Memory Flashcards
Elements of the multi store memory model
sensory register, short term memory, long term memory
Sensory register encoding
Sensory specific raw data
Sensory register capacity
Limitless
Sensory register duration
Approximately 0.5 seconds
How is information from the sensory register transferred to the STM
Attention
How is information from the LTM transferred to the STM
Retrieval
How does information remain in the STM
Maintenance rehearsal
Short term memory encoding
Mainly acoustic
Short term memory capacity
7 + or - 2 chunks
Short term memory duration
15-20 seconds
How is memory transferred to the STM from the LTM
Elaborative rehearsal
Long term memory encoding
Mainly semantic
Long term memory capacity
Limitless
Long term memory duration
Up to a life time
Evaluation of MSMM - too simple
Working memory model and its supporting research shows that the STM is not a unitary store
Evaluation of MSMM - research support
Supporting evidence - Studies using brain scanning have demonstrated their is a difference between STM and LTM, Beardsley (1997) found the prefrontal cortex is active during STM but not LTM tasks. Squire et al (1992) found the hippocampus is active when the LTM is engaged. LTM and STM as separate stores is the basis for the MSM
Evaluation of the MSMM - Case studies and counter
HM had an operation to remove his hippocampus for epilepsy. Personality and intellect remained intact but could not form new LTMs
However HM could learn new skills supports how MSM is too simple as LTM needs more than one store
Evaluation of the MSMM - Artificial studies
Studies use artificial tasks such as word lists which might not be applicable to real-life
Peterson and Peterson - STM
Had to remember trigrams (3 letters) while counting backwards (avoids maintenance rehearsal)
found 18-30 seconds for STM duration
Bahrick - LTM
Showed Ps photos of students from school and tried to recall their names
Ps did well so LTM duration is very long
Who invented the WMM
Baddely and Hitch
dual task performance
Baddely and hitch made people do 1 CE task and while doing had to say the repeatedly (AL) or say random digits (AL &CE) when task 2 involved the CE and AL it was much slower as 2 CE tasks shows CE is a separate element
Elements of the Working Memory model
Central executive, phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad, episodic buffer
central executive
monitors and coordinates all other mental functions in working
data arrives from the LTM or the senses
Central executive capacity
limited capacity so cant attend to many things at once and has no capacity for storing data
Phonological loop
deals with auditory information and preserves the order of information
What was the phonological loop divided into and by who
Baddeley (1986) further subdivided the loop into the phonological store which holds the words you hear and the articulatory process which is used for words which are heard or or seen
visuo-spatial sketchpad
codes visual information in terms of separate object as well as the arrangement of these objects in the visual field
What was the visuo spatial sketch pad divided into and by who
Logie (1995) suggested this be divided into the visual cache which stores information about visual items e.g. colour and the inner scribe which stores the arrangement of objects in the visual field
Episodic buffer`
Baddeley (2000) added the episodic buffer as it needed a general store
Episodic buffer is an extra storage system with limited capacity
It integrates information from the CE PL and VSS and maintains a sense of time sequencing. It send information to the LTM
Evaluation of the WMM - research support
dual task performance
Evaluation of the WMM - concept of the CE
EVR had brain tumour removed , reasoning was intact (CE functioning) but poor decision making (CE not functioning)
Evaluation of the WMM - Neuroimaging
some evidence for localisation e.g. phonological store = supramarginal gyrus, articulatory rehearsal = broca’s area
Evaluation of the WMM - case study
Shallice and Warrington studied KF who had brain damage his ability to remember auditory info was much worse than visual info
supports VSS and PL as separate stores
Types of long term memory
episodic, semantic, procedural
episodic memory
personal memories of an event e.g. what you did yesterday. Include contextual details and emotional tone
Procedural memory
memory of how to do things e.g. how to ride a bike or how to read. memories are automatic as a result of repeated practice
semantic memory
shared memories of facts or knowledge. may be concrete e.g. ice is made of water or abstract e.g. maths
evaluation of types of LTM - brain scans
episodic associated with hippocampus, temporal lobe and frontal lobe, semantic = temporal lobe, procedural = cerebellum, motor cortex and basal ganglia
Evaluation of types of LTM - case studies
HM procedural memory was intact not episodic or semantic
Evaluation of types of LTM - 4th LTM type
priming and implicit memories e.g. if given a list of word containing yellow then asked to name a fruit makes banana a more likely answer research shows priming is controlled by a separate brain system
Evaluation of types of LTM - distinguishing episodic and semantic
Alzheimer’s patients have been found to have the ability to form new episodic memories but not semantic or vice versa suggesting they are separate and form alone
interference
an explanation for forgetting in terms of one memory disrupting the ability to recall another more likely to occur when the 2 memories have some sort of similarity
Retroactive interference
new memories disrupt old memories
Proactive interference
old memories disrupt new memories
similarity and interference
McGeoch and McDonald (1931) gave Ps 2 lists and recall was worst when the 2 lists were synonyms
Evaluation of interference - artificial research
research is artificial - mot research uses lists of words this may reduced how the research can be used to relate to everyday memory (low ecological validity)
Evaluation of interference - Research support
Baddeley and Hitch (1977)rugby players recalled names of teams played, found recall depended on how many games played not time (more names interfering)
Evaluation of interference - duration generalisation
normally studies used 20 mins between learning and recall real life is often much longer so hard to generalise/lack ecological validity
Retrieval failure
occurs due to the absence of cues, based on the idea that the memory is available but not accessible
context-dependent forgetting
Godden and Baddeley (1975) scuba divers 4 conditions: learn on land recall on land, learn on land recall under water, learn underwater recall on land and learn underwater recall underwater. highest recall occurred when initial context matched recall environment
State-dependent forgetting
Goodwin et al (1969) male volunteers 4 conditions: learn drunk recall sober, learn sober recall drunk, learn drunk recall drunk and learn sober recall sober highest recall occurred when learning state matched recall state
Evaluation of retrieval failure - real world application
Smith(1979) showed that just thinking of the room where you did the original learning was a effective. this also lead to the cognitive interview.
Retrieval failure evaluation - research support
Goodwin et al (1969) and Godden and Baddeley (1975)
retrieval failure evaluation - explains interference
in a study where Ps had to learn 6 lists of 24 words in 6 categories the more lists the P learnt the worse their recall became however if they were given the category (cue) the interference effect disappeared showing retrieval failure is a more important explanation
Loftus and Palmer (1974) procedure
45 students shown 7 films of different traffic accidents then asked to fill in questionnaires the critical question was “about how fast were the cars going when they … each other” there were 5 different words from contacted to smashed
Loftus and Palmer (1974) findings
Findings - mean speed estimate increased when the leading question suggested a higher speed e.g. smashed - 40.8mph contacted = 31.8mph
loftus and palmer (1974) glass
same method but asked : did you see any broken glass) as well as the leading question “how fast were the cars going where the cars going when they … each other. 16 with smashed said there was broken glass whereas 7 with hit said they saw glass and 6 in the control
post-event discussion - conformity effect
conformity effect - co-witnessing reaching the same view of what happened Gabbert et al (2003) Ps in pairs, each watched a different video and viewed unique items. 1 condition encourage to discuss then 71% recalled inaccurate items in an individual recall
Post event discussion - repeat interviewing
each time eyewitness is interview comments from the interviewer will become incorporated into the recall. especially if the interviewer uses leading questions
evaluation of misleading information - research support
supporting research - Loftus students asked to evaluate Disney advertising material containing misleading information about bugs bunny those exposed where more likely to report having shaken hands with bugs even though he is not a Disney character
Evaluation of misleading information - real-life application
Has been used to warn the justice system of inaccuracies of EWT ensures people are not convicted solely on EWT
Evaluation of misleading information - artificial studies
Watching videos is not the same as real-life so may not produce the same effect on the memory
Evaluation of misleading information - may be response bias
may be people answering how they think the questionnaires want to be answered not actually changing their memories
negative effect of anxiety on EWT study
Johnson and Scott (1976)
Johnson and Scott (1976) procedure
asked Ps to sit in a waiting room, heard argument then man ran through room holding either a pen covered in grease or a knife covered in blood then Ps were asked to identify the man from a set of photographs
Johnson and Scott (1976) findings
findings support weapon focus effect 49% accuracy in pen condition 33% accuracy in knife condition
Positive effect of anxiety on EWT
alternative argument says high arousal creates more accurate memories
Christianson and Hubinette (1993) questioned 58 real-witnesses of a bank robbery in Sweden all witnesses showed good memory (75% accurate) and those with highest anxiety (bank tellers) than the lower anxiety (customers and employees)
Yerkes-Dodson effect
when anxiety is moderate EWT is enhanced but when anxiety is too extreme accuracy is reduced
resolves the contradiction
evaluation of anxiety and EWT - surprise not weapon focus
weapon focus could be because of surprise - Pickel (1998) theif entered hairdressing holding scissors, handgun, wallet or raw chicken identification was least accurate in high surprise not high threat (chicken and gun)
Evaluation of anxiety and EWT - Real life
Christianson and Hubinette studied anxiety in the context of a real crime making increased external validity
Evaluation of anxiety and EWT - individual differences
Bothwell et all (1987) tested Ps personalities and labelled them as neurotic or stable, stable Ps had higher accuracy with higher stress and the opposite for neurotics
Evaluation of anxiety and EWT - real life applications
Applies to the cognitive interview a it is important to reduce anxiety of the witness in the interview to improve their accuracy
Evaluation of anxiety and EWT - studies
real-life studies have less control as their may be other factors leading to a change in accuracy while lab studies have ethical issues by causing people anxiety and psychological harm
Stages of the cognitive interview
Mental reinstatement of original context
Report everything
Change the order
Change the perspective
What is mental reinstatement of context
interviewee encouraged to recreate both the physical and psychological environment of the incident - makes memories accessible/cues
What is report everything
Encourages the reporting of everything without missing anything out even if it seems irrelevant - interconnected memories 1 memory may cue another
What is change order
Alternates the timeline of the incident e.g. reversing the order
Tries to remove the effect of schemas influencing recall e.g. you expect a what is likely to happen at a restaurant like it at table take order etc…
What is change perspective
Asked to recall incident from alternate perspective e.g. from another persons view
standard interview
interviewer does most of the talking and asks lots of questions - may be leading questions and discussion may contaminate recall
Evaluation of the cognitive interview - research support
Kohnken et al (1999) meta-analysis of 53 studies found CI increased recall of accurate info by 34%
Evaluation of the cognitive interview - quality and quantity
Kohnken found 81% increase in correct info but also 61% increase in incorrect info
CI mainly increases quantity not quality
Evaluation of the cognitive interview - CI in practice
requires a lot of time and training so is often not used as time is not available and many forces don’t have the time for training - CI use has not been widespread
Evaluation of the cognitive interview - individual differences
Many older people are more reluctant to report info because the stereotype of them having bad memory, CI overcomes this by stressing the importance of reporting everything
CI may be more useful for specific people
Evaluation of the cognitive interview - some elements more useful
not all elements are equally as useful report everything and reinstate context have been found to produce the best result than all in combination, casts doubts on the credibility of the CI as a whole
