memory Flashcards
coding
-baddeley 1966 acoustic and semantic
-acoustically similar words or disimilar
-semantically similar or disimilar words
-immediate recall worse with acoustically similar
-recall after 20 mins worse with semantically similar words
-STM is acoustic
-LTM is semantic
capacity- testing digit span
-Jacobs 1887
-4 digits read, increase until they cannot recall order
-final number= digit span
-avg 9.3 numbers and 7.3 letters in correct order immediately
capacity- magic number
-Miller 1956
-noted that things in everyday come in 7s, days of week, deadly sins etc
-span of STM about 7 items plus or minus 2, but is increased by chunking
duration- STM
-Peterson and Peterson 1959 consonant syllables
-24 students given consonant syllable to recall and a 3 digit number to count backwards from
retention intervals; 3,6,9,12,15 or 18 secs
-after 3 secs avg recall about 80%, after 18 secs 3%
-STM duration without rehearsal is about 18 secs
duration-LTM
-Bahrick et al 1975 yearbook photos
-pps were 392 americans age 17-74
1.recognition test (50 photos from high school yearbook)
2.free recall test (pps listed names of their graduating class)
-recognition test= 90% after 15years, 70% after 48years
free recall= 60% after 15 years, 30% after 48years
MSMM- what is it?
-Atkinson and Shiffrin 1968
-describes how info flows through the memory system
-memory made of 3 stores linked by processing
MSMM- sensory register
-all stimuli from environment pass to SR, this is made up of 5 stores for each sense
-coding-specific, depends on sense (visual in iconic, acoustic in echoic)
-duration- very brief, less than half a second
transfer from SR to STM
info passes further into memory only if attention is paid to it
MSMM- STM
-limited capacity store of temporary duration
-coding-acoustic (based on sound)
-duration- about 18 secs unless rehearsed
-capacity- between 5 and 9 (7+/-2) items before some forgetting occurs
MSMM- transfer from STM to LTM
-maintenance rehearsal occurs when we repeat material to ourselves.
-we can keep info in STM as long as we rehearse it
-if we rehearse long enough it passes to LTM (prolonged rehearsal)
MSMM-LTM
-permanent memory store
-coding- mostly semantic
-duration-potentially a lifetime
-capacity-potentially unlimited
MSMM- retrieval from LTM
-when we want to recall info from LTM it has to be transferred back to STM by retrieval
types of LTM- episodic
-stores events from our life
-like a diary of personal experiences
-complex
-they are time stamped- you remember when they happened and how they relate in time
-involve several elements
-have to make conscious effort to recall
types of LTM-semantic
-stores our knowledge of the world
-e.g. taste of an orange, meaning of a word
-not time stamped, we do not remember when we first heard about them
-less personal and more facts that we all share
types of LTM- procedural
-stores memory for action and skills
-e.g. driving a car
-recall without awareness or effort
-become automatic with practice
-explaining step by step is difficult because you do it without conscious awareness
WMM- what is it?
-a model of STM
-concerned with mental space that is active e.g. when doing maths or comprehending language
WMM- central executive
-allocates subsystems
-supervisory role- monitors incoming data and allocates subsystems to tasks
-very limited storage capacity
WMM- phonological loop
-deals with auditory info and preserves the order in which info arrives, subdivided into;
-phonological store= stores words you hear
-articulatory process=allows maintenance rehearsal
WMM- visuo spatial sketchpad
-stores visual and spatial info when required
-Logie 1995 subdivided it into;
-visual cache=stores visual data
-inner scribe=records arrangement of objects in visual field
WMM- episodic buffer
-added in 2000
-temporary info store
-integrates visual, spatial and verbal info from other stores
-maintains sense of time sequencing- recording events that are happening
-links to LTM
if LTM can be unlimited, why do we forget?
possible info was never stored or the actual memory trace has disappeared
-or it is there but not accessible due to lack of cues
what are cues
-things that serve as a reminder
-may be environmental cues or mental state
what is retrieval failure?
-occurs due to absence of cues
-explanation for forgetting based on idea that the memory is there but not acsessible
retrieval failure- encoding specificity principle
-Tulving and thompson
-memory most effective if info present at encoding also present as retrieval
-ESprinciple states the cue doesn’t have to be exactly right but close the cue is to original item, the better
retrieval failure-context dependent forgetting
-most likely to forget in different context
-therefore a cue would be to go back to the place or visualise it
-
context dependent forgetting study- retrieval failure
-Godden and Baddeley
-scuber divers learn words under water or on ground
-tested on land or under water, 4 conditions
-highest recall occured when context of learning same as retrieval
retrieval failure- state dependent forgetting
-likely to forget if not in same physical, physiological or mental state in which memory took place
-cue is to recreate the state
state dependent forgetting study- retrieval failure
-Goodwin et al
-male volunteers remember list of words drunk or sober
-asked to recall after 24 hours when sober or drunk- 4 conditions
-more recalled in same state
what is interference
-explanation for forgetting in terms of one memory disrupting ability to recall another
-most likely when memories are similar
-
proactive interference
-past learning interferes with current attempts to learn
retroactive interference
-current learning interferes with past learning
proactive interference- study
-benton underwood
-analysed findings from many studies when pps have to learn a series of word lists they do not leearn words encountered later as well as the ones earlier in the list
-if pps memorised 10 or more lists, remembered 20% after 24hours
-if only learned one list, recall was over 70%
retroactive interference- study
-george muller
-list of nonsense syllables to learn for 6mins
-after retention interval, asked to recall
-performance worse if pps been given interview task in between learning and recall
-interviewing task produced RI
ewt- misleading info- loftus+palmer leading questions- procedure
1974
-45 students watch clips of car accidents, answer critical questions about speed
‘about how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’
-given a different verb, ‘contacted’ ‘smashed’ ‘bumped’
ewt- misleading info- loftus+palmer leading questions- findings
-verb ‘contacted’ produced mean estimate 31.8, smashed was 40.5
-leading question biased eyewitness recall of an event
-smashed suggests faster speed
why do leading questions affect EWT?
1.response bias explanantion- wording doesnt effect memory, only answer
2.substitution explanation- wording effects memory, interfering with original memory
ewt- misleading info-gabbert et al- post event discussion- procedure
-paired pps watch vid of same crime, filmed so they seen different aspects
-they then discussed the vid before a test of their recall
ewt- misleading info- gabbert et al- post event discussion- findings
-71% wrongly recalled aspects they did not see but heard in the discussion
-control group (no discussion and no errors)
-evidence of memory conformity
why does post event info affect EWT
1.mem contamination- after discussion they mix info with own mems
2.mem conformity- witnesses go along with each other for social approval or because they believe other person is right
ewt- anxiety- johnson and scott - anxiety has a negative effect- procedure
-pps in waiting room before what they believe to be lab study
-low a condition=heard casual convo and saw man walk through pen w grease
lhigh a condition=heated argument, breaking glass, knife in blood creates weapon focus
-asked to pick man out of 50 photos
ewt-anxiety-johnson and scott- anxiety has neg effect- findings
-49% of pps in low a condition, 33% in high a pps able to identify man
-tunnel theory of mem argues people have enhanced mem of central events
-weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect
ewt-anxiety-yuille and cutshall- anxiety has pos effect- procedure
-actual crime gun shop owner shot thief dead
-13/21 witness agreed to take part
-interviewed 4/5 month after
-info recalled compared to police interviews at the time
-witnesses rate how stressed they felt at time of incident
ewt- anxiety- yuille and cutshall- anxiety has pos effect- findings
-witnesses very accurate, little change after 5 month
-some details such as age height less accurate
-pps who reported higher stress were more accurate 88% compared to 75%
-anxiety may enhance ewt in real world events
ewt- anxiety- explaining contradictory findings
-inverted U theory= Yerkes and Dobson 1908-relationship between mem and stress is an inverted U
-affects memory= Deffenbacher 1983- reviewed 21 studies of ewt with opposite findings- he suggestes u curve effect could explain this
cognitive interview- introduction
-Fisher and Geiselman 1992- said ewt could be improved by using techniques to improve how memory works
-foundation in cog psychology
-understanding established in the interview
cognitive interview- technique 1- report everything
-every detail
-even if small or not confident
-trivial details may trigger other memories
cognitive interview- technique 2- reinstate the context
-return to original crime scene in mind
-imagine environment and emotions
-based on context dependent forgetting
-cues may trigger recall
cognitive interview- technique 3- reverse the order
-events recalled in diff order
-prevents people basing on expectations
-also prevents dishonesty as harder to lie
cognitive interview- technique 4- change perspective
-recall from another persons perspective
-prevents influence of expectations or schema (packages of info developed through experience)
enhanced cognitive interview
-Fisher et al 1987
-added more elements
-focus on social dynamics of interaction (knowing when to relinquish eye contact)
-also reduce eyewitness anxiety and minimising distractions
asking open ended questions and getting them to speak slowly
