- individual differences et age/ personality may impact

46
Q

Cognitive interview

A

Suggested by Geiselmen et al (1985) that CI elicits more accurate info from eyewitnesses by police investigators

1) mental reinstatement of context
2) report everything
3) change of narrative order
4) change of perspective

47
Q

Differences in SPI and CI

A

Revolve around interviewer
Witness discouraged from adding extra info
Interviewer give fixed, specific questions
May ask unconsciously leading questions to confirm own beliefs
Disrupt natural process of searching through memory: thus making memory retrieval inefficient and potentially inaccurate

48
Q

Evaluation of cognitive interview

A

+ Geiselman et al found that CI procedure produce more accurate and detailed memories than SPI techniques or those conducted under hypnosis
Found that CI produces both more accurate and inaccurate detail
Geiselman found after 48hrs following showing a violent crime video to students that CI was more effective at getting correct info yet inc number of incorrect or confabulated items
+ Holliday showed two groups of children minute video of children’s birthday party- next day interviews: CI produced more accurate recall
- practical issues: more specialist training and time consuming, more expensive

PSYCHOLOGY 1 memory (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions