Memory 1

Question 1

coding definition and ST and LT

Answer 1

coding is the format in which information is stored, acoustically in ST and semantically in LT

Question 2

capacity in ST

Answer 2

amount of info that can be held in a memory store, span of ST is 7 item plus or minus 2, easier with chunking

Question 3

duration

Answer 3

length of time information can be held, ST is 18secs and LT is lifetime

Question 4

Evaluate Baddeleys study

Answer 4

•clear difference between two memory stores led to MSM
•artificial stimulus, no personal meaning, does not tell us about everyday life, limited application

Question 5

Evaluate research on capacity

Answer 5

•Jacobs study has been replicated, although old and ppt distracted (CV), confirmed by others Bopp et al, valid test
•Overestimated STM capacity, Cowan concluded capacity of STM is about 4 plus or minus 2

Question 6

evaluate research on duration

Answer 6

•peterson and peterson had an artificial stimulus, do not reflect everyday life, lacks external validity
•high external validity, investigated meaningful memories, real estimate of duration

Question 7

evaluate the MSM

Answer 7

•more than 1 STM store: Shallice and Warrington patient KF amnesia, good recall when he read digits than when were read out to him
•research support: Baddeley supports coding, mix up similar sounding words ST or similar meaning LT, independent stores
•elaborative rehearsal: Craik and Michael, type of rehearsal more important than amount, link info to existing knowledge (elaborative) better

Question 8

types of long term memory A03

Answer 8

•Clive Wearing and HM, procedural and semantic intact, episodic affected by brain damage eg HM stoking a dog can’t recall but understands concept of dog CW know how to play piano // difficult to control
•Conflicting neuroimaging evidence: Buckner and Petersen, left prefrontal cortex = semantic right = episodic Tulving links left to encoding of episodic and right to episodic retrieval
•Real work: help people with memory problems, elderly struggle with new episodic but not old, Belleville found training helps those with training performed better on episodic test

Question 9

evaluation of WWM

Answer 9

•Clinical evidence: Shallice and Warrington, patient KF, phonological loop damaged, visuo-spatial intact // lack of control, trauma
• Dual task: Baddeley, bad performance when both tasks were the same visual and verbal = same VSS compete
•nature of CE: Baddeley says most important, more than just attention, least understood, separate components

Question 10

evaluate interference

Answer 10

•real world application: Baddeley and Hitch, Rugby player, most games=poor recall
•interference and cues: Tulving and Psotka, list with no categories 70% for first list and got worse but after cues recall test (name of category) recall improved to 70% interference temporary loss , improved with cues
•Drug studies: Coenen et al, taking diazepam after learning reduces interference and forgetting = retrograde facilitation as prevents new info

Question 11

evaluate retrieval failure

Answer 11

•real world: Baddeley, cues weak but can help overcome ie room example
•support: Godden&Baddeley, Carter and Cassaday and others show lack of cues =context and state forgetting, Eysneck and Keane:main reason for forgetting
•recall vs recognition, Godden and Baddeley replicated underwater with recognition (recognised word from list) and recall improved, limited explaination

Question 12

evaluate misleading information

Answer 12

•Real world: Loftus believed in distorting effect on memory, importance in criminal justice system
•Evidence against substitution: Sutherland et al, central details not as affected (distorted) as peripheral
•Evidence challenging memory conformity: Wright et al, two clips with different hair colour, post discussion in pairs means hair colour blended

Question 13

evaluate anxiety

Answer 13

•unusualness not anxiety: Pickel, hairdressers scissors (high anxiety low unusual) raw chicken (high unusual) decreased recall so weapon focus due to unusual not anxiety
•support for negative: Valentine and Mesout, 2 condition w/ heart rate London Dungeon, recall actor
•support for positive: Christianson et al, bank robbery in 58 Sweden, direct witness better recall // lack of control

Question 14

Evaluate cognitive interview

Answer 14

•support for effectiveness: Kohnken, meta analysis 41% increase in accuracy in police interview // also increase in inaccurate info
•some elements may b more usefull, Milne and Bull report everything and reinstate context, doubts on credibility
• Time consuming, more time and training, time for rapport, may not be realistic

Question 15

evaluate research on coding

Answer 15

•separate memory stores, Baddeleys study identifies clear difference, STM uses acoustic coding, LTM mostly semantic stood test of time, led to MSM
•artificial stimuli, list had no personal meaning to ppts, doesn’t tell us about coding in real life meaningful info ppl may use semantic even for STM, limited application

Question 16

types of long term memory A01

Answer 16

Episodic: recall events, complex timed stamped memories, several elements eg people place behaviours, conscious effort to recall, declarative
Semantic: shared knowledge about the world eg facts and meaning of words, not time stamped, less personal, Tulving says less vulnerable or distortions and forgetting than episodic, declarative, conscious
Procedural: actions or skills, motor skills, muscle memory, unconscious awareness or efforts, automatic, had to verbalise non declarative

Question 17

Working memory model A01

Answer 17

Central executive: supervisory role, monitor info divides limited attention and allocates tasks to sub components, limited processing capacity and doesn’t store info
Phonological loop: auditory info, preserve order that info arrives, phonological store- stores words you hear, articulatory processes- allows maintenance rehearsal, capacity of 2 secs
Visuo-spatial sketch pad: visual or spatial info, limited capacity 3/4 objects, visual cache- stores visual data inner scribe- records arrangements of objects
Episodic buffer: temporary store of info, integrates visual and verbal info, maintains sense of time sequencing, storage component of CE, limited capacity 4 chunks, links WMM to LTM

Question 18

Interference A01

Answer 18

*proactive :older memories intervene new memories
*retroactive:new memories intervene with old
*research on effects of similarities, McGoech and McDonalds, ppts memorised list of 10 words until 100% accuracy, 6 groups eg. Synonyms, antonyms, unrelated, consonant syllables, 3 digit numbers, no new list, most similar materials had the worse recall
*similarities increase interference

Question 19

Retrieval failure A01

Answer 19

*encoding specificity principle : cues at learning must be present at recall
*context dependent forgetting- recall depends on external cues
*state dependent- recall depends on internal cue
*Godden and Baddeley, deep water sea diver asked to memorise list, on land then recall under water vice versa, worst recall in different settings
*Carter and Cassaday, gave hay fever drug to ppts made them drowsy, asked to learn list on drug then recall sober vice versa, worse recall in different states

Question 20

Misleading information A01

Answer 20

*Loftus and Palmer, 45 ppts watched car crash clip, asked questions on how fast were the cars going when they smashed (collided, hit, bumped, contacted), mean estimate was highest for smashed (aggressive verbs)
*Loftus conducted second experiment where those who heard smashed reported seeing broken glass, verb altered their memory, supports the substitution explanation
*Post event discussion: Gabbert, watched same crime but different perspective and asked to discuss before reporting back individually, 71% mistakenly recalled aspect of event , supports memory conformity
*Post event discussion affects EWT because of memory contamination, combining misinformation from other witnesses in their own memories, another is memory conformity, go along to be approved but memory is unchanged

Question 21

Anxiety A01

Answer 21

*weapon focus effect: reduces recall because focus is on the weapon
*Johnson and Scott: ppts waited in waiting room for lab study, heard heated argument with glass breaking/ casual conversation and a man with knife covered in blood/ pen with grease, 49% identified man with pen only 33% recalled man with knife

*Yuille and Cutshall: shooting in gun shop, owner shot thief dead, interviewed 13 participants 4-5 m after incident, compared to police interview, asked how stressed, witnesses were accurate, some details were less accurate e.g. colour of items but high anxiety were most accurate, anxiety does not have a detrimental effect on EWT may even enhance it
*Yerkes-Dodson law explains these differences because bc of optimal level = max accuracy

Question 22

Cognitive interview A01

Answer 22

Fisher and Geiselmam
1. Report everything : minor details, may trigger other memories
2. Reinstate the context : imagine the environment, avoids context dependent forgetting
3. Reverse the order : final point to beginning, prevents dishonesty/ expectations of event
4. Change perspective : recall from other pov, avoids schema / stereotypes
*enhanced cognitive interview, Fisher social dynamics of interaction, eg eye contact, witness speak slowly ask open end questions

Question 23

Research on duration A01

Answer 23

Peterson and Peterson : 25 students in 8 trials, each trial= consonant syllable, 3 digit number, counted backwards from this number until told to stop to prevent mental rehearsal varying from 3 (80%) ,6,9,12,15,18 (3%) seconds
Bahrick: 392 american ppts between 17-74, high school book obtained by them or schools, recal tested through photo recognition of 50 photos and free recall, 15 yrs after grad 90% photo recall, 48yrs 70%, free recall less accurate