Memory

Question 1

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Outline Baddeley’s (1966) research on coding

Answer 1

PROCEDURE
- ptps asked to recall word lists in correct order
- group 1 (acoustically similar): words sounded similar
- group 2 (acoustically dissimilar): word sounded different
- group 3 (semantically similar): words with similar meanings
- group 4 (semantically dissimilar): words with different meanings

FINDINGS
- when recalled immediately (recalling from STM), tended to do worse with acoustically similar words
- when recalling after a time interval of 20 mins (recalling from LTM) tended to do worse with semantically similar words

CONCLUSION
- information is coded acoustically in STM and semantically in LTM

Question 2

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Outline Jacob’s (1887) research on capacity

Answer 2

• measured digit span

PROCEDURE
- researcher reads out 4 digits
- ptp recalls them in the correct order
- if correct, researcher reads out 5 digits, etc, until ptp gets it wrong
- indicates ptp’s digit span

FINDINGS
- mean digit span for all ptps was 9.3 ITEMS
- mean span for letters was 7.3

Question 3

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Outline Miller’s (1956) research on capacity (not usual format of APFC)

Answer 3

• span of memory and chunking
• made observations of everyday practice, e.g. 7 notes on musical scale, 7 deadly sins, 7 days of the week
• Miller thought that the span (i.e. capacity) of STM is about 7±2
• also noted that people can recall 5 words just as easily as 5 letters: chunking (grouping)

Question 4

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Outline Peterson and Peterson’s (1959) research on duration

Answer 4

DURATION OF STM

PROCEDURE
- 24 students in 8 trials
- student given a consonant syllable (e.g. YCG) and a 3-digit number to remember
- student counted backwards from that number to prevent any maintenance rehearsal of the consonant syllable (which would increase the duration of STM)
- on each trial they were told to stop after varying periods of time: 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 seconds (retention interval)

FINDINGS
- after 3 seconds, average recall was 80%
- after 18 seconds average recall was 3%

CONCLUSIONS
- STM duration may be 18 secs without maintenance rehearsal

Question 5

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Outline Bahrick et al’s (1975) research on duration

Answer 5

DURATION OF LTM

PROCEDURE
- 392 American ptps
- aged 17-74
- high school yearbooks obtained from ptps directly or through schools
- recall tested in various ways including: 1) photo-recognition using 50 photos, some from ptps’ yearbook, 2) free recall test, where ptps recalled all the names of their graduating class

FINDINGS
Photo recognition test:
- after 15 years, 90% accuracy
- after 48 years, recall declined to 70%
Free recall test:
- less accurate overall
- after 15 years, 60% accuracy
- after 48 years, 30%

CONCLUSION
- duration of LTM may last up to a lifetime for some material

Question 6

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Evaluate (one strength, one limitation) research on coding

Answer 6

STRENGTH: identified clear difference between two memory stores
- idea that STM uses mostly acoustic coding and LTM uses mostly semantic coding has stood the test of time
~~> important step in our understanding of memory system, led to MSM

LIMITATION: artificial stimuli
- word lists have no personal meaning to ptps
- findings may tell us nothing about coding of meaningful kinds of memory tasks in everyday life
~~> findings have limited application

Question 7

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Evaluate (one strength, one limitation) research on capacity

Answer 7

STRENGTH: Jacobs’ study is valid
- has been replicated
- findings have been confirmed by other (better controlled) studies
- e.g. Bopp and Verhaeghen 2005
~~> Jacobs’ study is a valid test of capacity/digit span of STM

LIMITATION: Miller may have overestimated capacity of STM
- Cowan (2001) reviewed other research and concluded capacity of STM is only about 4(±1) chunks
~~> lower end of Miller’s research (five items) is more appropriate than 7 items

Question 8

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Evaluate (one strength, one limitation) research on duration

Answer 8

LIMITATION: meaningless stimuli in STM study
- recalling consonant syllables doesn’t reflect most everyday memory activities where what we’re trying to remember is meaningful
~~> Peterson and Peterson’s study lacked external validity

STRENGTH: LTM study has high external validity
- researchers investigated meaningful memories (ppl’s names and faces)
- Shepard (1967): when LTM study conducted with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall rates were lower
~~> Bahrick’s findings reflect a more ‘real’ estimate of the duration of LTM

Question 9

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Complete the following sentences

The coding of STM is…

The coding of LTM is…

The capacity of STM is…

The capacity of LTM is…

The duration of STM is…

The duration of LTM is…

Answer 9

The coding of STM is… ACOUSTIC

The coding of LTM is… SEMANTIC

The capacity of STM is… 7±2 CHUNKS

The capacity of LTM is… POTENTIALLY UNLIMITED

The duration of STM is… 18 SECONDS

The duration of LTM is… UP TO A LIFETIME

Question 10

CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION OF MEMORY
Match the researcher to the research

Baddeley et al (1966)
Jacobs (1887)
Miller (1956)
Peterson and Peterson (1959)
Bahrick et al (1975)
Bopp and Verhaeghen (2005)
Cowan (2001)
Shepard (1967)
____________________________________

• reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity of STM is only about 4(±1) chunks
• measured the capacity of STM by measuring digit span, found mean digit span to be 9.3 items and mean letter span to be 7.3 letters
• measured duration of LTM by doing recall tests using high school yearbooks, found the duration of LTM to be up to a lifetime
• measured duration of STM by making ptps remember consonant syllables while counting backwards, found duration of STM to be 18 seconds without maintenance rehearsal
• conducted LTM study with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall was lower than they were for meaningful stimuli
• confirmed Jacobs’ findings with their better, more controlled replica of his study
• researched coding of STM and LTM using word lists which differed in acoustic similarity then semantic similarity, found coding of STM to be mainly acoustic and LTM to be mainly semantic
• observed 7 as a magical number (7 days of the week, 7 notes on musical scale, 7 deadly sins), said that the span/capacity of STM is 7±2, noticed the idea of chunking

Answer 10

Baddeley et al (1966): researched coding of STM and LTM using word lists which differed in acoustic similarity then semantic similarity, found coding of STM to be mainly acoustic and LTM to be mainly semantic

Jacobs (1887): measured the capacity of STM by measuring digit span, found mean digit span to be 9.3 items and mean letter span to be 7.3 letters

Miller (1956): observed 7 as a magical number (7 days of the week, 7 notes on musical scale, 7 deadly sins), said that the span/capacity of STM is 7±2, noticed the idea of chunking

Peterson and Peterson (1959): measured duration of STM by making ptps remember consonant syllables while counting backwards, found duration of STM to be 18 seconds without maintenance rehearsal

Bahrick et al (1975): measured duration of LTM by doing recall tests using high school yearbooks, found the duration of LTM to be up to a lifetime

Bopp and Verhaegen (2005): confirmed Jacobs’ findings with their better, more controlled replica of his study

Cowan (2001): reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity of STM is only about 4(±1) chunks

Shepard (1967): conducted LTM study with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall was lower than they were for meaningful stimuli

Question 11

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (MSM)
Outline what is meant by the Sensory Register (SR)

Answer 11

• all environmental stimuli pass through SR
• comprised of stores for each of the 5 senses (e.g. iconic, echoic)
• duration is less than 1/2 second
• capacity is very high (over 100 million cells storing data in one eye)
• info only passes through if we pay attention

Question 12

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (MSM)
Outline what is meant by the Short-term Memory (STM)

Answer 12

• limited-capacity memory store
• coding is mainly acoustic
• capacity is 7±2 chunks
• duration is 18 seconds

Question 13

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (MSM)
Outline what is meant by the Long-term Memory (LTM)

Answer 13

• permanent memory store
• coding is mainly semantic
• capacity is potentially unlimited
• duration is up to a lifetime

Question 14

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (MSM)
Evaluate the MSM

Answer 14

STRENGTH: research support
- Baddeley (1966): we mix up words that sound similar when using our STM
- but we mix up words with similar meanings when we use our LTM
- further support from other research on duration and capacity of STM and LTM
~~> clearly there are separate stores for STM and LTM, as suggested by MSM
—————> COUNTERPOINT: artificial stimuli
- stimuli used in studies have no personal meaning to ptps
~~> MSM may not be a valid model for how memory works in our everyday lives when we have to remember meaningful info

LIMITATION: more than one STM store
- Shallice and Warrington (1970): studied patient KF (amnesia)
- KF’s STM for digits was poor when they were read TO him, but much better when HE read the digits to himself
~~> MSM is wrong in claiming that there is just one STM store processing different types of info

LIMITATION: elaborative rehearsal over prolonged rehearsal
- Craik and Watkins (1973): type of rehearsal is more important than the amount
- elaborative rehearsal is needed for transfer to LTM (linking new info to existing knowledge/thinking about what it means) rather than prolonged rehearsal (rehearsal for a long time)
- therefore info can be transferred to LTM without prolonged rehearsal
~~> MSM doesn’t fully explain how LTM storage is achieved

Question 15

MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (MSM)
Match the researcher to the research

Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968)
Baddeley (1966)
Shallice and Warrington (1970)
Craik and Watkins (1973)
_______________________________________________________________

• found that elaborative rehearsal is needed for long-term storage rather than prolonged rehearsal
• their research on coding provided support for the MSM by showing that the STM and LTM were separate stores
• studied amnesia patient KF, whose STM was poor when digits were read TO him but better when HE read the digits to himself
• created the MSM, which describes how info flows through the memory system, suggested to be comprised of the SR, STM and LTM

Answer 15

Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968): created the MSM, which describes how info flows through the memory system, suggested to be comprised of the SR, STM and LTM

Baddeley (1966): their research on coding provided support for the MSM by showing that the STM and LTM were separate stores

Shallice and Warrington (1970): studied amnesia patient KF, whose STM was poor when digits were read TO him but better when HE read the digits to himself

Craik and Watkins (1973): found that elaborative rehearsal is needed for long-term storage rather than prolonged rehearsal

Question 16

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Name the 4 components of Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) WMM

Answer 16

Central Executive (CE)
Phonological Loop (PL)
Visuo-spatial Sketchpad (VSS)
Episodic Buffer (EB)

Question 17

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Outline the role of the Central Executive in Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974)WMM

Answer 17

Central Executive
- ‘supervisory role’
- monitoring incoming data
- focuses and divides our limited attention
- allocates subsystems to tasks
- limited capacity, doesn’t store info

Question 18

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Outline the role of the Phonological Loop in Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) WMM

Answer 18

PHONOLOGICAL LOOP
- deals with AUDITORY info
- coding = acoustic
- divided into Phonological Store (stores words we hear) and Articulatory Process (allows for maintenance rehearsal - repeating sounds in a loop to remember them)
- Articulatory Process has a capacity of 2 secs

Question 19

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Outline the role of the Visuo-spatial Sketchpad in Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) WMM

Answer 19

VISUO-SPATIAL SKETCHPAD
- deals with VISUAL (and/or spatial) info
- (e.g. “How many windows are in your house?” you’d visualise it)
- limited capacity, 3 or 4 objects
- divided into Visual Cache (stores visual data) and Inner Scribe (records arrangements of objects in the visual field)

Question 20

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Outline the role of the Episodic Buffer in Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) WMM

Answer 20

EPISODIC BUFFER
- temporary store of info
- integrates info from other stores and maintains time sequencing
- capacity of 4 chunks

Question 21

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Evaluate Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) WMM

Answer 21

STRENGTH: clinical evidence of patient KF
- Shallice and Warrington (1970): KF had poor STM ability for auditory info but normal ability for visual info
- e.g. immediate recall of digits was better when he read them himself, rather than having them head to him
- KF’s PL was damaged but his VSS was intact
~~> strongly supports existence of separate visual and acoustic stores
———————> COUNTERPOINT: possibility of other factors
- unclear whether KF had other cognitive impairments (other than PL) which might have affected his performance on memory tasks, because his injury was caused by a motorcycle accident
- the trauma involved may have affected his cognitive performance rather than the brain injury
~~> challenges evidence from clinical studies of ppl with brain injuries

STRENGTH: dual-task performance studies
- Baddeley et al (1975): when ptps carried out a visual and a verbal task at the same time (dual task), their performance was similar to when they carried out the tasks separately
- but when both tasks were visual (or both verbal), performance on both declined substantially
- this is because both visual tasks compete for the same subsystem (VSS)
- but there is no competition when performing the visual and verbal tasks together
~~> there must be a separate subsystem for processing visual data (VSS) and verbal data (PL)

LIMITATION: lack of clarity over central executive
- Baddeley (2003) “The CE is the most important but the least understood component of working memory”
- needs to be more clearly specified than being just simply ‘attention’
- e.g. some psychologists believe the CE may consist of separate subcomponents
~~> CE is an unsatisfactory component and this challenges the integrity of the WMM

Question 22

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMM)
Match the researcher to the research

Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
Shallice and Warrington (1970)
Baddeley et al (1975)
Baddeley (2003)
_____________________________________________________________________

• said “The CE is the most important but least understood component of the working memory”
• studied patient KF, whose PL was damaged and so struggled with auditory processing but could process visual data normally
• their ptps were able to carry out a verbal and visual task simultaneously but failed to carry out two tasks which competed for the same subsystem (i.e. two visual or two verbal)
• devised the Working Memory Model, which describes how STM is organised and how it functions

Answer 22

Baddeley and Hitch (1974): devised the Working Memory Model, which describes how STM is organised and how it functions

Shalice and Warrington (1970): studied patient KF, whose PL was damaged and so struggled with auditory processing but could process visual data normally

Baddeley et al (1975): their ptps were able to carry out a verbal and visual task simultaneously but failed to carry out two tasks which competed for the same subsystem (i.e. two visual or two verbal)

Baddely (2003): said “The CE is the most important but least understood component of the working memory”

Question 23

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
What 3 types of LTM did Tulving (1985) propose?

Answer 23

Episodic Memory
Semantic Memory
Procedural Memory

Question 24

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
Outline what Tulving (1985) meant by Episodic Memory

Answer 24

EPISODIC MEMORY
- our ability to recall events (episodes) from our life (like a diary/record of daily personal experiences)
- memories are time-stamped (we remember when they happened and how they relate to other events in time)
- memory of a single episode will include several elements (e.g. people, places, objects and behaviours) which are interwoven to produce a single memory
- must make a conscious effort to recall episodic memories; it’s quick but you’re aware you’re searching for that memory

Question 25

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
Outline what Tulving (1985) meant by Semantic Memory

Answer 25

SEMANTIC MEMORY
- our shared knowledge of the world (like a cross between an encyclopedia and a dictionary)
- e.g. how to apply to uni, meaning of words, taste of an orange, understanding of concepts like love
- memories are not time-stamped
- semantic knowledge is less personal and more about the facts we all share
- immense collection of material, constantly being added to
- less vulnerable to distortion and forgetting than episodic

Question 26

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
Outline what Tulving (1985) meant by Procedural Memory

Answer 26

PROCEDURAL MEMORY
- memory for actions, skills: how we do things
- can be recalled without conscious effort but requires practise
- difficult to explain to someone else
- memories of learned skills, unlikely to forget but must be practised to recall/be good at them

Question 27

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
Evaluate Tulving’s (1985) LTM stores

Answer 27

STRENGTH: clinical evidence (HM + Clive Wearing)
- episodic memory of both men was severely impaired due to brain damage
- but semantic memories were relatively unaffected (still understood meaning of words
- e.g. HM could not recall stroking a dog 30 mins earlier but he didn’t need to have the concept of ‘dog’ explained to him
- procedural memories were also intact
- e.g. still knew how to walk and speak, and Clive Wearing could still read music and play piano
~~> evidence supports Tulvig’s view that there are different memory stores in LTM, one store can be damaged while the others are unaffected
—————————> COUNTERPOINT: lack of control variables in clinical studies
- brain injuries experienced by patients were usually unexpected, so researchers had no way of controlling what happened to the ptp before or during the injury
- the researcher has no knowledge of an individual’s memory before the damage => difficult to judge how much worse it is afterwards
~~>lack of control limits what clinical studies can tell us about different types of LTM

LIMITATION: conflicting neuroimaging evidence (locating LTM stores)
- Buckner and Petersen (1996): semantic memory located in left prefrontal cortex, episodic on the right
- however, other research links left prefrontal cortex with encoding episodic memories and the right with episodic retrieval
~~> challenges any neurophysiological evidence to support types of memory as there is poor agreement on where each type might be located

STRENGTH: real-world application
- memory loss experienced in old age, but research has shown this seems to be specific to episodic memory
- Belleville et al (2006) devised an intervention to improve episodic memories in older people
- the trained ptps performed better on a test of episodic memory after training than a control group
~~> shows that distinguishing types of LTM enables specific treatments to be developed

Question 28

TYPES OF LONG-TERM MEMORY
Match the researcher to the research

Tulving (1985)
Buckner and Petersen (1996)
Belleville (2006)
_______________________________________________________________________

• devised an intervention to improve episodic memories in older people; the trained ptps performed better on a test of episodic memory after training than a control group
• felt the MSM was too simplistic and inflexible so proposed 3 stores of LTM
• said that semantic memory located in left prefrontal cortex, episodic on the right, which contrasts other research which links left prefrontal cortex with encoding episodic memories and the right with episodic retrieval

Answer 28

Tulving (1985): felt the MSM was too simplistic and inflexible so proposed 3 stores of LTM

Buckner and Petersen (1996): said that semantic memory located in left prefrontal cortex, episodic on the right, which contrasts other research which links left prefrontal cortex with encoding episodic memories and the right with episodic retrieval

Belleville (2006): devised an intervention to improve episodic memories in older people; the trained ptps performed better on a test of episodic memory after training than a control group

Question 29

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
What is Interference?

Answer 29

• interference is forgetting because one memory blocks another, causing one or both to be forgotten
• proposed mainly as an explanation in LTM
• once a memory reaches the LTM it is more-or-less permanent; any forgetting of LTMs is likely because we can’t get ACCESS to them even though they’re AVAILABLE
• interference between memories makes it harder for us to locate them, which is experienced as forgetting

Question 30

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
Outline the types of interference, with an example for each

Answer 30

PROACTIVE INTERFERENCE (PI)
- old memory interferes with new memory
- “pro” meaning working forwards; old memories move forwards to interfere with the recall of new memories
- e.g. teacher has learned so many names in the past that she struggles to remember new names

RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE (RI)
- new memories interfere with old ones
- “retro” meaning backwards; new memories move backwards to interfere with the recall of new memories
- e.g. teacher has learned so many new names that she struggles to remember old ones

Question 31

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
Outline the research on the effects of similarity by McGeoch and McDonald (1931)

Answer 31

• in both PI and RI, interference is worse when the memories are similar

PROCEDURE
- varying level of similarity between two sets of materials
- ptps learned a list of 10 words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy
- then learned a new list
- 6 groups: antonyms of original words, synonyms of original words, unrelated to originals,, consonant syllables, 3-digit numbers, control condition (no new words learned, just rested)

FINDINGS
- when ptps asked to recall original list of words, recall was worse for most similar material

CONCLUSION
- interference is strongest when materials are similar

Question 32

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
Explain the effects of similarity on interference

Answer 32

• could be due to PI: previously stored info makes new info more difficult to store
• could be due to RI: new info overwrites previous similar memories because of the similarity

Question 33

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
Evaluate Interference as an explanation of forgetting

Answer 33

STRENGTH: real-world interference
- Baddeley and Hitch (1977): asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a rugby season
- all players played for the same time interval (one season)
- number of intervening games varied (some players missed matches due to injury)
- players who played the most games (most interference for memory) had poorest recall
~~> increased validity due to real-world application
—————–> COUNTERPOINT: unusual, conditions for interference are rare
- memories have to be fairly similar for them to interfere with each other
- can occasionally happen outside the lab but not often
~~> forgetting may be better explained by other theories like retrieval failure

LIMITATION: interference can be overcome with cues
- Tulving and Psotka (1971): gave ptps word lists organised into categories (ptps not told what categories were)
- recall averaged 70% for 1st list
- became progressively worse with each additional list learned (proactive interference)
- when ptps were told what the categories were, recall rose again to about 70%
~~> interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material in LTM, which is not predicted in interference theory

STRENGTH: support from drug studies of retrograde facilitation
- Coenen and van Luijtelaar (1997): gave ptps a list of words to be recalled a week later, assuming intervening experience would act as interference
- found that when word list was learned under influence of the drug diazepam, recall was poorer than the control group
- when list was learned before drug was taken, recall was better than placebo (control group)
- drug improved recall of material
- Wixted (2004): suggests the drug prevents new info reaching parts of brain associated with memory, so it cannot interfere retroactively with info already stored
~~> forgetting ca be due to interference; reduce the interference and reduce you reduce the forgetting

Question 34

EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING: INTERFERENCE
Match the researcher to the research

McGeoch and McDonald (1931)
Baddeley and Hitch (1977)
Tulving and Psotka (1971)
Coenen and van Luijtelaar (1997)
Wixted (2004)
___________________________________________________________

• asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a rugby season; found that players who played the most games (most interference for memory) had poorest recall
• (evidence supporting state-dependant forgetting) found that when word list was learned under influence of the drug diazepam, recall was poorer than the control group; when list was learned before drug was taken, recall was better than placebo (control group)
• gave ptps word lists organised into unknown categories; recall became progressively worse with each additional list learned; when informed of categories, recall rose again to about 70%; => interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material in LTM, which is not predicted in interference theory
• (explanation of supportive evidence of state-dependant forgetting) suggests the drug prevents new info reaching parts of brain associated with memory, so it cannot interfere retroactively with info already stored
• discovered that in both PI and RI, interference is worse when the memories are similar

Answer 34

McGeoch and McDonald (1931): discovered that in both PI and RI, interference is worse when the memories are similar

Baddeley and Hitch (1977): asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a rugby season; found that players who played the most games (most interference for memory) had poorest recall

Tulving and Psotka (1971): gave ptps word lists organised into unknown categories; recall became progressively worse with each additional list learned; when informed of categories, recall rose again to about 70%; => interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material in LTM, which is not predicted in interference theory

Coenen and van Luijtelaar (1997): (evidence supporting state-dependant forgetting) found that when word list was learned under influence of the drug diazepam, recall was poorer than the control group; when list was learned before drug was taken, recall was better than placebo (control group)

Wixted (2004): (explanation of supportive evidence of state-dependant forgetting) suggests the drug prevents new info reaching parts of brain associated with memory, so it cannot interfere retroactively with info already stored

Question 35

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
Explain the concept of cues

Answer 35

• cues are triggers of info that allow us to access a memory
• they may be meaningful or indirectly linked by being encoded at the same time as learning
• indirect cues may be external (environmental context) or internal (mood or degree of drunkenness)
• when info is initially placed in memory, associated cues are stored at the same time
• if these cues are not present at time of recall, it may appear that you’ve forgotten the info but you’re just unable to access the memories

Question 36

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
What is the encoding specificity principle, as discovered by Tulving (1983)?

Answer 36

• cues must be present at both encoding and retrieval otherwise there may be some forgetting
• some are meaningful (e.g. “STM” allows you to recall facts about the STM)
• some are not meaningful: context-dependant forgetting (recall depends on external cue, e.g. weather or place) and state-dependant forgetting (recall depends on internal cues, e.g. emotions or being drunk)

Question 37

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
Outline the research on context-dependant forgetting by Godden and Baddeley (1975)

Answer 37

AIM: to investigate whether training on land helped or hindered the work of deep-sea divers underwater

PROCEDURE
- word list learned and recalled in 4 conditions:
- learn on land, recall on land
- learn on land, recall underwater
- learn underwater, recall on land
- learn underwater, recall underwater

FINDINGS
- accurate recall was 40% lower in non-matched conditions

CONCLUSIONS
- external cues available at learning were different to the ones available at recall, which led to retrieval failure

Question 38

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
Outline research on state-dependant forgetting by Carter and Cassaday (1998)

Answer 38

PROCEDURE:
- gave antihistamine drugs to ptps
- drugs had a mild sedative effect, making ptps drowsy
- creates an internal psychological state different from the ‘normal state’ of being awake and alert
- ptps had to learn and recall word lists and passages of prose:
- learn on drug, recall on drug
- learn on drug, recall off drug
- learn off drug, recall on drug
- learn off drug, recall off drug

FINDINGS:
- performance was significantly worse in mismatched conditions

CONCLUSIONS:
- when cues are asbsent, there is more forgetting

Question 39

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
Evaluate retrieval failure as an explanation of forgetting

Answer 39

STRENGTH: real-world application
- e.g. walking into a room and forgetting what you went in for, but when you go back to original room, you remember again
~~> research can remind us of strategies we use in the real world to improve our recall

STRENGTH: research support
- Godden and Baddeley (1975) and Carter and Cassaday (1998) showed a lack of relevant cues at recall lead to context-dependant and state-dependant forgetting in everyday life
- Eysenck and Keane (2010) argue that retrieval failure is perhaps the main reason for forgetting in LTM
~~> evidence shows that retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as in the highly controlled lab conditions
——————-> COUNTERPOINT: Baddeley argues that context effects are not very strong
- different contexts would have to be very different before an effect is seen
- e.g. difficult to find environments as different as underwater and on land
- learning and recalling in different rooms is unlikely to cause much forgetting because these environments are generally not different enough
~~> retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not actually explain much everyday forgetting

LIMITATION: recall vs recognition
- Godden and Baddeley (1970) replicated their underwater experiment but used a recognition test instead of a recall test (ptps had to say whether they recognised words from a list rather than recalling it themselves)
- no context-dependant effect; performance was the same in all 4 conditions
~~> suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting, only applies when person has to recall info rather than recognise it

Question 40

EXPLANATIONS OF FORGETTING: RETRIEVAL FAILURE
Match the researcher to the research

Tulving (1983)
Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Carter and Cassaday (1998)
Eysenck and Keane (2010)
Baddeley (1997)
Godden and Baddeley (1980)
___________________________________________________

• did research on state-dependent forgetting; found that mismatched conditions led to significantly worse performance on a memory test when word list was learned on/off the drug diazepam and recalled on/off it
• argue that retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as in highly controlled lab conditions
• did research on context-dependent forgetting; found that mismatched conditions led to 40% less recall when learning and recalling word lists on land vs water
• argues that context effects aren’t strong; the two contexts would have to be extremely different to lead to retrieval failure
• discovered the encoding specificity principle, which states that cues must be present at both encoding and retrieval otherwise there may be some forgetting
• replicated their context-dependent underwater study but used a recognition test instead of recall; found that there was no context-dependent effect (performance was the same in all 4 conditions); this suggested retrieval failure was a limited explanation for forgetting since it only applies when a person has to recall info rather than recognise it

Answer 40

Tulving (1983): discovered the encoding specificity principle, which states that cues must be present at both encoding and retrieval otherwise there may be some forgetting

Godden and Baddeley (1975): did research on context-dependent forgetting; found that mismatched conditions led to 40% less recall when learning and recalling word lists on land vs water

Carter and Cassaday (1998): did research on state-dependent forgetting; found that mismatched conditions led to significantly worse performance on a memory test when word list was learned on/off the drug diazepam and recalled on/off it

Eysenck and Keane (2010): argue that retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as in highly controlled lab conditions

Baddeley (1997): argues that context effects aren’t strong; the two contexts would have to be extremely different to lead to retrieval failure

Godden and Baddeley (1980): replicated their context-dependent underwater study but used a recognition test instead of recall; found that there was no context-dependent effect (performance was the same in all 4 conditions); this suggested retrieval failure was a limited explanation for forgetting since it only applies when a person has to recall info rather than recognise it

Question 41

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
Outline Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) research on leading questions

Answer 41

AIM: to investigate the effects of leading questions on eye-witness testimony

PROCEDURE:
- 45 ptps watched a video of a car accident, then asked follow-up questions
- critical question: “how fast were the cars going when they [hit/contacted/bumped/collided/smashed] each other?”
- each group had a different verb

FINDINGS
- mean estimated speed calculated for each group
- “contacted” group said 31.8mph
- “smashed” group said 40.5mph

CONCLUSION
- leading question biased eyewitness’s recall of an event

Question 42

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
What are the 2 explanations as to why leading questions affect EWT?

Answer 42

response bias explanation:
- leading questions influence how they decide to answer, rather than affecting the memory itself
- e.g. “smashed” encouraged them to choose a higher speed

substitution explanation:
- supported by Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) second experiment
- “smashed” group were more likely to report having seen broken glass (there was none) than “hit” group
- critical verb altered their memory of the event

Question 43

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
Outline research done by Gabbert et al (2003) on post-event discussion

Answer 43

AIM: to investigate the effects of post-event discussion on EWTs

PROCEDURE:
- ptps studies in pairs, who had seen different perspectives/angles of the same crime (on videos)
- ptps then discussed what they’d seen, before individually taking a recall test

FINDINGS:
- 71% ptps mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they didn’t see in the video but picked up in discussion
- in a control group it was 0%

CONCLUSION:
- evidence of memory conformity, post-event discussion affects EWT accuracy

Question 44

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
What are the two explanations of why post-event discussion affects EWT?

Answer 44

memory contamination:
- co-witness discussion leads to EWT becoming distorted/altered
- because they combine (mis)information from other witness with their own memories

memory conformity
- Gabbert et al (2003) concluded that witnesses go along with each other because they either seek social approval or believe other witness are right and they’re not
- unlike memory contamination, the memory is unchanged

Question 45

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
Evaluate (1 STRENGTH, 3 LIMITATIONS) misleading information as a factor affecting the accuracy of EWT

Answer 45

STRENGTH: real-world application in criminal justice system
- police warned about severe distortion effect of leading questions
- psychologists explain limits of EWT to juries in court
~~> psychologists help improve legal system, especially by protecting innocent people from faulty convictions based on unreliable EWT
————–> COUNTERPOINT: practical applications affected by issues with research
- Loftus and Palmer (1974): lab study with a video clip
- much less stressful than it would be in real life
- also no consequences in a lab, less motivation to be accurate
~~> researchers such as Loftus and Palmer may overestimate the inaccuracy of EWT

LIMITATION: evidence against substitution explanation of effect of leading questions
- EWT is more accurate for some events than others
- Sutherland and Hayne (2001): ptps shown a video clip, then asked follow-up misleading questions
- recall was more accurate for central details of the event than peripheral ones
- presumably where ptps attention was focussed on central features of event, such memories were resistant to misleading information
~~> original memories for central details survived and were not distorted, an outcome which is not predicted by the substitution explanation

LIMITATION: evidence challenging memory conformity explanation for effects of post-event discussion, that it does actually alter the memory
- Skagerberg and Wright (2008): showed ptps a film clip and discussed in pairs
- 2 versions: mugger’s hair was dark brown in one and light brown in the other
- often reported a blend of the two versions after discussion (“medium brown”)
~~> suggests the memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than a result of memory conformity

Question 46

FACTORS AFFECTING ACCURACY OF EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY: MISLEADING INFORMATION
Match the researcher to the research

Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Gabbert et al (2003)
Foster et al (1994)
Sutherland and Hayne (2001)
Skagerberg and Wright (2008)
_____________________________________________________

• ptps’ recall of central events of a video was more accurate than peripheral ones after being asked leading questions; suggests memories for central details survived and weren’t distorted (an outcome not predicted by substitution explanation)
• showed ptps two similar versions of a film clip (hair of mugger was a different shade of brown in each); ptps reported a blend of what they had seen and what they had discussed; suggests memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than a result of memory conformity
• ptps watched different video angles of the same event; post-event discussion led to 71% of the ptps mistakenly recalling aspects; 0% in control group where there was no discussion (evidence of memory conformity)
• conducted a second/follow-up experiment that supported the substitution explanation; ptps who heard “smashed” were more likely to report seeing broken glass (there was none)
• ptps asked a question about a car crash video with a critical verb that varied from “contacted” to “smashed”; found that these leading questions biased the EWT
• pointed out ptps are less motivated to be accurate in research, which casts doubt over the effects of misleading info due to flawed research

Answer 46

Loftus and Palmer (1974): ptps asked a question about a car crash video with a critical verb that varied from “contacted” to “smashed”; found that these leading questions biased the EWT

Loftus and Palmer (1974): conducted a second experiment that supported the substitution explanation; ptps who heard “smashed” were more likely to report seeing broken glass (there was none)

Gabbert et al (2003): ptps watched different video angles of the same event; post-event discussion led to 71% of the ptps mistakenly recalling aspects; 0% in control group where there was no discussion (evidence of memory conformity)

Foster et al (1994): pointed out ptps are less motivated to be accurate in research, which casts doubt over the effects of misleading info due to flawed research

Sutherland and Hayne (2001): ptps’ recall of central events of a video was more accurate than peripheral ones after being asked leading questions; suggests memories for central details survived and weren’t distorted (an outcome not predicted by substitution explanation)

Skagerberg and Wright (2008): showed ptps two similar versions of a film clip (hair of mugger was a different shade of brown in each); ptps reported a blend of what they had seen and what they had discussed; suggests memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than a result of memory conformity

Question 47

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
How can anxiety have a negative effect on recall?

Answer 47

• anxiety creates physiological arousal in the body which prevents us from paying attention to important cues, so recall is worse
• presence of a weapon => weapon focus, reducing a witness’s recall for other details of the event

Question 48

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
Outline the research by Johnson and Scott (1976) on the negative effect of anxiety on recall

Answer 48

PROCEDURE:
- (ptps thought it was a lab study, and were “waiting” in a waiting room)
- low anxiety condition: ptps overheard a casual convo, then a man walked past with a pen with grease on his hands
- high-anxiety condition: ptps overheard a heated argument, then a man walked past carrying a bloody knife

FINDINGS:
- ptps later picked out a photo of the man, 49% of those in pen + grease condition identified him correctly, compared to 33% in knife + blood condition

CONCLUSIONS
- the tunnel theory of memory argues that people have enhanced memory of central events
- weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect

Question 49

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
How can anxiety have a positive effect on recall?

Answer 49

anxiety => physiological arousal in the body => triggers flight or flight response => increased alertness

Question 50

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
Outline the research done by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) on the positive effects of anxiety on recall

Answer 50

PROCEDURE:
- actual shooting in a gun shop, 21 witnesses and 13 took part in this study
- interviewed 5 months after incident, compared with original interviews at time of event
(- accuracy determined by number of details reported in each account)
- witnesses also asked to report stress levels at time of incident, and whether they’d had any emotional problems since (e.g. sleeplessness)

FINDINGS:
- very accurate accounts, little change after 5 months
- those who reported the highest stress levels were most accurate, 88% (compared to 75% for less-stressed group)

CONCLUSIONS:
- anxiety doesn’t have a detrimental effect on EWT, may even enhance it

Question 51

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
Explain the contradictory findings of the negative and positive effects of anxiety on recall

Answer 51

• Yerkes and Dodson (1908): relationship between emotional arousal and performance = inverted U shape
• Yerkes-Dodson law: there is an optimum level of anxiety, too much or too little reduces accuracy of EWT

Question 52

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
Evaluate anxiety as a factor affecting the accuracy of EWT

Answer 52

LIMITATION: unusualness, not anxiety
- Johnson and Scott’s (1976) study might not have tested anxiety but unusualness
- the reason the ptps focussed on the weapon could have been because they were surprised at what they saw, rather than being scared
- Pickel (1998): used scissors, handgun, wallet, raw chicken in salon video (scissors would be low unusualness)
- EWT accuracy was significantly poorer in high unusualness conditions (chicken and handgun)
~~> weapon focus effect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety/threat, therefore tells us nothing specifically about the effects of anxiety on EWT

STRENGTH: support for negative effects
- Valentine and Mesout (2009): study supports research on weapon focus, finding negative effects on recall
- used heart rate (objective measure) to divide ptps into high-anxiety and low-anxiety groups
- anxiety clearly disrupted ptps’ ability to recall details about the actor in the London Dungeon’s Labyrinth
~~> high level of anxiety does have a negative effect on immediate EWT of a stressful event

STRENGTH: support for positive effects
- Christianson and Hübinette (1993): interviewed 58 witnesses of actual bank robberies in Sweden
- some were directly involved bank workers), some indirectly (bystanders)
- researchers assumed that those directly involved would experience most anxiety
- found that recall was more than 75% accurate for all witnesses
- direct witnesses (most anxious) were even more accurate
~~> findings from actual crimes confirm that anxiety doesn’t reduce the accuracy of EWT and may even enhance it
———————-> COUNTERPOINT: confounding variables
- interviewed months after the event
- no control over post-event discussion in intervening time
- effects of anxiety impossible to assess by the time ptps were interviewed
~~>possible that a lack of control over confounding variables may invalidate thee study’s findings and their support for positive effects of anxiety on accuracy of EWT

Question 53

FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: ANXIETY
Match the researcher to the research

Johnson and Scott (1976)
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
Yerkes and Dodson (1908)
Pickel (1998)
Valentine and Mesout (2009)
Christianson and Hübinette (1993)
_______________________________________________________

• negative effect of anxiety on recall: ptps picked out a photo of a man they’d seen in (two conditions): 49% of those in pen + grease condition identified him correctly, compared to 33% in knife + blood condition; suggested the tunnel theory of memory (argues that people have enhanced memory of central events); weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect
• positive effect of anxiety on recall: ptps were witnesses to an actual shooting in a gun shop; interviews from 5 months after were compared with police interviews at time of event; ptps also rated stress levels at time of event; those who reported higher levels of stress were more accurate (88%) than those who were less stressed (75% accurate)
• devised a law that states that there is an optimum stress level for best performance

Answer 53

Johnson and Scott (1976): negative effect of anxiety on recall: ptps picked out a photo of a man they’d seen in (two conditions): 49% of those in pen + grease condition identified him correctly, compared to 33% in knife + blood condition; suggested the tunnel theory of memory (argues that people have enhanced memory of central events); weapon focus as a result of anxiety can have this effect

Yuille and Cutshall (1986): positive effect of anxiety on recall: ptps were witnesses to an actual shooting in a gun shop; interviews from 5 months after were compared with police interviews at time of event; ptps also rated stress levels at time of event; those who reported higher levels of stress were more accurate (88%) than those who were less stressed (75% accurate)

Yerkes and Dodson (1908): devised a law that states that there is an optimum stress level for best performance; curvilinear relationship

Pickel (1998):

Valentine and Mesout (2009):

Christianson and Hübinette (1993):

Question 54

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Name the 4 main techniques used in the cognitive interview as suggested by Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 54

Report everything
Reinstate the context
Reverse the order
Change perspective

Question 55

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Outline the ‘report everything’ technique in the cognitive interview, as suggested by Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 55

REPORT EVERYTHING
- witnesses encouraged to include every detail of the event
- regardless of how irrelevant it may seem
- regardless of witness’ confidence about it
- seemingly trivial details may be important and may trigger other important memories

Question 56

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Outline the ‘reinstate the context’ technique in the cognitive interview, as suggested by Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 56

REINSTATE THE CONTEXT
- witness to return to the crime scene in their mind
- imagine the environment (e.g. weather, what they could see)
- imagine their emotions
(- related to context-dependant forgetting)

Question 57

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Outline the ‘reverse the order’ technique in the cognitive interview, as suggested by Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 57

REVERSE THE ORDER
- event should be recalled in a different order from the original sequence (end>middle>beginning or middle>beginning>end etc.)
prevents people reporting their expectations of how the event must have happened, instead reports actual event
- prevents dishonesty (harder to produce an untruthful account if they have to reverse it)

Question 58

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Outline the ‘change perspective’ technique in the cognitive interview, as suggested by Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 58

CHANGE PERSPECTIVE
- witness to recall event from someone else’s perspective (e.g. different witness or perpetrator)
- done to disrupt effect of expectations and effect of schema recall

(the schema you have for a particular setting will generate expectations of what would have happened; this is the schema which is recalled rather than what actually happened)

Question 59

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
What is the enhanced cognitive interview? (ECI)

Answer 59

Fisher et al (1987) developed additional elements of CI to focus on:
- social dynamics of the interaction (interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to relinquish it)
- reducing EW anxiety
- minimising distractions
- getting witness to speak slowly
- asking open-ended questions

Question 60

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Evaluate (1 strength 3 limitations) the cognitive interview as a way of improving the accuracy of EWT

Answer 60

STRENGTH: support for effectiveness of CI
- Günter Köhnken et al (1999): meta-analysis of 55 studies comparing CI and standard police interview
- CI gave 41% average increase in accurate info compared with standard interview
- only 4 studies showed no difference between the 2
~~> CI is an effective technique for helping witnesses to recall info that is available in memory store but not immediately accessible
—————> COUNTERPOINT: Köhnken also found an increase in inaccurate details recalled
- esp an issue for ECI, which produced more inaccurate details than CI
- CIs may sacrifice the quality (accuracy) of EWT in favour of quantity (amount of details)
~~> police should treat EW evidence from CIs/ECIs with caution

LIMITATION: not all elements are equally effective/useful
- Milne and Bull (2002): each of the 4 techniques alone produced more info than the standard police interview
- also found that using a combo of ‘report everything’ and ‘reinstate the context’ produced better recall than any other element or combo of them
~~> some elements are more useful than others; casts doubt on credibility of overall CI

LIMITATION: time-consuming
- takes more time and training than standard police interview
- time is needed to establish rapport with witness and allow them to relax
- many forces don’t have the resources to provide more than a few hours of training
~~> complete CI is not a realistic method for police to use; may be better to just use a few key elements

Question 61

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: COGNITIVE INTERVIEW (CI)
Match the researcher to the research