Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology paper 1 > memory > Flashcards

memory Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

coding definition

A

the format in which information is processed and stored

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

capacity definition

A

the amount of information that can be help in a memory store

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

duration definition

A

length of time information can be held in memory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

coding baddeley

A
  • lists of words to four groups of participants
  • group 1 – acoustically similar (sound similar)
  • group 2 – acoustically dissimilar
  • group 3 – semantically similar (similar meaning)
  • group 4 - semantically dissimilar
  • participants asked to recall words in the same order
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

coding Baddeley findings

A
  • immediate recall – recalling from short term memory tended to do worse in acoustically similar words
  • recall after 20 minutes – recalling from long term memory did worse with semantically similar words
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

coding baddeley advantage

A
  • separate memory store - identified a clear difference between 2 memory stores, led to multi store memory model
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

coding baddeley disadvantage

A
  • artificial stimuli - word list had no personal meaning to participants, processing more meaningful information may use semantic coding even for STM tasks.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

capacity jacobs

A
  • participants asked to recall the list the correct order until they make an error
  • mean score = 9.3
  • letter = 7.3
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

capacity miller

A
  • magic number = 7
  • believed that STM capacity is 7 +/- 2
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

capacity advantage

A
  • valid study - has been replicated (Bobb and Verhaegen)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

capacity disadvantage

A

not so many chunks
- may have overestimated STM capacity
- cowan reviewed research and found capacity of STM is only about 4
- suggests lower end of miller estimate is more appropriate than 7 items

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

duration Peterson and Peterson

A
  • 24 student participants in 8 trials/tests
  • students had to remember a consonant syllable (trigram) and count 3 digit number to count back from
  • prevent any mental rehearsal of consonant syllable
  • asked to stop for different periods of time from 3-18 seconds
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

duration Peterson and Peterson findings

A
  • After 3 seconds the average recall was 80%
  • After 18 seconds the average recall was 3%
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

duration Baharick

A
  • 392 american participants aged 17-74
  • tested photo recognition and free recall from highschool yearbook
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

duration Baharick findings

A
  • <15 year graduation 90% photo, 60% free
  • 48 years, 70% photo, 30% recall
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

duration positives

A

high external validity
- research investigated meaningful memories
- when studies on LTM were conducted with meaningless pictures recall rates lower
- suggests findings reflect a more real estimate of duration of crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

duration negatives

A

artificial stimuli
- rather than meaning full material
- word list had no personal meaning
- findings may not tell us much ab coding in different kinds of memory tasks
- processing more meaningful information people may use semantic coding even for STM tasks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness testimony: misleading information

A

Loftus and Palmer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Loftus and Palmer

A
  • 45 participants to watch clips of car accidents
  • asked to describe how fast the cars were going, 5 groups given different verb
  • mean for ‘contacted’ was 31.8mph
  • mean for ‘smashed’ was 40.5mph
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

why do leading questions affect EWT

A

response bias
- wording of questions influence how we answer
- Loftus and palmer - participants who heard ‘smash’ recalled broken glass (there was none)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

research on post-event discussion

A

Gabbert
- each participant watched video of same crime but filmed from different angle
- then discussed what they saw before completing recall test
- 71% recalled aspects that they heard in discussion not in video
- control group where no discussion was 0%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

why does post-event discussion affect EWT

A
  • memory contamination - co-witnesses to crime discuss it eyewitness testimony become altered, they combine info with other witnesses with their own
  • memory conformity - Gabbert witnesses go along with each other to win social approval
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

misleading information evaluation

A
  • real world application
  • evidence against the substitution
  • evidence challenging memory conformity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

misleading information real life application

A

real world application
- in criminal justice system
- Loftus - leading questions have distorting effect on memory so police are careful with how they phrase their questions
- psychologists askd to act as eyewitnesses in court to explain the limits of EWT to juries

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

real world application counterpoint

A
  • Participants watched film clips in a lab different from experiencing it in real life
  • Foster said what eyewitnesses remember has important consequences in the real world but participant responses in research don’t matter in the same way
  • Suggests that Loftus is too pessimistic about the effects of misleading information
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

misleading information.
evidence against the substitution

A
  • EWT is more accurate for some aspects of an event than others
  • Sutherland and Hayne - asked leading questions their recall was more accurate for central details
  • original memories for central details survived and were not distorted an outcome that is not predicted by the substitution explanation
27
Q

misleading information.
evidence challenging memory conformity

A
  • Evidence that post – event discussion actually alters EWT
  • Skagerberg and Wright (2008) showed participants 2 versions film clips.
  • Participants discussed the clips in pairs each having seen different
  • Often didn’t report what they had seen but what they had heard
  • Suggests that memory itself is distorted through misleading post-event discussion rather than result of memory conformity.
28
Q

improving the accuracy of EWT: cognitive interview
Fisher and Geiselman

A
  • EWT could improve if police used cognitive interviews
29
Q

cognitive interview

A

method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate memories
- 4 main techinques used

30
Q

cognitive interview
4 main techniques used

A
  • report everything
  • reinstate the context
  • reverse the order
  • change perspective
31
Q

the enhanced cognitive interview

A
  • Fisher - focus on dynamics of the interaction
  • includes ideas such as reducing eyewitness anxiety, mimimising distractions
32
Q

cognitive interview positive
support for the effectiveness

A
  • Meta- analyse by kohnken, combined data from 55 studies comparing the CI with the standard police interview
  • CI gave an average 41% increase in accurate information
  • Shows CI is an effective technique in helping witnesses recall information that is stored in the memory but not immediately accessible
33
Q

cognitive interview negative
some elements may be more useful

A
  • not all elements are useful
  • Milne and Bull- found combining ‘report everything’ and ‘reinstate the context’ produced the best recall
  • some aspects of CI are more useful than others
34
Q

cognitive interview negative
time consuming

A
  • police may reluctant to use CI because it takes more time and training
  • better to focus on just a few elements
35
Q
A
36
Q

the multi store memory model

A
  • representation of how memory works in terms of 3 stores
  • Describes how information is passed from 1 store to another
37
Q

sensory register

A
  • All stimuli from the environment is passed into the sensory register
  • Memory store for each of our 5 senses
  • Coding in each store is specific
  • Duration less than half a second
  • high capacity
  • Information passes further into the memory system only if you pay attention to it
38
Q

STM

A
  • Coded mainly acoustically and lasts around 18 seconds unless its rehearsed
  • Temporary memory store
  • Capacity is between 7 +/-2
39
Q

LTM

A
  • Potentially permanent memory store for information that has been rehearsed for a prolonged time
  • Coded mostly semantically
  • when we want to recall information from LTM it has to be transferred back into STM by retrieval
  • Bahrick el al found many participants were able to recognise the names and faces of old school classmates almost 50 years after graduating
40
Q

multi store memory model evaluation

A
  • research support
  • more than 1 STM store
    -elaborative rehearsal
41
Q

research support

A
  • MSM shows that STM and LTM are different
  • Baddeley found we tend to mix words that sound similar when using our STM
  • mix words that have similar meaning when we use our LTM
  • Shows LTM and STM are separate independent memory stores, claimed by the MSM
42
Q

research support counterpoint

A
  • In everyday life we form memories related to all sorts of useful things – names, faces
  • many studies that support MSM used none of these materials
  • Used digits, letters (Jacob) and sometimes words (Baddeley)
  • Used consonant syllables – have no meaning
  • Means that MSM may not be valid model of how memory works in our everyday life where we have to remember meaningful information
43
Q

more than 1 STM store

A
  • Shallice and Warrington studied a client with amnesia
  • STM for digits was poor when read aloud to him but good when he read them himself
  • Shows MSM is wrong in claiming that there is just 1 STM store processing different types of information.
44
Q

elaborative rehearsal

A
  • Prolonged rehearsal isn’t needed to transfer to LTM
  • according to MSM what matters about rehearsal is the amount of it (the more you rehearse something the more likely it goes to your LTM) – prolonged rehearsal
  • Craik and Watkins found the type of rehearsal is more important than the amount
  • elaborative rehearsal is needed for long-term storage
  • occurs when you link information of existing knowledge
  • suggests MSM doesn’t fully explain how LT storage is achieved
45
Q

types of LTM

A
  • Tulving proposed the idea that there are 3 LTM stores
46
Q

episodic memory

A
  • Recall person events from life
  • Memories are time stamped
  • Memories of single episode will include several elements (people, places, objects)
  • Memories have to be retrieved consciously and with effort
47
Q

semantic memory

A
  • Shared knowledge of the world
  • These memories aren’t time stamped
  • Need to be recalled deliberately
48
Q

procedural memory

A
  • Knowledge of how to do things
  • Recall without consciousness
  • Eg riding a bike
49
Q

types of LTM evaluation

A
  • clinical evidence
  • conflicting neuroimaging evidence
  • real world application
50
Q

clinical evidence

A
  • Study of Molaison and Wearing
  • Episodic memory in both men were severely impaired due to brain damage
  • But semantic memories were relatively unaffected- knew the concept of a dog but couldn’t remember stoking him 30 minutes before
  • Procedural memories were also intact – knew how to walk and speak
  • Shows that there are different memory stores in LTM – one can be damaged but others could be unaffected
51
Q

clinical evidence counterpoint

A
  • Clinical studies of brain are not always perfect
  • lack control of variables
  • Researcher has no control over what happened before or during the injury
  • No knowledge of individuals memory before incident, without its hard to see how much it has changed
52
Q

conflicting neuroimaging evidence

A
  • Buckner and Peterson (1996) reviewed evidence regarding the location of semantic and episodic memory.
  • semantic memory is the left side of the prefrontal cortex and episodic memory on the right
  • other research links the left prefrontal cortex with the episodic retrieval
  • Challenges any neurophysiological evidence to support types of memory as there is poor agreement on where each type might be located.
53
Q

real world application

A
  • Understanding types of LTM allows psychologist to help people with memory problems
  • As people age they experience memory loss but research shows it seems to be specific to episodic memory
  • Belleville devised an intervention to improve episodic memory in older people.
  • Trained participants performed better on a test of episodic memory after training than a control group
  • shows that distinguishing between types of LTM enables specific treatments to be developed
54
Q

the working memory model

A
  • Explanation of how STM is organised and how it functions
  • Consists of 4 main components
55
Q

central executive

A
  • Monitors the incoming data, focuses and divides our limited attention and allocates subsystems to tasks
  • Very limited processing capacity and doesn’t store information
56
Q

phonological loop

A
  • Deals with auditory information
  • Preserve the order the information arrives
  • Subdivided into
    o Phonological store – stores words you hear
    o Articulatory process – allows maintenance rehearsal, capacity is 2 seconds worth of what you can say
57
Q

visuo-spatial sketchpad

A
  • Stores visual and/or spatial information when required
  • Limited capacity – Baddeley around 3-4 objects
  • Subdivided into
    o Visual cache
    o Inner scribe
58
Q

episodic buffer

A
  • Added by Baddeley
  • Temporary store for information, visual, spatial and verbal information
  • limited capacity- about 4 chunks
  • Links working memory to long-term memory
59
Q

the working memory model evaluation

A
  • clinical evidence
  • dual task performance
  • nature of the central executive
60
Q

clinical evidence

A
  • Shallice and Warrington case study of patient KF
  • After brain injury KF had poor STM ability for auditory information but could process visual information normally
  • Immediate recall of digits were better when he read them(visual) than being read out to him (acoustic)
  • phonological loop was damaged but his visuospatial sketchpad was intact
  • Findings support the existence of separate visual and acoustic memory stores
61
Q

clinical evidence counterpoint

A
  • Unclear whether KF had other cognitive impairments which might have effected performance on memory
  • Challenges evidence that comes from clinical studies of people with brain injuries that may have affected many different systems
62
Q

studies of dual task performance

A
  • Baddeley – participants carried out a visual and verbal task at the same time, their performance on each was similar to when they did it separately
  • When both task were the same – performance declined
  • Because both visual tasks compete for the same subsystem whereas there is no competition when doing both
  • Shows there must be a separate subsystem that processes visual input
63
Q

nature of the central executive

A
  • Lack of clarity over nature of central executive
  • Baddeley – the central executive is most important but least understood
  • The CE needs to be more clearly specified than just for attention
  • Some psychologists believe the CE may consist of separate subcomponents
  • Means the CE is an unsatisfactory component and this challenges the integrity of the WMM

Psychology paper 1 (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions