Memory Flashcards
Gabbert et al 2003
Participants were shown the same crime from different perspectives and then discussed what they saw
71% recalled aspects they hadn’t seen
60% said the girl was guilty even though they hadn’t seen her commit a crime
There was 0% false recall in the control group
This shows that memories are easily influenced by post event discussion
They explained this as memory conformity
But these results do not reflect everyday examples of crime
Misleading information
Can lead you to give a particular response instead of an accurate one
What are the two types of misleading information?
Leading questions - suggest a desired answer
Post event discussion - can influence memory
Schemas
Memory is reconstructive meaning the original perception of an event is retrieved through schemas (mental framework)
Memories can be altered during pot event discussion
The memory process is easily corrupted and contaminated
Godden and Baddeley 1975
18 deep sea divers learnt a list of unrelated words on land and underwater and were then tested on land and underwater
Recall was most accurate when the context at recall matched that at acquisition
Recall was 40% lower in the 2 non matching conditions
Strengths of retrieval failure
Lots of evidence to support it
Controlled lab studies have high internal validity
Field studies have high external validity
Findings are consistent therefore reliable
Real world applications (reminiscence therapy is used to treat dementia)
Smith 1979 - mental reinstatement (recalling in the same room)
Baddeley and Hitch 1977
Rugby players were questioned on the names of teams they had played that season
Those who played regularly forgot proportionally more names than those who missed games due to injury or suspension
This supports retroactive interference
High mundane realism and ecological validity
Less control (individual differences between players)
Schmidt et al 2000
700 former Dutch students were randomly selected and asked to recall as many of the local street names as they could and the number of times they had moved was recorded
The more times they had moved the fewer street names they remembered
This supports retroactive interference as the new information disrupts the old
McGreoch and McDonald 1931
Participants learned a list of 10 words by heart and were then split into 6 groups and were asked to learn a new second list the recall the original list
Participants in group 1 who learnt similar words had the worst recall and those in group 5 had the best aside from the control group
This supports retroactive interference and presents that the effect is strongest for familiar material
Weaknesses of retrieval failure
Difficult to test scientifically
Nairne 2002 - relationship between cues and retrieval cannot be proven
Smith and vela 2001 - when learning meaningful material the effects of cues are significantly reduced
Application to all learning may be limited
Goodwin et al 1969
Participants learnt words while sober and drunk and recall accuracy was recorded
The state we learnt in is the best state to recall in
This supports context dependent forgetting
Abernethy 1940
Students were taught as usual but one group in the teaching room and one in the hall
The group tested in the same room recalled better and this affected the ‘weaker’ students more
What is context dependent forgetting?
When we forget due to the absence of environmental cues such as location
Tulving and Pearlstone 1966
Asked participants to learn words from different categories, when asked to recall those who were given category names recalled better
What is mood state dependent memory?
Current mood state is stored in the memory trace and recall is better when the mood is the same at retrieval
Tulving and Pearlstone
What are external cues?
Based on context - the setting or situation the information was learnt
Context also includes information presented, whether the words are printed, spoken or sung
Retrieval is more likely when the context at encoding matches the context at retrieval
What is retrieval failure?
The information is in the LTM but cannot be accessed because the retrieval cues are not present
These can be external (smell or place) or internal (emotions)
The encoding specificity principle
Forgetting is an accessibility issue rather than an availability issue
Tulving (1973-1983): cues aid retrieval if they were present at acquisition, the more similarity between cues the more likely recall is
What are cues?
Cues are triggers for information that are encoded at learning
Activating the memory of the cue helps activate the memory
Underwood 1975
Participants were given successively more words to recall each after 24hrs and percentage accuracy was recorded
Accuracy decreased with the more lists they got
This supports proactive interference (old disrupts new)
Lab study - high control but low ecological validity
Artificial task - lacks ecological validity
What is interference?
An explanation for forgetting LTMs which states that forgetting occurs because memories interfere with one another
The more similar the information the greater likelihood of interference effects occurring due to competition
What is interference theory?
Forgetting occurs when one memory disrupts or blocks another causing one or both memories to become distorted or forgotten
Proactive interference
Occurs when you cannot learn a new task because of an old task that has been learnt
(Old disrupts new)
Retroactive interference
You forget a previously learnt task due to the learning of a new task
(New disrupts old)
What is displacement?
Forgetting through the removal or replacement of a memory trace due to the limited capacity
What is decay?
Forgetting due to the deterioration of a memory trace over time
A/A* evaluation of the WMM
Braver et al (1997) gave logic and reasoning tasks while brain scanning
They found that the left pre frontal cortex was highly active, more so the harder the task
When completing visual tasks the right side of the occipital lobe was active
Weaknesses of the WMM
The central executive is limited and lacks credibility, we don’t know how it works or what it does
Not a comprehensive model, doesn’t include SM or LTM
Doesn’t explain changes in processing that happen over time as a result of rehearsal
Strengths of the WMM
Supported by dual task study, brain scanning evidence and case studies (CW and KF)
Applies to real life tasks
Reading - phonological loop
Problem solving - central executive
Navigation - visual and spatial processing
Shows that there are separate STM components for visual and verbal information
Episodic buffer 2000
Baddeley added the episodic buffer in 2000 after the model failed to account for some results
It was added to act as a backup store and communicates with both of the other components
What is the phonological loop?
A temporary store of auditory information
Deals with spoken and written materials
Phonological store - inner ear, holds information in a speech based form
Articulatory processor - inner voice, processes speech production and rehearses info from the phonological store
Can hold 2 seconds of speech
What is the visuospatial sketchpad?
Temporary store of visual and spatial information and processes in that form
Limited duration and capacity (4 items)
Visual cache - visual data
Inner scribe - spatial arrangement
What is the episodic buffer?
Integrates all forms of information and maintains sequencing
Limited to 4 chunks
What is the central executive?
The director of attention and decision maker
Has a small capacity
Working memory model Baddeley and Hitch 1974
ABC-121314
Participants recalled stimuli before they enter the STM disproving the MSM
Features of the levels of processing theory
It is non structured
Memory is a by product of depth of processing
Levels of processing theory
Crack and Lockhart 1972
Flashbulb memory
Brown and Kulik 1977
Exceptionally vivid memories
Usually of important events with emotional significance
Resistant to forgetting over time
Henry Molaison (HM)
He suffered damage to his LTM but his STM was intact but he cannot recall the doctors he has been seeing for years
He was taught mirror drawing showing he still has procedural memory
Clive Wearing (CW)
He suffered damage to his LTM meaning he couldn’t form new LTMs
His STM is very short
He still has his procedural LTM and can play piano
Asch trait study
When given two lists of the same characteristics participants chose the list with better characteristics at the top
Serial position effect
Glazner and Cuntiz showed that when presented with a list of words participants remember the first few and the last few
This supports the idea of separate memory stores
The first few go into the LTM - primary effect
The last few go into the STM - recency effect
Who proposed the multi store model?
Atkinson and Shiffrin 1986
Features of the multi store model
Separarte unitary memory stores
Linear flow of information
Transferred by attention and rehearsal
The multi store model
Bahrick’s research - procedure
392 high school graduates aged 17-74 were split into 2 groups
Group one (recognition) were given the yearbook pictures and a list of names and asked to match them
Group two (free recall) were asked to name the people without a list
Bahrick’s research - findings
Bahrick’s research - conclusion
The duration of the LTM is potentially infinite
LTM is more accurate when tested by recognition rather than free recall
What is declarative knowledge?
Involves knowing that (facts)
What is procedural knowledge?
Involves knowing how to do things including skills
What is procedural memory?
Responsible for knowing how to do things (memory of motor skills)
Does not involve conscious thought
What is semantic knowledge?
Responsible for storing information about the world including general knowledge
What is the episodic memory?
Responsible for storing information about events we have experienced
Involves conscious thought and is declarative
Long term memory model
Capacity of the LTM?
Potentially infinite
Duration of the LTM?
Potentially infinite
Encoding of the LTM?
Semantic
Peterson and Peterson 1959 - procedure
24 psychology students had to recall meaningless trigrams at different time intervals
To prevent rehearsals the students had to count backwards in threes or fours from a specific number
Peterson and Peterson 1959 - findings
The longer the interval the less accurate the recall
At 3 seconds 80% of trigrams were correctly recalled at 18 seconds only 10% were correctly recalled
Peterson and Peterson 1959 - conclusions
The STM has a limited duration of 18 seconds
If we are unable to rehearse information it wont be passed from the STM to the LTM providing support for the multi store model
Baddeley 1966
He gave participants a list of acoustically similar words and non acoustically similar words
The acoustically similar words were recalled better showing the STM is encoded acoustically
What is retrieval?
Getting information out of storage
What is storage?
The nature of memory stores (where the information is stored and how long it lasts)
What is acquisition?
An early stage of the learning process when a response is established
Cowan 2001
He found the capacity of the STM to be around 4 chunks meaning the upper end of Miller’s range is not supported by evidence
Jacob’s 1887
He used a span test with all letters and number excluding ‘w’ and ‘7’
People found it easier to recall numbers (4.3) than letters (7.3)
The magic number 7
In 1956 Miller suggested that the capacity of the STM is 7+-2
If we chunk information we can hold more in the STM
Capacity of STM?
7+-2
Duration of STM?
18-30 seconds
Encoding of the STM?
Acoustic
What is memory?
The process of acquisition, storage and retrieval of information
Capacity of SM?
All sensory experience (very large)
Duration of SM?
1/4 - 1/2 second
Encoding of SM
Sense specific
Memory contamination
Memories become altered or distorted because they combine information from other witnesses with their own memories - the memory is changed
Memory conformity
Witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or because they think the others are right - the memory is changed
Dual task study
Baddeley and Hitch 1976
Participants were asked to do two tasks at the same time (digit span and verbal reasoning)
As the number of digits increased participants took longer to answer verbal reasoning
The tasks used different areas of- verbal reasoning tasks use central executive and digit span uses phonological loop
Braun et al
Participants were given 2 types of false information: they shook hand with bugs bunny and shook hands with Ariel (both impossible events)
Confidence they had shaken hands:
Ariel = 76%
Bugs bunny = 78%
Factual (control) = 62%
Autobiographical advertising can create false memories and make consumers more likely to believe an event happened
These results support reconstructive memory
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - procedure
45 American students watched 7 films of a traffic accident ranging from 5-30 seconds and were then asked to describe what happened
They were asked specific question (e.g. how fast were the cars going when they crashed?)
The IV was the wording of the question and the DV was the speed they responded with
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - findings
Smashed = 40.8mph
Collided = 39.3mph
Bumped = 38.1mph
Hit = 34mph
Contacted = 31.8mph
The verb conveyed an impression of the speed the car was travelling and this altered the participants perceptions
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - conclusion
There are two reasons for biased eye witness testimony:
1) response bias factors - the misleading information may have influenced the answer given (e.g. the critical words ‘’smashed’’ influenced response)
2) the memory representation is altered - the critical verb changes a persons perception of the accident, and this perception is stored with the persons memory of the event
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - evaluation
G - cannot be generalised
R - reliable
A - used everyday in the real world
V - lacks ecological
E - distressing
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - variation
150 American students were shown a 1 minute film of a traffic accident and were then questioned (question was the IV)
50 asked how fast was the car going when they hit
50 asked how fast was the car going when they smashed
50 not asked any questions
One week they were asked if there was any broken glass (there was not)
Participants who were asked how fast the cars were going when they smashed were more likely to say yes to broken glass
This suggests the effect is not just due to response bias because the leading questions alter the memory
Confabulation
The addition of false details to a memory of an event
Tunnel theory of memory
Safer et al 1998
During a stressful event, we automatically narrow attention to the details that are the source of the arousal. Narrowed attention, combined with heightened processing of the critical details, results in poorer memory of peripheral details
Weapon focus effect
When in a stressful situation involving a weapon a person is likely to focus solely on the weapon and ignore other details
Johnson and Scott 1976
Participants were asked to take part in a lab study and while they were sat waiting they heard an argument in the next room. Group one saw a man leave carrying a greasy pen and group two heard smashing glass and saw the man carrying a bloody knife. All participants were asked to pick the man out from a line up. Group one was 49% accurate and group two was 33% accurate. This shows that stress makes it more difficult to focus out attention and to think clearly supporting tunnel theory.
Loftus and Palmer 1987
They showed slides of participants in a restaurant. In one version, the customer was holding a gun and in the other a check book. People who saw the gun focused more on it meaning they were less likely to identify the customer in a parade
Pickle 1998
A thief entered a hair dressers in one of four conditions. Witness identification was least accurate in high surprise but no threat. She argued that weapon focus effect is not about anxiety but surprise undermining tunnel vision theory
Christian’s on and Hubinette 1993
58 witnesses to a Swedish bank robbery were questioned several months later. Recall was at 75%+. The victims (workers) had more accurate recall than bystanders showing that anxiety increases recall accuracy
Yuille and Cutshall 1986
13 eye witnesses to a Canadian robbery in which the thief was shot dead were interviewed several months later were compared with original police interviews. Witnesses were asked to rate their stress and if they had emotional issues since. They were very accurate: high stress 88% and low stress 75% showing that anxiety increases recall accuracy
Inverted U-theory
This theory is ok at normal levels of cognitive anxiety but is also an oversimplification. At high cognitive anxiety there is a catastrophic drop in performance so cognitive anxiety may be inversely related to self confidence meaning the catastrophe model is a more appropriate explanation for the role of anxiety in EWT
Deffenbacher 1983
The evidence is inconsistent, to a point high anxiety has a positive effect on memory but it can also have a negative effect. This led to Deffenbacher arguing that the best way to show this is a curve called Yerkes and Dodson Law, moderate anxiety is good for memory but very low or extreme anxiety reduces performance
Catastrophe model
At high cognitive anxiety there is a catastrophic drop off in performance
Individual differences also mean that it is difficult to achieve a general theory since personality differs so much between individuals
What is cognitive interview?
Is an evidence based technique used to enhance the retrieval of information about a crime scene from memory and was developed by Geiselman et al in 1985 and it takes into account findings about cue and state dependent forgetting
What are the four stages of a cognitive interview?
Mental reinstatement
Change the order
Report everything
Change perspective
What is mental reinstatement?
The witness should try to ‘revisit the crime scene’ in their minds and imagine the environment, their feelings and so on. This is based on the theory of context and state dependent forgetting
What is change the order?
The witness should try to recall the event out of sequence, such as in reverse order. This prevents schemas and expectations affecting the statement and stops dishonesty
What does report everything mean?
The witness should share every minor detail they can think of, even if they do not think it is relevant. This may cue other memories, due to the associative nature of our memory
What does change perspective mean?
The witness should try to recall the event from the point of view of another person involved. This prevents past experience and schemas from influencing recall
Advantages of the cognitive interview
Improves comprehension
Reduces ambiguity
Enhances communication
Enhances STM recall
Retrieves accurate and thorough recall
Provides structure to the interview process
Leads to a more relaxed interview environment
Disadvantages of the cognitive interview
More time consuming
Police have limited time and resources
Specialist training is required to deliver it
Most forces have not been able to adequately provide this
Geiselman 1985
Procedure:
Participants watched a film of a violent crime and were interviewed 48 hours later using either the CI, the standard interview or hypnosis. The number of errors and correct facts was recorded.
Findings:
The average number of correctly recalled facts for CI was 41.2, for hypnosis it was 38 and for the standard interview it was 29.4. There was no significant difference in the number of errors.
Conclusion:
The cognitive interview leads to better memory of events with witnesses recalling more relevant information.
Fisher 1990
He trained detectives from the Miami police department to use the CI. Their interviews were then videotaped and the total number of statements was scored. A second eyewitness was then asked to confirm whether these were true or false.
Compared to the standard procedure used, the cognitive interview produced a 46% increase in recall and 90% in accuracy. These findings suggest that the CI is more effective than the standard interview, producing higher recall and reducing errors.
Does the CI work well with all witnesses?
Young children can become confused by some of the processes used e.g. reporting things in reverse order. Developmental psychologists have suggested that children can not perspective take until 5 years old.
Mello and Fisher 1996
Older (average 72) participants benefited significantly more from the CI than younger years (average 22). This suggests that the CI is a useful technique when used selectively.
Kebbell and Wagstaff 1999
Many police officers don’t use the CI in less serious crimes and they do not have the time. This means that there is likely no standardised application of the CI meaning establishing its real effectiveness is nearly impossible
