Memory Flashcards
Can you state the features of the sensory register?
Coding:
Any modality (visual, acoustic, touch, olfactory etc)
Duration:
<1s (milliseconds)
Capacity:
Unlimited
Can you state the features of the STM?
Coding:
acoustic (sound)
Duration:
18s
Capacity:
7+/-@
Can you state the features of the LTM?
Coding:
Semantic (meaning)
Duration:
Infinite
Capacity:
Unlimited
Can you give details of the studies that support the features of the STM?
role: immediate memory
7+/-2: Hayes/ Miller - digit span test
lists of: binary code numbers, decimal code numbers, letters , monosyllabic words
Average capacity 7+/-2
Applies to “chunks” of info as well as single bits
<30s (18s): Peterson and Peterson - distracter task
Nonsense trigrams to learn (e.g GND or HJS)
One group recall immediately, others had to count back in 3’s out loud (distracter task)
Asked to recall
<30s if rehearsal is prevented
Acoustic: Baddeley - recall of words that sound same or mean same
When immediate recall tested, recall of acoustically similar words less good than recall of acoustically dissimilar words, confirming acoustic coding is used in STM as there would be no confusion in the LTM btw acoustic.
Can you give details of the studies that support the features of the LTM?
Unlimited: N/A
Impossible to test as there are no means capable of ascertaining the full potential capacity of a store where forgetting may or may not have occurred
suggested LTM capacity includes sub-classes of information e.g motor skills, special model of world around us
Infinite: Bahrik - retention of names and faces of high school classmates 3 months to 47years (80% accurate) later using both recall and recognition
· Free recall (trying to remember everyone in your class)
· Name recognition (naming the photos in the Yearbook)
· Picture recognition (picking out the photos of your classmates).
V little decline in name and picture recognition over whole time span- only free call that showed after 7 years
Suggest infinite duration also use cues to aid recall (difference in material used to remember)
Semantic: Baddeley - recall of words that sound the same or mean the same.
· delayed recall tested (i.e. recall using LTM), performance on acoustically similar and dissimilar lists was the same, suggesting that acoustic coding is not used in LTM. However, clear difference in recall of semantically similar and dissimilar lists suggesting that semantic coding is used. found recall in LTM was worse for the lists of words with the same meaning than words with different meanings.
Are you able to evaluate the studies that support the features of STM and LTM?
STM:
Duration:
:) - American footballers study - although event causing concussion easily recalled within 30s = forgotten 3-5 mins later
Capacity:
:( - Vogue - may be more limited to 4 items (using visual rather than verbal stimuli) - lower end of millers range may be more appropriate
Coding:
:) - Conrad - sequences of six consonants to learn, found errors made similar in sound to original stimulus. also found lists that had same sounds produced more errors of recall than lists that sounded different
Zhang & Simon found same true of Chinese language - as cross-cultural supports - this shows acoustic coding result of nature rather than nurture.
LTM:
Duration:
:) - high eco val: remembering people went to school with representative of everyday memory use - but how often do we use these memories?
:( - low internal val - lots of extraneous variables - relationships (may not have known everyone in year, may have stayed friends after, how often see each other?
Capacity:
Bower suggest LTM capacity includes sub-classes of information e.g motor skills, a spatial model of the world around us, language
Coding:
:( - frost - long-term recall related to visual as well as semantic; Nelson and Rothbart - evidence of acoustic coding
:) - bower - importance of semantic elaboration in improving memory - recalled more than double when link word- pairs compared to control group who learnt word pairs - show coding can vary according to circumstances
Are you able to explain strengths and weaknesses of how organic amnesiacs can be used to model memory?
:) -
Gives unique insight into experiences of individual participants - longitudinal (completed over long time - researchers rly get to know participant) gives lots of qualitative data; High ecological validity - some cases (CW/KF) naturally occurring event - individual investigated in context of home environment- little manipulation by researchers so behaviours valid; shows evidence for separate memory stores
:( - very unique - do findings apply to all people? Lack of generalisability by sec etc (all male); impossible to replicate - not reliable - findings concur and all had hippocampal damage =probably valid but cannot be sure; low in internal validity due to extraneous variables e.g HM epilepsy
Are you able to evaluate the MSM of memory?
- :)
- support of distinction between STM and LTM. Organic Amnesiac studies:
- KF (no problem with LTM, but digit span only 2 items)
- Clive Wearing retrograde and anterograde amnesia - memories for events last btw 7-30 seconds supported by murdoch and Glanzer:
- participants showed that remembered first 5 words - (showing had been transferred to LTM via elaborative rehearsal)
- and last 5 words - (showing had been transferred to STM via maintenance).
Sufficient evidence as lots of studies to back up - :( - psychological study on HM. - making LTM too simple
- had impaired declarative memories yet could be conditioned to blink whenever tone played. - - suggests LTM has more complex coding components, other than just semantic, that don’t involve conscious awareness.
- more complex than MSM suggests.
- As based on case study = more ecologically valid – happening to real people in real life and so gives a better representation of how real memory works.
Glanzer and Meinzer - silent rehearsal more effective than repetition - challenges acoustic aspect of STM coding as suggests semantic coding - :(
MSM incorrectly represents LTM as single, unitary store.
organic amnesiacs:
- Clive Wearing + HM - new procedures/ skills could be learnt through repetition, just without remembering how they learned them.
access long term memories suggest different types of long term memories.
MSM only displays each memory as block. Tulving - MSM too simple. brains are so complex it is surely illogical to assume that the memory is just three blocks, especially with studies suggesting that there is more detail missing - he then found evidence for episodic, semantic and procedural memory within LTM
Can you distinguish between the different types of long term memory? (sort them in to declarative and non-declarative; ‘explicit’ and ‘implicit’)
Declarative episodic (can be both) - conscious memory of events e.g emotional memories, period of time
Declarative Semantic (explicit) - conscious memory of facts e.g 2+2= 4, gravity
Non-declarative Procedural (implicit) - unconscious memory of skills e.g muscle memory (walking)
Can you evaluate evidence for different types of LTM?
- :)
LTM is not single, unitary store.
organic amnesiacs:
- Clive Wearing (piano) + HM (blink when tone played) - new procedures/ skills could be learnt through repetition, just without remembering how they learned them.
access long term memories suggest different types of long term memories.
MSM only displays each memory as block. Tulving - MSM too simple. brains are so complex it is surely illogical to assume that the memory is just three blocks, especially with studies suggesting that there is more detail missing - divided into semantic, episodic and procedural - :(
- brain damage very traumatic which may in itself cause changes in attention span as unique events causing their memory loss damage neural links. E.g HM debilitating epileptic seizures affect childhood brain injury - result in removal of hippocampus. Clive - brain infection .However support as there is large amount of support from organic amnesiacs, common trends of LTM so therefore strong suggestion LTM as having separate stores. - Study - effect of drug on brain - participants given 10mg of cortisol (stress) - impaired declarative memory but not procedural. Supports separate and also more complex as suggest explicit and implicit memory.
Can you recall the different parts of the WMM, including the Visual Cache, Inner Scribe, Articulatory Control and Phonological Store?
Central executive:
- allocates tasks to slave systems; supervisory
- capacity limited
- doesn’t store info
Episodic buffer:
- brings together visual ,spatial, heard and spoken info into single memory; maintains time sequencing. Links working memory to LTM
- capacity 4 chunks
- coding visual + acoustic
Phonological loop:
- interpreting spoken/ written material; preserving order
- capacity ~ 2 secs
- coding acoustic
- articulatory control system = inner voice
- phonological store = inner ear
Visuo-spacial sketch pad:
- storing visual and spacial info so can picture objects
- capacity 3-4 chunks
- coding visual and acoustic
- visual cache = form+ colour
- inner scribe = 3D arrangement
Can you evaluate strengths and limitations of the WMM, including dual task studies and
brain imaging?
- :)
case studies:
- Baddeley and Hitch supported existence of the Central executive through dual-task study - found that participants able to recall six digit strings (phonological loop) and perform accurately on verbal- task (the central executive).
- supplies evidence for central executive being separate to the phonological loop as
- Bunge et al - fMRI (measure blood flow in brain) to see which parts of brain were most active when participants were doing two tasks (reading a sentence and recalling the final word in each sentence).
- The same brain areas were active in dual- and single- task conditions, but was significantly more activation in the dual task condition, indicating that increased attentional demands were reflected in brain activity
- support suggestion that CE role allocates processing power to salvage systems - :(
central executive, (most important feature) lacking in information.
- Hanson and Morris found that claims for variety of processing capabilities it possesses = difficult to test + precise function not easy to describe.
- Eslinger and Diamasio did study on EVR, who had cerebral tumour removed.
- resulted in them having good reasoning capability (implies the central executive is functioning), but poor decision making (which implies the central executive is not functioning).
- Instead, Eysenck suggested may be more appropriate not to consider as a single processor but instead series of interconnected processes that combine to create memory.
- In addition, The MSM isn’t a comprehensive model of memory as no sensory register included.
- also doesn’t explain changes we have in processing with practice/ time.
- again supported by EVR
- Menson reported that Phonological Loop predicted mathematical ability in 2nd Graders whereas the Visuo-spactial sketch pad predicted mathematical ability in 3rd graders
- suggesting although the WMM builds on the MSM
- still lacks detail, meaning credible however, not the most accurate.
Be aware of differences in forgetting in terms of accessibility (retrieval failure / interference) vs availability (trace decay / displacement).
Accessibility = LTM (can’t reach memories)
Availability = STM (memories are gone)
Can you recall the difference between proactive and retroactive interference?
Pro = forward:
Older memory interferes with recall of newer one
Retro = backward:
Newer memory interferes with the recall of the older one
Can you recall the differences between context dependent and state dependent forgetting (retrieval failure)?
Context: environment (sights, colours, smells, sounds, etc)
State: internal cues - mental state (emotions, drugs, etc)
