Memory

Question 1

STM and LTM

• What is STM?
• What is LTM?

Answer 1

• We look at two types of memory, short-term memory (STM) and long-term memory (LTM)
• STM, limited memory capacity (5-9 items), codes acoustically (sounds), duration of about 18 seconds
• LTM, permeant memory store (unlimited), codes semantically (meaning), duration of a lifetime

Question 2

Coding, Capacity and Duration of Memory

• What is Coding in relation to memory?
• What is Capacity in relation to memory?
• What is Duration in relation to memory?

Answer 2

• Coding is the format info is stored in the memory stores
• Capacity is the amount of info that can be held in memory stores
• Duration is the length of time info can be held in memory

Question 3

Research on coding (Baddeley 1966)

• Describe the procedure of Baddeley (1966)
• Describe the findings of Baddeley (1966)
• What conclusions can be made?

Answer 3

• Process of converting info between forms is called coding
• Baddeley (1966), gave different list of words to 4 groups ppts to remember
• Group 1, acoustically similar, sound similar (cat, cab, can)
• Group 2, acoustically dissimilar, sound different (pit, few, cow)
• Group 3, semantically similar, similar meanings (great, large, big)
• Group 4, semantically dissimilar, different meanings (good, huge, hot)
• When ppts told to recall immediately after learning lists (recall from STM), did worse with acoustically similar words
• When ppts told to recall list 20 minutes after learning lists (recall from LTM), did worse with semantically similar words
• Suggests info coded acoustically in STM, semantically in LTM

Question 4

Evaluation for research on coding

• BS|BA

Answer 4

• Separate memory stores (Baddeley 1966)
• Artificial Stimuli (Baddeley 1966)

Question 5

Separate memory stores (Baddeley 1966)

Answer 5

• Strength, Baddeley identified difference between two memory stores
• STM mostly acoustic coding, LTM mostly semantic coding stood test of time
• Important step in understanding of memory, led to MSM

Question 6

Artificial Stimuli (Baddeley 1966)

Answer 6

• Limitation, Baddeley study very artificial, meaningful material not used
• List had no personal meaning to ppts, findings may not tell us much about coding in everyday life
• When processing meaningful info, people may use semantic coding even in STM tasks
• Suggests findings from Baddeley have limited application

Question 7

Research on capacity

• What are the three things that are researched upon?

Answer 7

Three things that are researched upon, digit span the span of memory and chunking

Question 8

Digit Span (Jacobs 1887)

• Describe the procedure of Jacobs (1887)
• Describe the findings of Jacobs (1887)
• What conclusions can be made?

Answer 8

• Jacobs (1887), measured digit span (num of digits ppt could recall correctly) to determine capacity of STM
• Researcher read out n digits, ppt recites n digits, continues to failure, indicates ppts digit span
• Jacobs found mean span of digits for all ppts was 9.3 items, mean span of letters was 7.3 items

Question 9

Span of memory and chunking (Miller 1956)

• What did Miller (1956) observe?
• What did Miller believe about the span of STM?
• What is chunking?

Answer 9

• Miller (1956), observed everyday practice, noted things come in sevens (7 days of the week, 7 deadly sins etc)
• Miller believed span of STM 7+-2 (5 to 9 items
• He also noted we recall fives words as easily as five letters through chunking
• Chunking is the grouping of sets of digits or letters into units/chunks

Question 10

Evaluation for research on capacity

• JV|C

Answer 10

• Valid study (Jacob 1887)
• Not so many chunks (Miller 1956, Cowan 2001)

Question 11

Valid study (Jacob 1887)

Answer 11

• Strength, Jacob’s study has been replicated
• Jacob’s findings have been confirmed by better controlled studies that are more recent
• Suggests Jacob’s study is a valid test of digit span in STM

Question 12

Not so many chunks (Miller 1956, Cowan 2001)

Answer 12

• Limitation, Miller may have overestimated STM capacity
• Cowan (2001), reviewed other research, concluded capacity STM 4 chunks (+-, 3 to 5 chunks)
• Suggests lower end Miller suggested (5 items) more appropriate than 7 items

Question 13

Research on duration

• What are the two things that are researched upon?

Answer 13

Research is performed on the duration of STM and LTM

Question 14

Duration of STM (Peterson and Peterson 1959)

• Describe the procedure of Peterson and Peterson (1959)
• Describe the findings of Peterson and Peterson (1959)
• What conclusions can be made?

Answer 14

• Peterson and Peterson (1959), 24 students 8 trials (tests), each trial ppt given consonant syllable (YCG, ERF etc), also given 3-digit number
• Ppt count backwards from this number (prevent mental rehearsal of consonant syllable)
• Told to stop after varying periods on each trial (3, 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 seconds), retention interval
• Findings, after 3 seconds recall 80%, 18 seconds recall 3%
• Findings suggest STM duration about 18 seconds, unless info repeated over and over (verbal rehearsal)

Question 15

Duration of LTM (Bahrick et al 1975)

• Describe the procedure of Bahrick et al (1975)
• Describe the findings of Bahrick et al (1975)
• What conclusions can be made?

Answer 15

• Bahrick et al (1975), 392 American ppts aged 17-74
• Recall tested, photo recognition test, 50 photos, some from ppts yearbooks
• Free recall test, ppts recalled names from graduating class
• Ppts tested within 15 years of graduation, 90% accurate photo recognition, 60% free recall
• Ppts tested 48 years after graduation, 70% accurate photo recognition, 30% free recall
• Shows LTM may last a lifetime for some material

Question 16

Evaluation for research on duration

• M|EV|CP

Answer 16

• Meaningless stimuli in STM study (Peterson and Peterson 1959)
• High external validity (Bahrick et al 1975)
• Counterpoint (Use of Yearbooks)

Question 17

Meaningless stimuli in STM study (Peterson and Peterson 1959)

Answer 17

• Limitation, Peterson and Peterson (1959), stimulus material artificial
• Not completely irrelevant (try to remember phone numbers, realistically meaningless)
• Stimulus used (consonant syllables) not used in everyday life
• Study therefore lacked external validity meaning generalisation is difficult

Question 18

High external validity (Bahrick et al 1975)

Answer 18

• Strength, Bahrick et al’s study, high external validity
• Meaningful memories researched on
• Suggests findings reflect more “real” estimate of duration of LTM

Question 19

Counterpoint (Use of Yearbooks)

Answer 19

• Limitation, people may have recently looked at yearbooks
• Not measuring memory of years ago, possibly months or days even
• Low internal validity, confounding variable that has not been controlled

Question 20

The Multi-store Model of memory (MSM)

• What does the MSM describe?
• What are the three stores of the MSM?

Answer 20

• Richard and Richard’s (1968, 1971) multi-store model (MSM)
• Describes how info flows through memory system
• Suggests memory made up of three stores linked by processing
• The three stores are The Sensory Register, STM and LTM

Question 21

Sensory Register (SR)

• What is passed into the SR?
• What does the SR contain, how many of these are there?
• What is coding dependent on, what is the name of this?
• What is the store for coding visual info?
• What is the store for coding auditory info?
• What is the capacity and duration of SR?
• What causes the info to pass further through the MSM?

Answer 21

• Stimuli form environment (sound, sight etc) passed into sensory register (SR)
• SR contains registers (sensory memory stores), one for each of the 5 senses
• Coding modality-specific (depends on sense)
• Store coding for visual info is iconic memory, store coding acoustically is echoic memory
• Duration is very brief (less than half a second), very high capacity (millions of cells in one eye, each store data)
• Info passes further through memory system if you pay attention (attention is a key process)

Question 22

Short-term memory (STM)

• How is info coded?
• Describe the capacity and duration of STM
• What is the two types of rehearsal, how do they relate to each other?
• What is the condition for info to be stored in STM?
• What happens if the info is not stored in STM?
• When does info get passed to the LTM?

Answer 22

• Info mainly coded acoustically, duration of about 18 seconds unless info rehearsed, STM is a temporary store
• Capacity of 5 to 9 items, more like 5 rather than 9 according to Cowan’s research
• Maintenance rehearsal, repeat material to ourselves over and over again
• Info kept in STM so long as its rehearsed, if done for long enough (prolonged rehearsal) it passes into LTM
• If info not rehearsed then it is forgotten

Question 23

Long-term memory (LTM)

• How is info coded?
• Describe the capacity and duration of LTM
• How is info recalled?

Answer 23

• Potentially permeant memory store for ingo that has been rehearsed for a prolonged time
• LTM mostly coded semantically, duration may be up to a lifetime according to Bahrick et al
• Capacity is practically unlimited, according to MSM if we recall info from LTM, has to be transferred back to STM though process called retrieval

Question 24

Evaluation for MSM

• B|CP|KF|FM

Answer 24

• Research support (Baddeley 1966)
• Counterpoint (Meaningful stimuli)
• More than one STM store (Shallice and Warrington 1970, KF)
• Elaborative rehearsal (Fergus and Michael 1973)
• Usefulness of MSM

Question 25

Research support (Baddeley 1966)

Answer 25

• Strength of MSM, support showing STM and LTM different
• Baddeley (1966), STM coded acoustically LTM coded semantically
• Further support from studies of capacity and duration
• Studies show STM and LTM separate, independent memory stores as claimed by MSM

Question 26

Counterpoint (Meaningful stimuli)

Answer 26

• Most studies that support MSM have unmeaningful stimuli
• Digits and Letters (Jacobs), Words (Baddeley), Consonant syllables (Peterson and Peterson)
• Suggests MSM may not be valid model for memory in everyday life where more meaningful info is remembered

Question 27

More than one STM store (Shallice and Warrington 1970, KF)

Answer 27

• Limitation of MSM, evidence of more than one STM store
• Shallice and Warrington (1970), studied client KF who had amnesia
• KF’s STM for digits was poor when they were read out loud to him
• Recall however was better when he read the digits to himself
• Further studies also showed there could be another short-term store for non-verbal sounds
• Suggests MSM is wrong, claims just one STM store processing different types of info (visual, auditory etc)

Question 28

Elaborative rehearsal (Fergus and Michael 1973)

Answer 28

• Limitation of MSM, prolonged rehearsal not needed for transfer to LTM
• Fergus and Michael (1973) found type of rehearsal more important than amount
• Elaborative rehearsal needed for long-term storage (link info to existing knowledge, think about what it means)
• Suggests MSM does not fully explain how long-term storage is achieved

Question 29

Usefulness of MSM

Answer 29

• MSM stated STM and LTM were single memory stores
• Evidence however suggests that they are not just single memory stores
• LTM contains different kinds of info, very unlikely its just one store
• Stores facts about the world, personal experience and how to perform actions, these may be different stores
• Therefore, MSM may be oversimplified model of memory, but it was a useful starting point to stimulate research leading to other models that explained more of the evidence

Question 30

Types of long-term memory

• What did Tulving realise about the MSM?
• What are the three LTM stores proposed by Tulving?

Answer 30

• Tulving (1985), one of the first cognitive psychologists to realise MSM view of LTM too simplistic and inflexible
• He proposed three LTM stores that store quite different types of info
• Procedural memory, Episodic memory and Semantic memory

Question 31

Procedural memory

• What is this?
• How is info recalled, how much effort does this take?
• Is it easy to explain to someone else?
• Are these memories time stamped?
• Are these memories vulnerable to distortion and forgetting?

Answer 31

• Memory for actions or skills, how we do things
• Recalled unconsciously, effortless to do so (eventually), not personal
• Example, riding a bicycle, becomes automatic through practice
• Difficult to explain to someone else, for example hard to explain how to ride a bicycle
• Memories not time stamped, probably don’t remember when you learnt to ride a bicycle

Question 32

Episodic memory

• What is this?
• How is info recalled, how much effort does this take?
• Is it easy to explain to someone else?
• Are these memories time stamped?
• Are these memories vulnerable to distortion and forgetting?

Answer 32

• Ability to recall events (episodes) of our lives (personal), like a diary, record of personal experiences
• Example, first day of college, these memories are complex, time-stamped (remember when they happened as well as what happened)
• Episodic memories also store info about how events relate to each other in time
• Memory of single episode contains several elements (places, people, weather etc), all these memories interwoven to produce single memory (College + Students + Sun = First day of college)
• Conscious effort to recall episodic memories, easy to explain to someone else

Question 33

Semantic memory

• What is this?
• How is info recalled, how much effort does this take?
• Is it easy to explain to someone else?
• Are these memories time stamped?
• Are these memories vulnerable to distortion and forgetting?

Answer 33

• Store contains shared knowledge of the world, like a combo of a dictionary and encyclopaedia
• Examples, what an orange tastes likes, meanings of words
• Contains knowledge of a variety of concepts (animals, love, Frozen the movie)
• Memories not time stamped, don’t remember when we acknowledge the concept of animals
• Less personal, more about facts we all share, contains immense collection of material that is constantly being added to
• Less vulnerable to distortion and forgetting than episodic memory according to Tulving

Question 34

Evaluation for Types of long-term memory

• CE|CP|NE|RWA|ESM

Answer 34

• Clinical evidence (HM and Clive Wearing)
• Counterpoint (Case Studies)
• Conflicting neuroimaging evidence (Buckner and Petersen 1996, Tulving et al 1994)
• Real-world application (Belleville et al 2006)
• Episodic and Semantic memory (Tulving 2002, Hodges and Patterson 2007)

Question 35

Clinical evidence (HM and Clive Wearing)

Answer 35

• Strength, evidence from famous case studies HM and Clive Wearing
• Episodic memory in both men severely impaired due to brain damage (Caused by operation and infection respectively)
• Semantic memory relatively unaffected, still understood meaning of words, HM understood concept of dog
• Procedural memories also intact, knew how to walk and speak
• Clive Wearing was a professional musician, could read music, sing and play piano post brain injury
• Supports Tulving’s view, three different memory stores of LTM, one store damaged others unaffected

Question 36

Counterpoint (Case Studies)

Answer 36

• Limitation, case studies used as evidence
• Difficult to generalise, small sample, unique cases
• Researchers do not know how good memories were post brain injury, nothing to compare to
• Lack of control limits what clinical studies can tells us about different types of LTM

Question 37

Conflicting neuroimaging evidence (Buckner and Petersen 1996, Tulving et al 1994)

Answer 37

• Limitation, conflicting research findings linking type of LTM to areas of the brain
• Buckner and Petersen (1996), reviewed evidence of location of semantic and episodic memory
• Concluded SM located left side of prefrontal cortex, EM located right side of prefrontal cortex
• Tulving et al (1994) links encoding of EM to left prefrontal cortex and retrieval of EM to the right prefrontal cortex
• Challenges any neurophysiological evidence supporting types of LTM, poor agreement where each type is located

Question 38

Real-world application (Belleville et al 2006)

Answer 38

• Strength, understanding of types of LTM allows psychologist to help people with memory problems
• People age, experience memory loss, research shown specific to episodic memory (harder to recall memories of personal events/experiences that occurred recently, past EM remain intact)
• Belleville et al (2006), devised intervention to improve EM in older people
• Trained ppt did better on test of EM after training than control group
• Shows distinguishing between types of LTM enables specific treatment to be developed

Question 39

Episodic and Semantic memory (Tulving 2002, Hodges and Patterson 2007)

Answer 39

• Debate whether EM and SM different forms of LTM or the same store
• Tulving (2002), view that EM specialised subcategory of SM (same store)
• Research into amnesia, showed its possible to have fully functioning SM with damage EM
• Some with amnesia know past event happened (semantic), cannot re-experience them (episodic)
• Also concluded not possible to have fully functioning EM with damaged SM
• However, Hodges and Patterson (2007), found some with Alzheimer’s disease could form new EM but not SM
• Suggests EM does not require functioning SM, therefore they must be separate
• Evidence shows EM and SM are closely related but ultimately are different forms of LTM

Question 40

The Working Memory Model (WMM)

• What is the WMM an explanation of?
• What is it concerned with?
• What does it consist of?

Answer 40

• Baddeley and Hitch (1974), created WMM, explanation of how STM is organised and how it functions
• Concerned with “mental space” that’s active when storing and manipulating info temporarily, examples include doing maths problems, playing chess or understanding language
• Consists of 4 main components, CE, PL, VSS and the EB

Question 41

Central Executive (CE)

• What role does the CE have?
• What does it do?
• Describe its capacity

Answer 41

• Has a supervisory role, monitors incoming data
• Focuses and divides limited attention, allocates subsystems (slaves) to tasks
• Limited processing capacity, does not store info

Question 42

Phonological Loop (PL)

• What role does the PL have?
• What is it subdivided into?
• What does (1) do?
• What does (2) do?
• Describe how PL codes and its capacity

Answer 42

• Deals with auditory info (codes acoustically), preserves order info arrives in
• Subdivided into phonological store and articulatory process
• Phonological store, stores words we hear
• Articulatory process, allows maintenance rehearsal of words to keep them in working memory while they are needed
• Capacity of the loop is believed to be 2 seconds worth of what we can say

Question 43

Visuo-spatial sketchpad (VSS)

• What role does the VSS have?
• What is it subdivided into?
• What does (1) do?
• What does (2) do?
• Describe its capacity

Answer 43

• Stores visual or spatial info when required, for example when told to work out how many windows in your house, you visualise it, processed in mental space known as our “inner eye”
• Limited capacity, Baddeley (2003) claimed its 3-4 objects
• Logie (1995) subdivide VSS into visual cache and inner scribe
• Visual cache stores visual data
• Inner scribe records arrangement of objects in visual field

Question 44

Episodic buffer (EB)

• What role does the EB have?
• What does the EB do in simple terms?
• Describe its capacity
• What does EB link?

Answer 44

• Added by Baddeley in 2000, temporary store for info
• Brings together (integrates) material from other subsystems (slaves) into single memory
• Maintains sense of time sequencing
• Basically records events (episodes) that are happening
• Can be seem as storage component of CE, limited capacity 4 chunks according to Baddeley (2012)
• EB links working memory to LTM and wider cog processes such as perception (provides a bridge)

Question 45

Evaluation for WMM

• KF|CP|DTP|NOCE|A

Answer 45

• Clinical evidence (Shallice and Warrington (1970), KF)
• Counterpoint (Other cognitive impairments)
• Dual-task performance (Baddeley et al 1975)
• Nature of CE (Baddeley 2003)
• Artificial

Question 46

Clinical evidence (Shallice and Warrington (1970), KF)

Answer 46

• Strength, support from Shallice and Warrington’s (1970) case study of KF
• KF poor STM ability for auditory info, could process visual info normally
• Immediate recall of letters and digits better when he read them (visual) then read to him (acoustic)
• KF’s PL damaged but VSS was intact
• Strongly supports existence of separate visual and acoustic memory stores

Question 47

Counterpoint (Other cognitive impairments)

Answer 47

• Unclear if other cog impairments other than damage to PL affected performance on memory tasks
• For example, trauma involved in his motorcycle accident could have affected his cog performance
• Challenges evidence from clinical studies of people with brain injuries, may have affected many different systems

Question 48

Dual-task performance (Baddeley et al 1975)

Answer 48

• Strength, studies of dual-task performance support existence of separate VSS
• Baddeley et al (1975), ppts carried out visual and verbal task at same time (dual task)
• Performance similar to when they carried out the tasks separately
• When both tasks visual or both verbal, performance declined substantially
• May be because both visual tasks compete for same subsystem (VSS)
• No competition when performing visual and verbal task together
• Shows there must be a separate subsystem that processes visual input (VSS) and another for verbal processing (PL)

Question 49

Nature of CE (Baddeley 2003)

Answer 49

• Limitation, lack of clarity of nature of CE
• Baddeley (2003) said, “CE most important but least understood component of WM”
• CE needs to be more clearly specified than just being “attention”
• Some psychologists believe CE may have separate subcomponents
• Suggests CE unsatisfactory component, challenges integrity of WMM

Question 50

Artificial

Answer 50

• A lot of the studies that support the WMM have artificial tasks and stimuli
• Dual-task studies lab based, highly controlled but use artificial material that does not reflect everyday life
• Therefore, unclear how WMM operates in everyday real-world situations
• Studies that are used as support challenge validity of WMM

Question 51

Explanations for forgetting

• What are the two explanations for forgetting?

Answer 51

Two explanations for forgetting, interference and retrieval failure

Question 52

Interference

• What is interference?
• What memory does it concern?
• How can this explain forgetting?

Answer 52

• Two pieces info/memories disrupt each other resulting in forgetting or distortion of one or both memories
• Explanation of forgetting for LTM, info in LTM can’t get access to the info
• Interference between memories makes it harder to locate them, this experience is forgetting

Question 53

Types of Interference

• What are the two types on interference?
• Explain and give an example of (1)
• Explain and give an example of (2)

Answer 53

• Proactive Interference (PI), older memory interferes with newer memory
• Example, teacher learnt so many names in past, difficult to remember names from new class
• Retroactive Interference (RI), newer memory interferes with older memory
• Example, teacher learnt so many new names, difficult to remember names from old class

Question 54

McGeoch and McDonald (1931)

• Describe the procedure
• Describe the findings
• What conclusions can be made from this?

Answer 54

• PI and RI, interference worse when memories are similar as discovered by M and M
• Studied RI by changing similarity of 2 lists
• Ppts learn 10 words till they could remember with 100% accuracy, then learned new list
• 6 groups ppts, learnt the following types of lists
• Group 1, synonyms, words same meanings as originals
• Group 2, antonyms, words different meaning to originals
• Group 3, words unrelated to originals
• Group 4, consonant syllables
• Group 5, three-digit numbers
• Group 6, no new list, they rested (Control group/condition)
• Ppts recalled original list, group with most similar material produced worse recall
• Shows interference strongest when memories are similar

Question 55

Explanation of effects of similarity

• What two explanations can explain the effect of similarity?
• Describe these two explanations

Answer 55

• Could be due to PI, old info makes new info more difficult to store
• Could be due to RI, new info overwrites old info because of the similarity

Question 56

Evaluation of Interference

• RWA|CP|TP|DS|A

Answer 56

• Real-world interference (Baddeley and Hitch 1977)
• Counterpoint (Other explanations better)
• Interference and cues (Tulving and Psotka 1971)
• Support from drug studies (Coenen and Luijtelaar 1997, Wixted 2004)
• Artificial and Exaggeration

Question 57

Real-world interference (Baddeley and Hitch 1977)

Answer 57

• Strength, evidence interference effects everyday situations
• Baddeley and Hitch (1977), rugby players asked to recall names of teams they played against in a season
• Players who played all games had poorer recall than players who played most games (missed due to injury)
• Shows interference can operate in some real-world situations, increase in validity of interference

Question 58

Counterpoint (Other explanations better)

Answer 58

• Interference requires conditions that are relatively rare in everyday life
• Very similar memories may still occur occasionally in everyday life, for example when revising similar subjects in close time but not often
• Suggests most forgetting better explained by other theories such as retrieval failure

Question 59

Interference and cues (Tulving and Psotka 1971)

Answer 59

• Limitation, interference temporary, can be overcome using cues
• Tulving and Psotka (1971), gave ppts list of words organised in categories (ppts not told categories)
• Recall average 70% for first list, progressively worse when ppts learn additional list (PI)
• At end of procedure ppts given cued recall test, told names of categories
• Recall rose back to about 70%, shows interference causes temporary loss of accessibility to material (it’s still in LTM), this finding is not predicted by interference theory, suggests its incomplete

Question 60

Support from drug studies (Coenen and Luijtelaar 1997, Wixted 2004)

Answer 60

• Strength from evidence of retrograde facilitation (memory enhancement for events before taking drugs)
• Coenen and Luijtelaar (1997), ppts given list, later asked to recall list, assumed intervening experiences act as interference
• When list learnt under influence of diazepam, recall week later poor compared to placebo control group
• When list learned before drug taken, later recall better than placebo
• Drug therefore improved (facilitated) recall of material learnt beforehand
• Wixted (2004) suggested drugs prevent new info (experienced after taking drug) from reaching parts of brain involved in processing memories
• Drugs cannot interfere retroactively with info already stored
• Findings show forgetting due to interference, reduced interference results in reduced forgetting

Question 61

Artificial and Exaggeration

Answer 61

• Interference theory mostly based on lab experiments, does offer tight control over variables
• Artificial materials, unrealistic procedures, different from everyday life
• Therefore, because lab studies maximise possibility of interference occurring, it may exaggerate its importance as a cause of forgetting

Question 62

Retrieval failure

• What is retrieval failure?
• What is the cause of this?

Answer 62

• Ppl forget may be because of insufficient cues at recall
• When info initially stored (learned), associated cues stored at same time
• If cues not available at recall, may seem like you have forgotten info, this is due to retrieval failure
• Not being able to access memories that are there (memory not available without necessary cues)

Question 63

Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)

• SD|CD
• What did Tulving (1983) discover in his research?
• What is encoding specificity principle?
• What two ways are cues encoded during learning?
• How do they differ from each other?
• What are the two examples of non-meaningful cues?
• What type of forgetting are they linked to?

Answer 63

• Tulving (1983) reviewed research into retrieval failure discovered consistent pattern to the findings
• He called this ESP, states that a useful cue must be both present at encoding (learning) and present at retrieval (recalling)
• If cues at encoding and retrieval are different or entirely absent, there will be some forgetting
• Some cues encoded at time of learning in meaningful way, for example mnemonics leads to recall of a variety of info, such cues used in mnemonic techniques
• Other cues encoded at time of learning but not in a meaningful way, two examples of this below of non-meaningful cues
• Context-dependent forgetting, recall depends on external cue (weather, place)
• State-dependent forgetting, recall depends on internal cue (feeling upset, being drunk)

Question 64

Research on CD forgetting

• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Godden and Baddeley (1975)

Answer 64

• Godden and Baddeley (1975), deep sea divers learnt list in one of the conditions below
• Learn on land, recall on land
• Learn on land, recall underwater
• Learn underwater, recall underwater
• Learn underwater, recall on land
• Found 40% lower recall when conditions were not matched (L&W), concluded external cues were different at recall and learning, led to retrieval failure

Question 65

Research on SD forgetting

• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Carter and Cassaday (1998)

Answer 65

• Carter and Cassaday (1998), gave antihistamine drugs to ppts, had mild sedative effect leading to slight drowsiness
• Creates internal physiological state different from “normal” state of awake and alert
• Ppts learnt list of words under conditions below
• Learn on drug, recall on drug
• Learn on drug, recall when not on drug
• Learn when not on drug, recall on drug
• Learn when not on drug, recall when not on drug
• Found mismatch in conditions lead to significantly lower accuracy of recall, suggests when cues are absent (drowsy at recall, alert at learning) there is more forgetting

Question 66

Evaluation for retrieval failure

• RWA|RS|CP|RVSR|PWE

Answer 66

• Real World Application
• Research support
• Counterpoint (Extreme)
• Recall versus recognition
• Problems with ESP

Question 67

Real World Application

Answer 67

• Strength, helps to overcome some forgetting in everyday situations
• May not have a strong effect on forgetting, still worth paying attention to
• When we have trouble remembering something, probably worth making the effort to recall the environment in which you learnt it first
• For example, need to get phone from other room, go to other room, forget what you wanted to get, go back to previous room, remember you wanted to get your phone
• Shows how research can remind us of strategies we use in real world to improve our recall

Question 68

Research support

Answer 68

• Strength, impressive range of research that supports RF
• Godden and Baddeley, Carter and Cassaday both demonstrate how the absence of the necessary cues at recall leads to CD and SD forgetting
• Eysenck and Keane (2010), argue RF may be main reason for forgetting in LTM
• Evidence shows that RF occurs in real-world situations as well as highly controlled conditions in a lab

Question 69

Counterpoint (Extreme)

Answer 69

• Baddeley (1997) argues contextual effects not very strong, especially in everyday life
• Different contexts must be very different before an effect is seen
• Hard to find environment as different from land and underwater
• Learning something in one room, recalling in another unlikely to result in much forgetting because environments are not different enough generally
• Suggest RF due to lack of contextual cues may not explain much everyday forgetting

Question 70

Recall versus recognition

Answer 70

• Limitation, context effects may depend on type of memory being used
• G and B (1980) replicated experiment but used recognition test instead of recall
• Found there was no context-dependent effect, performance same for all conditions
• Suggests RF is a limited explanation for forgetting because it only applies when person has to recall info rather than recognise it

Question 71

Problems with ESP

Answer 71

• Validity of evidence from research depends on whether we can determine if a cue has really been encoded or not
• If successful recall occurs, we assume this is due to the cue being encoded at learning
• If recall unsuccessful, we assume this is due to the cue not being encoded at learning
• Circular reasoning, this occurs because of that, that occurs because of this
• This means ESP is not scientifically testable, cannot independently measure the presence or absence of cues, cannot conclude that forgetting is due to RF, this undermines the validity of the explanation

Question 72

Eyewitness Testimony (EWT)

• What is eyewitness testimony?

Answer 72

This is the ability of people to remember details of events (accidents, crimes) which they themselves have observed, accuracy of EWT affected by misleading information and anxiety

Question 73

Factors affecting the accuracy of EWT

• MI|A
• What are the two factors affecting the accuracy of EWT?

Answer 73

Misleading information and Anxiety are the two factors affecting the accuracy of EWT

Question 74

Misleading information

• What is misleading information?

Answer 74

This is info that is given to eyewitness usually after the event (post-event info), can take many forms such as leading questions and post-event discussion (PED) between co-witnesses and other people

Question 75

Research on leading questions

• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Loftus and Palmer (1974)

Answer 75

• Leading questions are questions that may “direct” a witness into giving a particular answer
• Loftus and Palmer (1974) demonstrate this with 45 ppts that watched a film of car accidents
• In critical question (LQ or MI), ppts asked to describe how fast cars were going
• “About how fast were the cars going when they [verb] each other”
• Five groups of ppts, each given different verb in their question, hit, contacted, bumped, collided and smashed
• Mean estimated time calculated for each ppt group, contacted resulted in mean of 31.8mph, smashed resulted in mean of 40.5mph

Question 76

Why do leading questions affect EWT?

• RB|S
• What are the two explanations for this?

Answer 76

• Response-bias explanation suggests wording of question has no real effect on memory of witness, it just influences how they decide to answer
• When given verb like smashed, ppt more encouraged to choose a higher speed estimate
• L and P (1974) conducted second experiment to see if leading question wording altered ppt memory (this is the substitution explanation)
• Found that ppts who originally had LQ with verb smashed were later more likely to report seeing broken glass (no broken glass in film) compared to those who has LQ with verb hit
• Suggests that the critical verb altered their memory of the incident

Question 77

Research on post-event discussion

• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Gabbert et al (2003)

Answer 77

• Eyewitnesses may sometimes discuss their experiences and memories with each other, this is called post-event discussion (PED)
• Gabbert et al (2003), ppts in pairs watched video of same crime from different angles, ppt could see elements in event that the other could not
• For example, only one ppt could see the title of the book that the woman was carrying
• Both ppts discussed what they had seen before individually doing a test of recall
• Researchers found that 71% mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they did not see, this info was picked up from the discussion
• In a control group where there was no discussion, there was 0% mistakes in comparison
• This is evidence for memory conformity demonstrating the effects of PED

Question 78

Why does post-event discussion lead affect EWT?

• MC|MC
• What are the two explanations for this?

Answer 78

• One explanation is memory contamination, when discussion takes place memory becomes distorted or altered due to witnesses combing info from other witnesses with their own memories
• Another explanation is memory conformity, Gabbert et al concluded that some witnesses go along with each other to either win social approval or because they think other witnesses are right, they are wrong
• Unlike with memory contamination, the original memory is left unchanged

Question 79

Evaluation for misleading information

• RWA|CP|EAS|ECMC|DC

Answer 79

• Real-world application
• Counterpoint (Issues with research)
• Evidence against substitution
• Evidence challenging memory conformity
• Demand characteristics

Question 80

Real-world application

Answer 80

• Strength, the research has important practical uses in the criminal justice system
• Consequences of inaccurate EWT can be very serious
• L believed that LQ can have such a distorting effect on mem that police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase questions in interviews with witnesses
• Psychologists sometimes asked to act as expert witnesses in court trials and explain limits of EWT to juries
• Shows that psychologist can help improve the way the legal system works, especially protecting innocent people from faulty convictions based on unreliable EWT

Question 81

Counterpoint (Issues with research)

Answer 81

• Practical application of EWT affected by issues with research
• L and P ppts watched film clips in lab, very different experience from witnessing a real event (less stress)
• Foster et al (1994), pointed at that what eyewitnesses remember has important consequences in real world, ppts responses in research do not matter in same way
• Ppt may be less motivated to be accurate compared to in a real-world situation
• Suggests that researchers are too pessimistic about the effects of misleading info, EWT may be more dependable than many studies suggest

Question 82

Evidence against substitution

Answer 82

• Limitation of substitution explanation, EWT more accurate for some aspects of event than for others
• Sutherland and Hayne (2001), ppts showed video clip, ppts later asked misleading questions, their recall was more accurate for central details of event than peripheral details
• Ppts attention focused on central features of event, central memories were relatively resistant to misleading information
• Suggests that the original memories for central details survived and were not distorted, this outcome is not predicted by the substitution explanation

Question 83

Evidence challenging memory conformity

Answer 83

• Limitation of memory conformity, is evidence that PED actually alters EWT
• Skagerberg and Wright (2008), showed ppts film clips, two versions, mugger’s hair was dark brown in one but light brown in other
• Ppts discussed clips in pairs each seeing different versions, often did not report what they had seen or what they heard from co-witness, instead reported a blend of the two
• Common answer for hair questions was “medium brown”
• Suggests that memory itself is distorted through contamination through misleading PED, rather than result of memory conformity

Question 84

Demand characteristics

Answer 84

• Controlling variables in lab studies allowed researchers to pinpoint LQ/PED as a cause of inaccurate recall
• High control means high internal validity
• However, ppts responses may have been affected by DC, ppts did not want to disappoint researcher, attempted to figure out what they were expecting of them
• Used cues in procedure to do this, when asked questions about car accidents, even if they did not know the answer (can’t remember) they may have given an answer anyway
• They may have done this because they believed it to be the most helpful to the researcher
• This measures ppts ability to guess rather than the accuracy of their EWT
• Therefore, to maximise internal validity, variables need to be controlled to reduce DC, also cues must be removed that may lead ppts to realise the hypothesis

Question 85

Anxiety

• What effects does anxiety have?
• Does this effect recall?

Answer 85

Has strong emotional and physical effects, unclear if these effects make eyewitnesses recall better or worse, research supports both possibilities

Question 86

Negative effect on recall (Weapon focus)

• What does anxiety prevent us from doing?
• What is weapon focus?

Answer 86

• Anxiety creates physiological arousal in body, prevents paying attention to important cues, recall worse
• One approach to studying anxiety and EWT is to look at effect of a weapon which creates anxiety
• Leads to focus on weapon, reduces witnesses recall for other details of the event

Question 87

Johnson and Scott (1976)

• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Johnson and Scott (1976)

Answer 87

• Ppts believed they were taking part in a lab study, while seated in waiting room they were either in the low-anxiety or high-anxiety condition
• In the low-anxiety condition, casual conversation in next room was heard, man walked past with a pen and grease on his hands
• In the high-anxiety condition, heated argument in next room, sound of breaking glass, man walked out of room holding knife covered in blood
• Ppts later picked out man from set of 50 photos, 49% could identify man in LA condition, in comparison only 33% could identify the man in the HA condition
• Tunnel theory of memory argues ppl have enhanced memory for central events
• Weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect

Question 88

Positive effect on recall

• What response is triggered, why is it triggered?
• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Yuille and Cutshall (1986)

Answer 88

• Witnessing stressful event creates anxiety through physiological arousal within body
• Fight or flight response triggered, increases alertness, may improve memory because we become more aware of cues in the situation
• Yuille and Cutshall (1986), study of actual shooting in gun shop in Canada, owner shot thief dead
• 21 witnesses, 13 took part in study, interviewed 4-5 months after incident, interviews compared with original police interviews at the time of shooting
• Accuracy determined by number of details reported in each account, also asked to rate how stressed they felt on a scale of 0 to 7 during shooting
• Asked if they had any emotional problems post event
• Found that accounts were very accurate, little change in amount recalled, some details less accurate
• More-stressed group, more accurate recall (88% compared to 75% for less-stressed group)
• Suggests anxiety does not have detrimental effect on accuracy of eyewitness memory in real world context, it may even enhance it

Question 89

Explaining contradictory findings

• What is Yerkes-Dodson law?
• Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Deffenbacher (1983)
• How did he use the Yerkes-Dodson law?

Answer 89

• Yerkes and Dodson (1908), relationship between emotional arousal (anxiety) and performance is a bell curve according to them
• Deffenbacher (1983) reviewed 21 studies of EWT, noted contradictory findings, used Yerkes-Dodson law to explain findings
• When we witness crime/accident, become more emotionally and physiologically aroused
• We experience anxiety (emotional) and physiological changes in body (F or F response)
• Lower levels of anxiety/arousal, produces lower levels of recall accuracy
• Higher levels of anxiety/arousal, produces more accurate recall accuracy till optimal level
• Once reached, any more anxiety/arousal would cause recall to suffer a drastic decline

Question 90

Evaluation for anxiety

• UNA|SNE|SPE|CP|PWYD

Answer 90

• Unusualness not anxiety (Pickel 1998)
• Support for negative effects (Valentine and Mesout 2009)
• Support for positive effects (Christianson and Hübinette 1993)
• Counterpoint (Confounding variables)
• Problems with Yerkes and Dodson’s explanation

Question 91

Unusualness not anxiety (Pickel 1998)

Answer 91

• Limitation of Johnson and Scott, may not have tested anxiety
• Ppts may have focused on weapon because they were surprised with what they saw rather than scared
• Pickel (1998), used scissors, handgun, wallet or a raw chicken as hand-held items in a hairdressing salon video (scissors high anxiety, low unusualness)
• Found accuracy significantly poorer in high unusualness conditions (chicken, handgun)
• Suggests weapon focus effect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety/threat, tells us nothing specifically about effects of anxiety on EWT

Question 92

Support for negative effects (Valentine and Mesout 2009)

Answer 92

• Strength, evidence to support view that anxiety has negative effect on accuracy of recall
• Valentine and Mesout (2009), real world setting of a Horror Labyrinth at the London Dungeon
• Ppts offered reduced entrance fee if they complete questionnaire after to assess level of self-reported anxiety
• They used objective measure (heart rate) to divide ppts into high low anxiety groups
• Ppts tasked to describe person encountered in the Labyrinth (played by an actor)
• Found HA ppts recalled fewest correct details, made more mistakes
• Anxiety clearly disrupted ppts ability to recall details about actor in London Dungeon’s Labyrinth
• Found 17% of HA group correctly identified actor in a line-up compared to 75% correct identification in LA group
• Suggests a high level of anxiety does have a negative effect on immediate eyewitness recall of a stressful event

Question 93

Support for positive effects (Christianson and Hübinette 1993)

Answer 93

• Strength, evidence that anxiety can have positive effects on accuracy of recall
• Christianson and Hübinette (1993), 59 witnesses of actual bank robberies interviewed in Sweden
• Some had direct involvement (bank workers), some indirect involvement (bystanders)
• Researchers assumed DI would experience the most anxiety, found recall more than 75% accurate across all witnesses
• Direct victims (most anxious) were even more accurate
• Findings from actual crimes confirm anxiety does not reduce accuracy of recall for eyewitnesses and may even enhance it

Question 94

Counterpoint (Confounding variables)

Answer 94

• C and H interviewed ppts several months after event (4-15 months)
• Researchers had no control over what happened to ppts during this time (may have had a PED)
• Effects of anxiety may have been overwhelmed by other factors, impossible to assess by the time ppt interviewed
• Therefore, possible that lack of control over CV may be responsible for findings, invalidating their support

Question 95

Problems with Yerkes and Dodson’s explanation

Answer 95

• Bell curve explanation only focuses on physiological arousal involved in anxiety, phys change to body and brain during stressful incidents affect accuracy of EWT
• However, anxiety more complex than this, has more components which theory ignores
• For example, cognitive element, way we think about stressful incident can have major effect on what we remember about it
• Anxious thoughts (“worries”) could mean that bell curve has more of a cliff edge instead
• Suggests that theory is too simplistic, the way we think about stressful events could have different effect on EWT compared with that predicted by physical arousal

Question 96

Cognitive Interview

• RE|RC|RO|CP
• What did Fisher and Geiselman (1992) argue?
• What are the four techniques that make up the cognitive interview?

Answer 96

• Fisher and Geiselman (1992) argued EWT could be improved if police used better techniques when interviewing witnesses
• Argued techniques should be based on psychological insight into how memory works
• Techniques collectively is the cognitive interview (CI), four main techniques used
• Report everything, reinstate the context, reverse the order, change perspective

Question 97

Report everything

• Describe this technique

Answer 97

• Witnesses encourage to include every single detail of the event, even if it seems trivial/irrelevant
• These details may be important, and they may trigger other important memories

Question 98

Reinstate the context

• Describe this technique

Answer 98

• Witness should return to crime scene in their mind, imagine environment (weather, what they could see)
• Should recall their emotions (happy, sad, bored), this Is related o context-dependent forgetting
• Reinstating the context in their mind may lead to them remembering more details of the crime/event

Question 99

Reverse the order

• Describe this technique

Answer 99

• Event should be recalled in different order from original sequence (back to front, middle to end etc)
• Prevents people reporting expectations rather than what actually happened
• Also prevents dishonesty, harder to be untruthful in the account when asked to reverse the order

Question 100

Change perspective

• Describe this technique

Answer 100

• Witness should recall incident from other people’s perspective
• For example, how it appeared from another witness or the perpetrator
• This disrupts the effect of expectations and the effect of schema on recall
• Schema for particular setting may generate expectations of what would have happened
• Schema therefore recalled rather than what really happened, this is avoided using a change of perspective

Question 101

The enhanced cognitive interview (ECI)

• What did Fisher et al (1987) develop?
• What additional elements were included?

Answer 101

• Fisher et al (1987), developed additional elements of CI on social dynamics of interaction
• Interviewer needs to know when to keep eye contact and when to relinquish it
• ECI also includes ideas like reducing eyewitness anxiety, minimising distractions, getting witness to speak slowly and asking open-ended questions

Question 102

Evaluation of the cognitive interview

• S|CP|SMU|TC|VOCI

Answer 102

• Support for effectiveness of the CI (Köhnken et al 1999)
• Counterpoint (Inaccurate information)
• Some elements may be more useful (Milne and Bull 2002)
• The CI is time-consuming (Kebbell and Wagstaff 1997)
• Variations of the CI

Question 103

Support for effectiveness of the CI (Köhnken et al 1999)

Answer 103

• Strength, evidence that CI works
• Köhnken et al (1999), meta-analysis, combined 55 studies comparing CI, ECI and standard police interview
• CI gave 41% increase in accurate info compared with standard interview
• Only four studies had no difference between types of interview
• Shows CI is an effective technique in helping witnesses recall info that is stored in memory (available) but not immediately accessible

Question 104

Support for effectiveness of the CI (Köhnken et al 1999)

Answer 104

• Strength, evidence that CI works
• Köhnken et al (1999), meta-analysis, combined 55 studies comparing CI, ECI and standard police interview
• CI gave 41% increase in accurate info compared with standard interview
• Only four studies had no difference between types of interview
• Shows CI is an effective technique in helping witnesses recall info that is stored in memory (available) but not immediately accessible

Question 105

Counterpoint (Inaccurate information)

Answer 105

• K et al also found increase in inaccurate info recalled by ppts
• Particular issue in ECI, produced more incorrect details than CI
• CI may sacrifice quality of EWT (accuracy) in favour of quantity (amount of details)
• This means police officers should treat eyewitnesses’ evidence from CIs and ECIs with caution

Question 106

Some elements may be more useful (Milne and Bull 2002)

Answer 106

• Limitation of original CI, not all elements equally effective or useful
• Milne and Bull (2002), found four techniques alone produced more info than standard police interview
• Also found combo of report everything and reinstate the context produced better recall than any other element or combo of elements
• Confirms police officer suspicion that some aspects of CI more useful than others
• Casts some doubt on credibility of overall CI

Question 107

The CI is time-consuming (Kebbell and Wagstaff 1997)

Answer 107

• Limitation, police officers reluctant to use it due to it taking more time and training than standard police interview
• More time needed to establish rapport/relationship with witness and allow them to relax
• CI requires special training; many forces do not have the resources to provide more than a few hours (Kebbell and Wagstaff 1997)
• Suggests complete CI is not realistic method for police officers to use, it may be better to focus on just a few key elements of CI

Question 108

Variations of the CI

Answer 108

• We have seen that research shows some techniques more effective and useful than others
• Leads to pick and mix approach to using CI in practice, hard to comparted effectiveness of CI in research studies if there is no common standard or CI protocol followed by everyone
• Pick and mix approach does make CI flexible, its really a collection of techniques rather than an overall method
• Allows forces to evolve their own approaches, stick to what they believe will work in their own circumstances
• Permits them to adapt method to individual cases
• Therefore, the variation in the use of CI is a strength because it can be adapted to different situations, increases credibility in eyes of police officers and witnesses themselves