Memory Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Outline Baddeley’s acoustic and semantic coding study

A
  • Participants given list of acoustically similar words (e.g. cat, cab, can) others given dissimilar words (e.g. pit, few, cow)
  • Participants given list of semantically similar words (e.g. great, large, big) others given dissimilar words (e.g. good, huge, hot)
  • Immediate recall worse with acoustically similar words, so STM is acoustic
  • Recall after 20 minutes worse with semantically similar words, so LTM is semantic
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Outline Jacobs’ testing digit span capacity study

A
  • Researcher reads four digits and increases until the participant can’t recall the order correctly
  • Final number = digit span
  • On average, participants could repeat back 9.3 numbers and 7.3 letters in the correct order immediately after they were presented
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Outline Miller’s magic number 7 +/- 2 capacity study

A
  • Miller noted that everyday things come in 7s (e.g. 7 days of the week / 7 deadly sins, etc.)
  • Span of STM is about 7 items (plus or minus 2) but is increased by CHUNKING - grouping sets of digits into meaningful units
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Outline Peterson and Peterson’s duration of STM study (consonant syllables)

A
  • 24 students given consonant syllable (e.g. YCG) to recall and a 3 digit number to count backwards from to avoid rehearsal
  • After 3 seconds, average recall was 80%, after 18 seconds, iy was about 3%
  • STM duration = up to 18 seconds
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Outline Bahrick’s LTM duration study (yearbook photos)

A
  • 392 Americans aged 17 - 74
  • Recognition test - 50 photos from high school yearbooks
  • Free recall test - participants listed names of their graduating class
  • Recognition test - 90% accuracy after 15 years, 70% after 48 years
  • Free recall test - 60% accuracy after 15 years, 30% after 48 years
  • LTM duration = up to a lifetime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Baddeley identified two memory stores. How is this a strength of coding of memory?

A
  • Later research showed there are exceptions to Baddeley’s findings
  • STM is mostly acoustic and LTM is mostly semantic
  • This led to the development of the MULTI-STORE MODEL
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Baddeley used artificial stimuli for his study. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Words had no personal meaning to participants, so tells us little about coding for everyday memory tasks
  • When processing more meaningful information, people use SEMANTIC coding, even for STM
  • This suggests that the findings from Baddeley’s study have limited application
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Jacobs’ study has been replicated. How is this a strength of STM capacity?

A
  • Study may have lacked adequate controls (confounding variables, e.g. participants being distracted) due to the study being old
  • HOWEVER, Jacobs’ findings have been confirmed in later studies (Bopp and Verhaegen)
  • This shows that Jacobs’ study is a valid measure of STM digit span
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Miller may have overestimated STM capacity. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Cowan reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity for STM was only about 4 (plus or minus 1) chunks
  • This suggests that the lower end of Miller’s estimate (5 items) is more appropriate than 7 items
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Peterson and Peterson used meaningless stimuli. How is this a weakness of duration of STM?

A
  • Recall of consonant syllables does not reflect meaningful everyday memory tasks
  • Therefore, the study lacked EXTERNAL VALIDITY
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Bahrick’s study has high external validity. How is this a strength of duration of LTM?

A
  • Everyday meaningful memories (names and faces) were studied
  • Shepard found that when lab studies were done with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall rates were lower
  • This means that Bahrick’s findings reflect a more “real” estimate of LTM duration
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Sketch the multi-store model of memory

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

Outline the sensory register from the multi-store model

A
  • All environmental stimuli pass into the sensory register. This part of memory has 5 stores for each of the senses
  • CODING - depends on the sense (visual in iconic, acoustic in echoic, etc.)
  • DURATION - very brief, less than half a second
  • CAPACITY - very high, e.g. over 100 million cells in one eye, each storing data
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Outline the transfer from sensory register to STM in the multi-store model

A

Information passes further into memory only if attention is paid to it (ATTENTION is the key process)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Outline short term memory in the multi-store model

A
  • Limited capacity store of temporary duration
  • Coding = acoustic
  • Duration = about 18 seconds unless information is rehearsed
  • Capacity = between 5 and 9 (7+/-2) items before some forgetting occurs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Outline the transfer from STM to LTM in the multi-store model

A
  • Maintenance rehearsal occurs when we rehearse material
  • We can keep information in STM as long as we rehearse it
  • If we rehearse it long enough, it passes into LTM
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Outline long term memory in the multi-store model

A
  • Permanent memory store
  • Coding = semantic
  • Duration = up to a lifetime
  • Capacity = potentially unlimited
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Outline retrieval from LTM in the multi-store model

A

When we want to recall information stored in LTM, it has to be transferred back to STM by a process called RETRIEVAL

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

There is evidence from Baddeley showing STM and LTM are different. How is this a strength of the multi-store model?

A
  • Baddeley found that we tend to mix up words that sound similar when using our STMs (so STM coding is acoustic)
  • But we mix up words that have similar meanings when we use our LTMs (which shows LTM coding is semantic)
  • This supports the multi-store model’s view that these two memory stores are separate and independent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Jacobs and Peterson and Peterson’s studies show that the multi-store model may not be a valid model of how memory works in everyday life. How is this a weakness?

A
  • The studies tend not to use everyday information (e.g. faces or names)
  • They use digits/letters (Jacobs) or meaningless consonant syllables (Peterson and Peterson)
  • Therefore, the multi-store model may not be a valid model of how memory works in everyday life where memory tends to involve meaningful information
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Shallice and Warrington found there may be more than one STM store. How is this a weakness of the multi-store model?

A
  • Shallice and Warrington - KF had amnesia. STM recall for digits was poor when he heard them, but was much better when he read them
  • Other studies confirm there may also be a separate STM store for non-verbal sounds (e.g. noises)
  • Therefore, the MSM is wrong to claim there is just 1 STM store, processing different types of information
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

According to Craik and Watkins, prolonged rehearsal is not needed for STM → LTM transfer. How is this a weakness of the multi-store model?

A
  • Craik and Watkins argue there are 2 types of rehearsal called maintenance and elaborative rehearsal
  • MAINTENANCE (amount of rehearsal) is the one described in the multi-store model
  • ELABORATIVE is needed for long term storage. This occurs when you link information to your existing knowledge, or think about its meaning
  • This suggests the MSM doesn’t fully explain how long-term storage is achieved
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

The multi-store model is a bygone model. How is this a weakness?

A
  • The MSM was useful at explaining a lot of evidence at the time (e.g. differences between STM and LTM)
  • HOWEVER, it’s become clear that the MSM can’t account for many research findings (e.g. amnesia) and oversimplifies the nature of STM, LTM and rehearsal
  • Therefore, the MSM was a good starting point for developing more valid models of memory that explain the research evidence better
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Outline episodic memory

A
  • Stores events from our lives
  • Likened to a diary of daily personal experiences
  • Time stamped - you remember when things happened
  • Conscious effort to be recalled
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Outline semantic memory

A
  • Stores knowledge of the world
  • Combination of an encyclopedia and a dictionary
  • Not time-stamped
  • Less personal and more about knowledge we all share
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Outline procedural memory

A
  • Stores memories for actions and skills
  • How we do things
  • Become automatic with practice
  • Explaining the step-by-step process is hard because you do it without conscious recall
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

There is case study evidence (HM and Clive Wearing) for different types of long term memory. How is this a strength?

A
  • Clinical studies of amnesia (HM and Clive Wearing) showed both had difficulty recalling past events (EPISODIC MEMORY)
  • But, their SEMANTIC MEMORIES were unaffected (HM did not need the concept of “dog” explained to him)
  • PROCEUDRAL MEMORIES were also intact (Clive Wearing could still play piano)
  • This supports the view that there are different memory stories in LTM because one store can be damaged but other stores are unaffected
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Researchers lack control in clinical case studies. How is this a weakness of types of long term memory?

A
  • Researchers lack control in clinical case studies - they don’t know anything about the person’s memory before brain damage
  • Therefore, clinical case studies are limited in what they can tell us about different types of LTM
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

How is conflicting findings about types of LTM and brain areas a weakness of types of long term memory?

A
  • Buckner and Petersen reviewed research findings and concluded that SEMANTIC memory is in the LEFT prefrontal cortex and EPISODIC with the RIGHT prefrontal cortex
  • But other studies (Tulving) found SEMANTIC memory was associated with the RIGHT prefrontal cortex and the reverse for episodic memory
  • This challenges any neurophysiological evidence to support types of memory as there is poor agreement on where each type may be located
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Types of long term memory can help people with memory problems. How is this a strength?

A
  • Memory loss in old age is specific to EPISODIC memory - it is harder to recall memories of recent experiences although past episodic memories are intact
  • Belleville devised an intervention for older people targeting episodic memory, which improved their memory, compared to a control group
  • This suggests that distinguishing between types of LTM enables specific treatment to be developed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Sketch the working memory model

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Outline the central executive from the working memory model

A
  • Supervisory role - monitors incoming data, directs attention and allocates slave systems to tasks
  • Very limited storage capacity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Outline the phonological loop from the working memory model

A
  • Deals with auditory information and preserves the order in which the information arrives. It is subdivided into :
  • PHONOLOGICAL STORE - stores the words you hear
  • ARTICULATORY PROCESS - allows maintenance rehearsal
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Outline the visuo-spatial sketchpad from the working memory model

A
  • Stores visual and/or spatial information when required
  • Logie divided the VSS into :
  • VISUAL CACHE - stores visual data
  • INNER SCRIBE - records arrangements of objects in visual field
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Outline the episodic buffer from the working memory model

A
  • Temporary store for information
  • Integrates visual, spatial and verbal information from other stores
  • Maintains sense of time-sequencing - recording events that are happening
  • Links to LTM
36
Q

There is support from clinical studies (KF) for the working memory model. How is this a strength?

A
  • Shallice and Warrington studied KF who had a brain injury
  • His STM for AUDITORY information was poor (damaged PL) but he could process VISUAL information normally (intact VSS)
  • This supports the WMM view that there are separate visual and acoustic memory stores
37
Q

How does KF challenge evidence from clinical studies of brain injury?

A
  • KF may have had other impairments which explained poor memory performance, apart from damage to his PL
  • This challenged evidence from clinical studies of brain injury
38
Q

Baddeley’s dual task performance studies support the VSS. How is this a strength of the working memory model?

A
  • Baddeley’s participants found it harder to carry out two visual tasks at the same time than a verbal and a visual task together (same for two visual tasks)
  • This is because both visual tasks compete for the same subsystem (VSS). There is no competition with a visual and verbal task
  • Therefore, there must be a separate slave system that processes visual input (VSS) and also a separate system for verbal processes (PL)
39
Q

According to Baddeley, there is a lack of clarity over the central executive. How is this a weakness of the working memory model?

A
  • Baddeley said the CE was the most important but the least understood component of working memory
  • There must be more to the CE than just being “attention”, e.g. it is made up of separate subcomponents
  • Therefore, the CE is an unsatisfactory component and this challenges the integrity of the model
40
Q

Dual task studies challenge the validity of the working memory model. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Dual task studies support the WMM because they show that there must be separate components processing visual (VSS) and verbal information (PL)
  • HOWEVER, these studies are highly controlled and use tasks that are unlike everyday working memory tasks (e.g. recalling random sequences of letters)
  • This challenges the validity of the model because it’s uncertain that working memory operates this way in everyday life
41
Q

Outline interference

A

Interference : when two pieces of information disrupt each other. Forgetting occurs in LTM because we can’t access the memories even though they’re available

42
Q

Outline proactive interference

A

Proactive interference : old memories interfere with new memories. EXAMPLE - a teacher learns many names in the past and can’t remember names of her current class

43
Q

Outline retroactive interference

A

Retroactive interference : new memories interfere with old memories. EXAMPLE : a teacher learns many new names this year and can’t remember the names of her previous students

44
Q

Explain why interference is worse when memories are similar

A

This may be because :

  • In proactive interference, previously stored info makes new info more difficult to store
  • In retroactive interference, new info overwrites previous memories which are similar
45
Q

Outline McGeoch’s and McDonald’s effects of similarity on interference study

A
  • Participants were asked to learn a list of words to 100% accuracy
  • Then they were given a new list to learn
  • GROUP 1 - SYNONYMS
  • GROUP 2 - ANTONYMS
  • GROUP 3 - UNRELATED WORDS
  • GROUP 4 - CONSONANT SYLLABLES
  • GROUP 5 - 3 DIGIT NUMBERS
  • GROUP 6 - NO NEW LIST (control group)
  • Performance depended on nature of the second list
  • SYNONYMS produced worst recall
  • Shows interference is strongest when memories are similar
46
Q

There is support for interference in real-world situations (Baddeley and Hitch). How is this a strength of interference?

A
  • Baddeley and Hitch asked rugby players to recall the names of teams they’d played against during a season
  • Players did not play same number of games due to injuries, those who played most (more interference) had worst recall
  • This shows that interference operates in some everyday situations, increasing the validity of the theory
47
Q

Everyday forgetting may be better explained by retrieval failure than interference. How is this a weakness of interference?

A
  • Interference in everyday situations is unusual because the necessary conditions are relatively rare, e.g. similarity of memories doesn’t occur often
  • Therefore, most everyday forgetting may be better explained by other theories (e.g. retrieval failure due to lack of cues)
48
Q

Tulving and Psotka found the interference effect may be overcome using cues, which was not predicted by the theory. How is this a weakness of interference?

A
  • Tulving and Psotka gave participants lists of words organised into categories
  • Recall of the first list was 70% but fell with each new list (PROACTIVE INTERFERENCE)
  • When given a cued recall test (names of categories), recall rose again to 70%
  • Suggests that interference causes just a temporary loss of access to material still in LTM - not predicted by interference theory
49
Q

Coenen and van Luijtelaar provide support from drug studies for interference theory. How is this a strength?

A
  • Material learned just before taking DIAZEPAM recalled better than a PLACEBO group one week later - this is RETROGRADE FACILITATION (Coenen and van Luijtelaar)
  • The drug stopped new information reaching brain areas that process memories, so it could not retroactively interfere with stored information
  • This suggests that the forgetting is due to interference - reducing the interference reduced the forgetting
50
Q

Interference theory has validity issues. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Lab studies of interference have tight control of confounding variables (e.g. time), so there is a clear link between interference and forgetting
  • HOWEVER, most research is unlike everyday forgetting. In everyday life, we often learn something and recall it much later (e.g. revising for exams)
  • This means that because research is mostly lab-based, it may overestimate the importance of interference as a cause of forgetting
51
Q

Describe how lack of cues can cause retrieval failure

A
  • When info is initially placed in memory, associated cues are stored at the same time
  • If the cues are not available at the time of retrieval, you might not access memories that are actually there
52
Q

Outline Tulving’ Encoding Specificity Principle

A
  • Cues help retrieval if the same ones are present both at encoding (when we learn material) and retrieval
  • If the cues available at encoding and retrieval are different or absent, there will be some forgetting
53
Q

Outline context-dependent forgetting and state-dependent forgetting

A
  • Context-dependent forgetting - recall depends on EXTERNAL cue (e.g. weather or place)
  • State-dependent forgetting - recall depends on INTERNAL cue (e.g. feeling upset or being drunk)
54
Q

Outline Godden and Baddeley’s context-dependent forgetting study

A
  • Deep-sea divers learned word lists and were later asked to recall them :
  • CONDITION 1 - learn on land, recall on land
  • CONDITION 2 - learn on land, recall underwater
  • CONDITION 3 - learn underwater, recall on land
  • CONDITION 4 - learn underwater, recall underwater
  • Accurate recall was 40% lower in mismatched contexts
  • Retrieval failure was due to absence of encoded context cues at time of recall - material was not accessible, so forgotten
55
Q

Outline Carter and Cassaday’s state-dependent forgetting study

A
  • Participants learned lists of words and later recalled them :
  • CONDITION 1 - learn on drug, recall on drug
  • CONDITION 2 - learn on drug, recall not on drug
  • CONDITION 3 - learn not on drug, recall on drug
  • CONDITION 4 - learn not on drug, recall not on drug
  • Recall significantly worse in mismatched cues
  • When cues at encoding are absent at retrieval, then there is more forgetting
56
Q

Retrieval cues have real-world application. How is this a strength of retrieval failure?

A
  • People often go to another room to get an item but forgot what they wanted, but they remember when they go back to the original room
  • When we have trouble remembering something, it’s worth making the effort to recall the environment in which you learned it first
  • Shows how research can remind us of strategies we use in the real world to improve our recall
57
Q

How is range of supporting evidence (Godden and Baddeley, and Carter and Cassaday) a strength of retrieval failure?

A
  • Godden and Baddeley (divers) and Carter and Cassaday (drugs) show that lack of cues at recall leads to everyday forgetting
  • Eysenck and Keane argue that retrieval failure is the main reason for forgetting in LTM
  • This evidence shows that retrieval failure due to lack of cues occurs in everyday life as well as in highly-controlled labs
58
Q

According to Baddeley, contexts have to be very different for it to have an effect. How is this a weakness of retrieval failure?

A
  • Baddeley argues that different contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen (e.g. on land vs underwater)
  • Learning something in one room and recalling it in another is unlikely to result in much forgetting because the environments aren’t different enough
  • This means that retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not explain much everyday forgetting
59
Q

Godden and Baddeley found that context effects vary in recall and recognition in the replication of their underwater study. How is this a weakness of retrieval failure?

A
  • Godden and Baddeley replicated their underwater study, using a RECOGNITION test instead of recall
  • There was no context-dependent effect. Findings were the same in all four conditions whether the contexts for learning and recall matched or not
  • Suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting because it only applies when a person has to recall information rather than recognise it
60
Q

There are problems with Tulving’s ESP. How is this a weakness of retrieval failure?

A
  • Retrieval failure theory is supported by research showing that forgetting occurs when there is a mismatch or absence of cues - the Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)
  • HOWEVER, we cannot independently establish whether a cue has really been encoded or not - so the argument for the role of cues is circular
  • Therefore, the ESP is not scientifically testable, so we can’t be certain that forgetting is due to retrieval failure
61
Q

Outline Loftus and Palmer’s leading questions study

A
  • 45 participants watched clips of car accidents and answered questions about speed
  • CRITICAL QUESTION : “How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
  • 5 groups of participants, each given a different verb in the critical question : hit, contacted, bumped, collided, smashed
  • The verb “CONTACTED” produced a mean estimated speed of 31.8mph, for “SMASHED”, the mean was 40.5mph
  • The leading question biased eyewitness recall of an event. The verb “smashed” suggested a faster speed of the car than “contacted”
62
Q

What are the two reasons as to why leading questions affect eyewitness testimony?

A
  • RESPONSE-BIAS EXPLANATION - wording of a question has no enduring effect on an eyewitness’ memory of an event, but influences the kind of answer given
  • SUBSTITUTION EXPLANATION - wording of a question does affect eyewitness memory, it interferes with the original memory, distorting its accuracy
63
Q

Outline Gabbert et al.’s post-event discussion study

A
  • Paired participants watched a video of the same crime, but filmed so each participant could see elements in the event that the other could not
  • Both participants discussed what they had seen on the video, before individually completing a test of recall
  • 71% of participants wrongly recalled aspects of the event they didn’t see in the video but had heard in the discussion
  • CONTROL GROUP - there was no discussion and no subsequent errors
  • This was evidence of MEMORY CONFORMITY
64
Q

What are the two reasons for post-event information affecting eyewitness testimony?

A
  • MEMORY CONTAMINATION - when co-witnesses discuss a crime, they mix (mis)information from other witnesses with their own memories
  • MEMORY CONFORMITY - witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or because they believe the other witnesses are right
65
Q

There are real world applications in the criminal justice system. How is this a strength of misleading information in eyewitness testimony?

A
  • The consequences of EWT are serious. Loftus argues police officers should be careful in phrasing questions to witnesses because of distorting effects
  • Psychologists are sometimes expert witnesses in trials and explain limits of EWT to juries
  • Therefore, psychologists can improve how the legal system works and protect the innocent from faulty convictions based on unreliable EWT
66
Q

Researchers may be too pessimistic about the effects of misleading information. How is this a weakness of misleading information in eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Loftus and Palmer showed film clips - a different experience from a real event (less stress)
  • Participants are also less concerned about the effect of their responses in a lab study (Foster et al.)
  • Therefore, researchers may be too pessimistic about the effects of misleading information - EWT may be more reliable than studies suggest
67
Q

Sutherland and Hayne’s central details study challenges substitution explanation. How is this a weakness of the substitution explanation for misleading information in eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Sutherland and Hayne found their participants recalled central details of an event better than peripheral ones, even when asked misleading questions
  • This is because their attention was focussed on the central features and these memories were relatively resistant to misleading information
  • Therefore, the original memory of an event survived and was not distorted, which is not predicted by the substitution explanation
68
Q

Evidence from Skagerberg and Wright does not support memory conformity. How is this a weakness of misleading information in eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Skagerberg and Wright’s participants discussed film clips they had seen (in one version, the mugger had dark brown hair, and light brown in the other)
  • The participants recalled a “blend” of what they had seen and what they heard from their co-witness, rather than one or the other (e.g. said hair was medium brown instead of dark or light)
  • This suggests that the memory itself is distorted through contamination by post-event discussion and is not the result of memory conformity
69
Q

Why are demand characteristics a weakness of lab studies investigating the effects of misleading information in eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Lab studies give researchers high control over variables (high internal validity), so they can demonstrate that misleading post-event information causes inaccurate EWT
  • HOWEVER, lab experiments suffer from demand characteristics - participants want to help so they guess when they can’t answer a question (low internal validity)
  • Therefore, to maximise internal validity, researchers should reduce demand characteristics by removing the cues that participants use to work out the hypothesis
70
Q

Outline Johnson and Scott’s study into anxiety having a negative effect on eyewitness testimony

A
  • Participants sat in a waiting room believing they were going to be taking part in a lab study
  • LOW ANXIETY CONDITION - participants heard a casual conversation then saw a man walk through the waiting room carrying a pen with grease on his hands
  • HIGH ANXIETY CONDITION - heated argument was accompanied by the sound of breaking glass. A man walked through the room holding a paper knife covered in blood (creates anxiety and “weapon focus”)
  • Participants later asked to pick the man from a set of 50 photographs
  • 49% participants in the LOW ANXIETY CONDITION, and 33% from the HIGH ANXIETY CONDITION were able to identify the man
  • The TUNNEL THEORY OF MEMORY argues that people have enhanced memory for central events. Weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect
71
Q

Outline Yuille and Cutshall’s study into anxiety having a positive effect on eyewitness testimony

A
  • In an actual crime, a gun shop owner shot a thief dead. There were 21 witnesses, 13 agreed to participate in the study
  • Participants were interviewed 4-5 months after the incident. The information recalled was compared to the police interviews at the time of the shooting
  • Witnesses rated how stressed they felt at the time of the incident
  • Witnesses were very accurate in what they recalled and there was little change after 5 months. Some details were less accurate, e.g. age/weight/height
  • Participants who reported highest levels of stress were most accurate (88% compared to 75% for the less-stressed group)
  • Anxiety does not appear to reduce the accuracy of EWT for a real-world event and may enhance it
72
Q

Outline Yerkes and Dodson’s inverted U theory to explain differences in findings from research into the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony

A
  • Yerkes and Dodson argue that the relationship between performance and stress is an inverted U
  • Deffenbacher reviewed 21 studies of EWT with contradictory findings on the effect of anxiety on recall
  • He suggested the Yerkes-Dodson effect could explain this - both low and high levels of anxiety produce poor recall whereas optimum levels can lead to very good recall
73
Q

Anxiety may not be relevant to weapon focus. How is this a weakness of the effects of anxiety on eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Johnson and Scott’s participants may have been focussed on the weapon, not out of anxiety, but surprise
  • Pickel found accuracy in identifying the “criminal” was poorest when the object in their hand was unexpected (e.g. a raw chicken and a gun in a hairdressers)
  • This suggests the weapons effect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety and so tells us nothing about the specific effect of anxiety on recall
74
Q

Valentine and Mesout have supporting evidence for negative effects of anxiety on eyewitness testimony. How is this a strength?

A
  • Valentine and Mesout used heart rate (objective measure) to divide visitors to the London Dungeon’s Labyrinth into low and high anxiety groups
  • High anxiety participants were less accurate than low anxiety in describing and identifying a target person
  • This supports the claim that anxiety has a negative effect on immediate eyewitness recall of a stressful event
75
Q

Christianson and Hubinette have supporting evidence for positive effects of anxiety on eyewitness testimony. How is this a strength?

A
  • Christianson and Hubinette interviewed actual witnesses to bank robberies - some were direct victims (high anxiety) and others were bystanders (low anxiety)
  • They found more than 75% accurate recall across all witnesses. Direct victims (most anxious) were even more accurate
  • This suggests that anxiety does not affect the accuracy of eyewitness recall and may even enhance it
76
Q

Lack of control over confounding variables may be responsible for (in)accuracy of recall, instead of anxiety. How is this a weakness of the effects of anxiety on eyewitness testimony?

A
  • Christianson and Hubinette interviewed witnesses long after the event
  • Many things happened that the researchers couldn’t control (e.g. post-event discussions)
  • Therefore, lack of control over confounding variables may be responsible for the (in)accuracy of recall, not anxiety
77
Q

There are problems with the inverted U theory. How is this a weakness of the effects of anxiety on eyewitness testimony?

A
  • The inverted U theory appears to be a reasonable explanation of the contradictory finding linking anxiety with both increased and decreased eyewitness recall
  • HOWEVER, it only focusses on physical elements, and ignores other elements, including COGNITIVE (how we think about stressful events affects what we recall)
  • Therefore, the inverted U theory is too simplistic to be useful, e.g. anxious thoughts may not always lead to symptoms of anxiety but may block memory
78
Q

Describe the “report everything” technique from the cognitive interview

A
  • Witnesses are encouraged to include every detail of an event, even if it seems irrelevant or the witness is not confident about it
  • Seemingly trivial details could be important and may trigger other memories
79
Q

Describe the “reinstate the context” technique from the cognitive interview

A
  • The witness returns to the crime scene in their mind and imagines the environment (e.g. the weather, what they could see, etc.) and their emotions
  • This is based on context-dependent forgetting - cues from the context may trigger recall
80
Q

Describe the “reverse the order” technique from the cognitive interview

A
  • Events are recalled in a different order (e.g. from end to beginning)
  • This prevents people basing their descriptions on expectations of how the event must have happened rather than the actual events
  • It also prevents dishonesty (harder to lie if the account is reversed)
81
Q
A
  • Witnesses recall the event from other people’s perspectives (how it would’ve appeared to another witness or to the perpetrator)
  • This prevents the influence of expectations and schema on recall
  • Schema are packages of information developed through experiences. They generate a framework for interpreting incoming information
82
Q

Outline the Enhanced Cognitive Interview

A
  • Fisher et al. developed additional elements of the CI
  • This includes a focus on the social dynamics of the interaction (e.g. knowing when to establish and relinquish eye contact)
  • The ECI also includes ideas such as reducing the witness’ anxiety, minimising distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly and asking open-ended questions
83
Q

Kohnken’s meta-analysis has research support for the effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview. How is this a strength?

A
  • A meta-analysis by Kohnken et al. combined data from 55 studies comparing CI and ECI with the standard police interview
  • The CI produced an average of 41% more correct information than the standard interview. Only 4 studies showed no difference
  • This shows that the CI is effective in helping witnesses recall information that is available but not accessible
84
Q

Kohnken found an increase in inaccurate information in the Enhanced Cognitive Interview. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Kohnken also found increases in the amount of inaccurate information, especially in the ECI (quantity over quality)
  • Therefore, police officers need to be very careful about how they treat eyewitness evidence from CIs / ECIs
85
Q

Milne and Bull found that some elements of the Cognitive Interview are more useful than others. How is this a weakness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Milne and Bull found that each individual technique of the CI alone produced more information than the standard police interview
  • But they also found combining REPORT EVERYTHING and REINSTATE THE CONTEXT produced better recall than any other technique individually or combined
  • This casts doubt on the credibility of the overall CI because some of the techniques are less effective than the others
86
Q

The Cognitive Interview is time-consuming. How is this a weakness?

A
  • Police are reluctant to use the CI because it takes more time than the standard police interview (e.g. to establish rapport and allow the witness to relax)
  • The CI also requires special training but many forces do not have the resources to provide more than a few hours’ training (Kebbell and Wagstaff)
  • This suggests that the complete CI is not realistic for police officers to use and it might be better to focus on just a few key elements
87
Q

Police use variations of the Cognitive Interview. How is this a strength?

A
  • Police forces take a “pick and mix” approach in practice which makes it hard to compare effectiveness in studies
  • HOWEVER, this approach make the CI more FLEXIBLE because the police forces (or individuals) evolve their own approaches depending on what they think works best
  • This variation is a benefit of the CI because it can be adapted to different situations, increasing its credibility for officers, though not for empirical research