Introductory topics: Flashcards
Conrad:
1964
-aim: to see how information is encoding in STM
-procedure:
-showed participants a random series of 6 consonants and asked them to remember them
-there were two conditions: acoustically similar (P,D,T) and acoustically dissimilar words (D,O)
-participants had to write them down in order
-findings: participants made frequent errors of recall, they also found out it hard to recall strings of letters that sounded similar. It was therefore concluded that STM is encoded phonologically
Conrad: evaluation
Strength:
-the idea that STM is encoded acoustically is supported by Baddeley 1966
Weaknesses:
-lacks realism: the use of single letters does not compromise a reflection of the memory tasks we encounter in everday life
-other methods of encoding, such as visual (or even taste and smell) are also used
Baddeley:
1966
-aim: to test whether LTM was encoded acoustically or semantically
-procedure:
-participants were provided with different word lists that either sounded similar or meant similar things
-the 72 participants were recruited through opportunity sampling and were randomly allocated to four groups
-predictions:
-if participants could remember more similar-sounding words, LTM would be encoded acoustically
-on the contrary, if participants remembered more words with similar meanings, LTM would be encoded semantically
-the IV had two levels: 1. Acoustically similar words vs. Acoustically dissimilar words, 2. Semantically similar words vs, semantically dissimilar ones
-the DV was the score on a recall test of 10 words, participants had to recall the words in the order they were presented
Baddeley 1966: different phases
-the learning phase was seperated from the testing phase by an interference test in which participants had to hear and write numbers
-in the testing phase, participants took part in a recall test
-for the recall test, participants needed to recall the words and the order in which they appeared
-this procedure was repeated four times, after the fourth trial, participants took a break and completed an unrelated interference task
-to their surprise, they were aked to recall the list of words again after the break
Baddeley 1966: findings
-when calculating the results, the performance of the individuals in groups 1 and 2 was compared, as well as the performance of groups 3 and 4, seperately
-further, participants’ peformance on the 5th trial was analysed to test for forgetting
-the results indicated that:
-acoustically similar words were harder to recall than acoustically dissimilar words, remembering the words cap, hat, and sack is more difficult than remembering cow, dad and led
-semantically similar words were harder to recall than semantically dissimilar words, remembering the words big, large, and huge is more difficult than remembering hot, pen, and man
-when assessing STM, this is when comparing trials before the break, the worse performance was for the acoustically similar words
-performance was overall better on the semantic condition than on the acoustic one
Baddeley 1966: conclusion
-the main conclusion that Baddeley drew from such results is that LTM is encoded semantically
-this comes from the fact that performance on the 5th condition was better for the semantic condition than for the acoustic one
-further, Baddeley (1966) concluded that STM is encoded acoustically
-this was deduced by the fact that performance on the short-term conditions (trials 1-3) was worse for semantically similar words
Repeated measures design: definition and example study
-a type of experimental design where the same subjects are used for each treatment or condition
-example study:
-Loftus conducted a study that used a r.m.d to explore how the information presented after an avent can alter a person’s memory of that event
-participants views a car crash video and then asked misleading questions
-this design was appropiate since it allowed her to control indidivdual differences, measure how memories change over time and increase statistical power by comparing responses from the same participants under different conditions
-demonstrated how post-event information can alter people’s memories of an event
Repeated measure design: advantages and disadvantages
advantages:
-increased statistical power -> reduces variability
-fewer participants needed -> more cost-effective
-control of condounding variables -> enhances internal validity by using same participants
-ability to track changes over time -> observes chamges within individuals across conditions
disadvantages:
-order effects (practice, fatigue) -> treatment order can influence results
-carryover effects -> previous treatments can affect responses in subsequent treatments
-participant attrition -> dropout can complicate results due to intertwined data
Primary-Recency effect: seperate definitions
-primacy effect: the items at the start of the list are more likely to be transferred to our long-term memory due to repeated rehearsal
-recency effect: the items at the end of the list are still in short-term memory when recall is promptly
Primary-Recency effect: information
-> the tendency to remember the first (primary) and last (rencency) items in a list, while forgetting those in the middle
-reasons: cognitive processess -> primacy and recency effect (other defs.) + memory -> primacy linked to long-term memory; recency linked to short-term memory
real life observations:
-shopping lists
-presentations
-job interviews
-exams
-everyday conversations
-application: understanding this effect can help structure information for imporved retention and recall
Glanzer and Cunitz: overview
-1966
-investifated the serial position effect, specificially the primacy recency effect in memory recall
-key concepts -> primacy effect + recency effect
Glanzer and Cunitz: method
-participants were presented with lists or words and were asked to recall them immediately after presentation
-the study varied the timing of the recall:
-immediate recall (no delay)
-delayed recall (participants counted backwards for 30 seconds before recalling)
Glanzer and Cunitz: findings
- Immediate recall:
-participants showed both primacy and recency effects; they remembered the first and last items best - delayed recall:
-the recency effect dimisnhed significantly after a delay (due to the displacement of stm)
-the primacy effect remained relatively intact, supporting the idea that early items were stored in long-term memory
Glanzer and Cunitz: conclusions
-the results supported the multi-store model of memory, indicating that stm accounts for the recency effect, while ltm accounts for primacy effect
-the study highlighted the distinct processes involved in memory retention and retrieval
