memory Flashcards
what is coding? (memory)
- the format in which information is stored in the various memory stores
what is capacity? (memory)
- the amount of information that can be held in a memory store
what is duration? (memory)
- the length of time information can be held in memory
outline Baddeley (1966) research into coding (6) (memory)
- four groups of participants were given a different list of words (group 1 = acoustically similar e.g. cat/can/cab, group 2 = acoustically dissimilar e.g. pit/few/cow, group 3 = semantically similar e.g. great/large/big, group 4 = semantically dissimilar e.g. good/huge/hot)
- 75 Ps in each group & were asked to repeat list 4 times
- Ps were shown the words & were asked to recall them immediately in the correct order (test of STM)
- when recalling from STIM, the acoustically similar words were recalled the worst
- when recalling from LTM (20 mins after), the semantically similar words were recalled the worst
- this suggests that coding is acoustic in STM & semantic in LTM
evaluate Baddeley’s research into coding (memory)
separate memory stores (S):
- showed a clear difference between STM & LTM:
- later research showed there are some exceptions to his ideas but the idea than STM uses mostly acoustic coding & LTM uses mostly semantic coding is still used/considered to be correct today
- this was an important step in understanding of the memory system & led to the multi store model of memory
artificial stimuli (W):
- used artificial stimuli instead of meaningful material
- e.g. the word lists had no personal meaning to Ps, so Baddeley’s findings may not tell us much about coding in different kinds of memory tasks (especially in everyday life)
- when processing more meaningful info, people may use semantic coding even for STM tasks
- this suggests that the findings from this study have limited application (low ecological validity)
outline & give a strength of Jacobs (1887) research on capacity (memory)
study:
- measured digit span
- e.g. researcher reads out 4 digits & P recalls these out loud in the correct order
- if this is correct researcher reads out 5 digits & so on until the P can’t recall the order correctly (indicates individual’s digit span)
- found the mean span for digits across all Ps was 9.3 items & the mean span for letters was 7.3
valid study (S):
- it has been replicated
- study is very old & early psychological research often lacked adequate controls
- e.g. some Ps’ digit spans may have been underestimated because they were distracted during testing (confounding variables)
- despite this, Jacob’s’ findings have been confirmed by other better controlled studies (e.g. Bopp & Verhaeghen 2005)
- this suggests that Jacobs’ study is a valid test of digit span in STM
outline & give a weakness for Miller (1956) research into capacity (memory)
study:
- discovered that capacity of STM is 7 +/- 2 items (5-9 items)
- discovered ‘chunking’ (grouping sets of digits or letters into chunks) as people find it easier to remember 5 words than 5 letters
overestimate of STM capacity:
- Cowan (2001) reviewed other research & concluded the capacity of STM is only about 4 +/- 1 chunks
- this suggests that the lower end of Miller’s estimate (4 items) is more appropriate than 7 items
outline & state a weakness of Peterson & Peterson (1959) study into duration of STM (6) (memory)
- investigated duration of STM when no rehearsal was allowed
- Ps were read a nonsense trigram & immediately after were given a distractor task of counting back in 3s from a large 3 digit number (e.g. 842) for between 3 & 18 seconds
- at the sound of a tone Ps were asked to recall the trigram
- 80% of trigrams were recalled after 3 seconds, 60% were recalled after 6 seconds, 30% recalled after 9 seconds, 20% after 12 seconds, 10% recalled after 15 seconds & 5% recalled after 18 seconds
- they concluded that without rehearsal the duration of STM is very short (around 18 seconds)
meaningless stimuli (W):
- study was not completely irrelevant as we do sometimes try to remember meaningless material (e.g. phone numbers)
- recalling consonant syllables doesn’t reflect most everyday memory activities where what we are trying to remember is meaningful
- this means that the study lacks external validity
outline & state a strength of Bahrick et al (1975) research in duration (memory)
- investigated the duration of very long term memory by identifying whether or not people could still remember their classmates from school after they left
- 392 ex-students of different ages from a high school who had graduated anywhere from 2 weeks to 57 years prior had to identify old classmates
- one group had to match names to faces (recognition group)
- the other had to name people in the photo without names (recall group)
- in the recognition group, Ps were 90% correct after 14 years & 70% correct after 48 years
- in the recall group, Ps were 60% accurate after 7 years & 30% accurate after 48 years
- concluded that people could remember certain types of memories for up to a lifetime & the accuracy of VLTM is better measured be recognition tests
high external validity (S):
- researchers investigated meaningful memories (e.g. people’s names & faces)
- when studies on LTM were conducted with meaningless pictures to be remembered recall rates were lower (Shepard 1967)
- this suggests that Bahrick et al’s findings reflect a more ‘real’ estimate of duration of LTM
what is the sensory register? (memory)
- the store for our 5 senses
what is short term memory? (2) (memory)
- temporary memory store that stores information
- information receives very little processing
what is long term memory? (memory)
- memory store that permanently stores information
what is the coding, capacity & duration of the sensory register? (memory)
- coding = modality specific
- capacity = very high
- duration = 0.5 seconds
what is the coding, capacity & duration of STM? (memory)
- coding = mostly acoustic
- capacity = 7 +/- 2 items
- duration = 18 seconds
what is the coding, capacity & duration of LTM? (memory)
- coding = semantic
- capacity = potentially unlimited
- duration = up to a lifetime
what happens to visual & acoustic information in the sensory register? (3) (memory)
- visual info goes into the iconic memory
- acoustic info goes into the echoic memory
- info only passes to STM if you pay attention to it
how does information arrive to the STM? (2) (memory)
- in its original form
- this means that it has to be coded so that it can be understood
what is maintenance rehearsal & what does it do? (2) (memory)
- repeating info over & over agin to keep it in STM
- if info is rehearsed for long enough, it passes through to LTM
what happens when we want to recall information from LTM? (memory)
- it has to be transferred back into STM via retrieval
outline Glanzer & Cunitz’s 1968 experiment into the primary & recency effect (5) (memory)
- investigated the differences between LTM & STM to see if they were different units
- gave two different groups of Ps the same list of words to recall but one group had a distractor task before recalling
- words at the beginning of the list were recalled as they has been stored in LTM as they had time for prolonged rehearsal, so it was easier for them to be remembered (primacy effect)
- words at the end of the list were remembered by the immediate recall group as they were still in STM. They were forgotten by the distractor task group as the words had been pushed out of their STM but weren’t in their LTM (recency effect)
- serial position effect demonstrates that we have separate unitary LTM & STM stores
summarise the amnesia case study of H.M. (4) (memory)
- had his hippocampus removed on both sides of his brain
- STM was generally normal, but couldn’t form new memories
- supports MSM because outlines MSM as 2 separate stores (LTM was damaged but STM wasn’t)
- contradicts MSM because had perceptual & motor skills (e.g. good procedural LTM but bad episodic LTM - LTM = too simplistic)
summarise the amnesia case study of Clive Wearing (5) (memory)
- he developed herpes simplex virus which destroyed his hippocampus & other parts of his cortex
- affected LTM because couldn’t remember earlier life (could only recall people from what they were like before the illness) & capacity for recalling detail was poor
- affected STM because he couldn’t remember things he had just done (couldn’t transfer info from STM to LTM)
- supports MSM because he couldn’t transfer info from STM to LTM, which chows transfer of info between stores is linear
- contradicts MSM because had good procedural LTM but bad episodic LTM & had some semantic memories, which shows LTM is split up into separate stores
summarise the amnesia case study of K.F.
(memory)
- he suffered brain damage from a motorcycle accident
- affected LTM so ability to retain & learn new info & cued recognition seemed normal
- affected STM because digit span reduced (from 5-9 to 2) & had no acoustic confusion but forgot auditory stimuli
- supports MSM as shows STM & LTM as being different & separate stores
how does the amnesia case study of K.F. contradict the MSM of memory? (memory)
- only some areas of STM were damaged
- visual was good but hearing was bad
why should we be cautious when using the amnesia case studies as evidence? (memory - MSM)
- its is a case study
- there way be issues generalising the findings to other people
give some positive evaluation points for the MSM model of memory (2 points) (memory)
- one strength is support from studies showing that STM & LTM are different (e.g. Baddeley 1966)
- further support comes from studies into capacity & duration
- these studies show that STM & LTM are separate & independent stores, like the MSM suggests
- another strength is support from case studies like Clive Wearing
- CW developed amnesia after the herpes simplex virus destroyed his hippocampus & other parts of his cortex
- he could not transfer info from STM & LTM & could only remember people in his life by what they were like prior to his illness
- this shows that LTM & STM are different stores & that the transfer of info between them is linear
- have to be cautious when using as evidence as it is a case study so may be difficult to generalise
give some negative evaluation points for the MSM model of memory ( 3 points) (memory)
- (Baddeley counterpoint) despite support in daily life we form memories related to useful things (e.g. names & faces)
- most of the studies use artificial stimuli (numbers, letters, consonant syllables) & so are not ecologically valid
- this means that MSM may not be a valid model of how memory works when we have to remember more meaningful info
- another limitation is prolonged rehearsal is not needed for transfer to LTM
- MSM says its the amount of rehearsal needed but other studies have found that elaborative rehearsal (linking info to existing knowledge) is needed for long term storage, so prolonged rehearsal is not needed
- this suggests MSM does not fully explain how long term storage is achieved
- another limitation is that there are several types of STM & LTM
- STM = K.F. case study, ability to recall digits was poor when read out loud to him but better when read himself
- LTM = episodic, semantic, procedural
- idea of multiple types of store contradicts MSM
outline the concept of episodic LTM (memory - MSM)
- e.g. a milestone birthday party
- refers to the ability to recall events/episodes (complex memories) from our lives
- memories are time stamped so can be remembered as & when they happened
- store info about how events relate to each other
- memory of a single episode has several elements
- conscious effort has to be made in order to recall episodic memories
outline the concept of semantic LTM (memory - MSM)
- e.g. concepts like animals & love
- contains our shared knowledge of the world
- memories are not time stamped
- semantic knowledge is less personal & more about facts we all share
- collection of material that is constantly being added to
- according to Tulving, it is less vulnerable to distortion & forgetting than episodic memory
outline the concept of procedural LTM (memory - MSM)
- e.g. driving a car
- memory for actions & skills
- can be recalled without conscious awareness or much effort
- ability becomes automatic through practice
- may find skills hard to explain to others
which type of LTM is time stamped? (memory - MSM)
- episodic LTM
which type of LTM can be recalled without conscious awareness? (memory - MSM)
- procedural
which type of LTM is less vulnerable to distortion & forgetting than episodic LTM, according to Tulving? (memory - MSM)
- semantic LTM
which type of LTM does require conscious effort to recall? (memory - MSM)
- episodic
give some positive evaluation points for the theory of types of LTM (memory - MSM)
- clinical evidence (e.g. H.M. & Clive Wearing
- episodic memory in both men was severely impaired due to amnesia but their semantic memories were unaffected (procedural memory was also intact)
- this supports Tulving’s view that there are different types of stores in LTM - one could be damaged & the other can remain unaffected
- application to treatments
- research shows memory loss related to age is specific to episodic memory
- Belleville et al (2006) tried to improve episodic memory in elderly people by training a group of Ps
- the trained Ps performed better on an episodic memory test that the control group
- this shows that distinguishing between different types of LTM enables specific treatments to be developed
outline the Belleville et al (2006) study for developing treatments for impacted LTM (memory - MSM)
- tried to improve episodic memory in elderly people by training a group participants
- trained Ps performed better in an episodic memory test than the control group
- shows that distinguishing between types of LTM can enable specific treatments to be developed
give some negative evaluation points for the theory of types of LTM (memory - MSM)
- neuroimaging evidence
- conflicting research findings linking types of LTM to areas of the brain
- Buckner & Petersen concluded that semantic memory is located in the left side of the prefrontal cortex
- other research links the left side with encoding of episodic memory & the right with episodic retrieval
- this challenges neurophysiological evidence to support types of memory
- uncontrolled variables in case studies
- brain injuries experienced by Pa were usually unexpected so researchers had no way of controlling what happened to Ps before/during injury
- researchers had no knowledge of Ps memory before injury so couldn’t see how much worse it was made by amnesia
- lack of control limits what clinical studies can tell us about different types of LTM
- Cohen & Squire argued that episodic & semantic memory are stored in one LTM store called declarative memory & procedural memory is stored in the non declarative store
who created the multi store model of memory & when? (memory)
- Atkinson & Shiffrin
- 1972
who created the working memory model & when? (memory)
- Baddeley & Hitch
- 1974
outline the WMM & state why is was created (memory)
- MSM was criticised for saying that STM is a unitary store
- WMM suggests STM is made up of several stores
- WMM is only concerned with STM (the ‘mental’ space that is active when we are temporarily storing/manipulating information)
state the sites of the WMM (memory)
- central executive
- phonological loop (subunits = phonological store & articulatory process)
- episodic buffer
- visuo-spatial sketchpad
outline the role of the central executive in the WMM & state its capacity (memory)
- directs attention to particular tasks & determines how resources are allocated to tasks
- does not store information
- has a very limited capacity so can’t attend to lots of things at once
what is the coding & capacity of the phonological loop? (WMM) (memory)
- coding = acoustic
- capacity = limited
outline the role of the phonological loop in the WMM (memory)
- deals with auditory information
- preserves the order in which information arrives
- divided into two sub-systems (phonological loop & articulatory process)
outline the role of the phonological store in the WMM (memory)
- subunit of the phonological loop
- hold info that you can hear
- referred to as the ‘inner ear’
outline the role of the articulatory process in the WMM (memory)
- subsystem of the phonological loop
- allows maintenance rehearsal
- silently rehearses information that has been heard
- referred to as the ‘inner voice’
- capacity of maintenance loop is about 2 seconds worth of info
outline the role of the visuo-spatial sketchpad in the WMM (memory)
- temporarily stores visual and/or spatial information
- used when you have to plan a spatial task (e.g. moving from one room to another)
- capacity = limited (3-4 objects)
- referred to as the ‘inner eye’
- data is divided into the visual cache (stores visual data) & the inner scribe (records the arrangement of objects in the visual field)
what are the two subsystems of the VSS & what do they do? (WMM) (memory)
- visual cache - stores visual data
- inner scribe - records the arrangement of objects in the visual field
- not in original model
outline the role of the episodic buffer in the WMM (memory)
- added to the original model by Baddeley in 2000
- temporary store that relates to both visual & auditory info
- integrates info from other stores & LTM (visual, spatial & verbal info)
- maintains a sense of time sequencing
- storage component of CE that has a limited capacity (3-4 chunks)
- links working memory to LTM & wider cognitive processes like perception
give some positive evaluation points for the WMM (memory)
- can explain why we can/can’t do two things at once
- if we do two tasks at the same time & they need the same systems then our performance will suffer (e.g. texting & driving)
- has practical application - introduction of laws surrounding mobile phone use while driving prevents accidents
- Cohen et al (1997)
- used brain scans
- higher brain activity in prefrontal cortex (decision making) when central executive used
- higher brain activity in Wernicke’s area (speech perception) & Broca’s area (speech production) when phonological loop used
- higher activity in occipital lobe when VSS used
- Baddeley 1973 (phonological loop)
- Ps had a list of words of different lengths (short words: mat, hand & long words: university, psychology)
- they had to write them down straight after in the correct order
- short words were recalled better than long words (PL has a limited time based capacity so small words take less time to learn & are recalled easier)
- Baddeley 1973 (visuo-spatial sketchpad)
- Ps had to hold a moving pointer & keep it in contact with a moving spot of light
- at the same time they were asked to perform an imagery task & imagine a 3D letter ‘f’. Stating at the bottom they had to state if each angle included a top/bottom line with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’
- Ps found it very difficult to do both tasks (as both required the use of VSS)
- K.F. Case study
- PL was damaged but VSS intact
- supports evidence of separate stores in STM
Give some negative evaluation pints for the WMM (memory)
- the concept of the central executive is vague & unclear
- there is little known about how it actually works/what it does
- no evidence to support its capacity
- challenges integrity of WMM
- WMM only focuses on STM & not other memory stores/processes
- ignores how processes may not fit with other memory processes
- unaware if K.F. Had other cognitive impairments
- trauma of accident may have affected his cognitive performance alongside the brain injury
- challenges evidence from clinical studies of people with brain injuries that may have affected different systems
define interference (memory)
- forgetting because one memory blocks another, causing one or both memories to be distorted/forgotten
what is interference an explanation for? (memory)
- proposed as an explanation for forgetting in long term memory as we can’t access the memories even though they are available
what are the two types of interference? (memory)
- proactive interference
- retroactive interference
define proactive interference (memory)
- forgetting occurs when older memories (already stored) disrupt the recall of newer memories
- e.g. if the rules to a game you play regularly change, you may recall the old rules instead of the new ones
- degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar
define retroactive interference (memory)
- forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories stored
- e.g. forgetting your old address when filling out a job application
- degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar
outline the McGeoch & McDonald 1931 study into the effects of similarity (memory - interference)
- AIM: to investigate retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between recalled lists
- PROCEDURES: Ps were given two lists of words to learn & learned then until they could be recalled with 100% accuracy, after new lists were learned they were asked to recall the original list, group 1 = synonyms, group 2 = antonyms, group 3 = unrelated to original, group 4 = nonsense syllables, group 5 = three-digit numbers, group 6 = no new list (control)
- FINDINGS: the most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall, the best recall happened when Ps did not have to learn another list
- CONCLUSIONS: interference is strongest when the memories are similar
- STRENGTHS: there are lots of studies that support the findings, lab study - variables could’ve been controlled (valid explanation), Baddeley & Hitch 1977 rugby player study demonstrates inference, Tuvling & Psotka (1971) found that the results of interference effects can be overcome by using cues (can be applied to real life)
- CRITICISMS: artificial material - the lists used in the lab are not true to real life so the study lacks mundane realism, for practical application many of the studies do not allow a lot of time between learning lists & then recalling them (this may mean that the results aren’t true to real life)
how do proactive interference & retroactive interference explain how similarity affects recall? (memory)
- PI - previously stored info makes new info more difficult to store
- RI - new info overwrites previous similar memories due to the similarity
give some positive evaluation points for interference (memory)
- there is evidence of interference effects in more everyday situations
- Baddeley & Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall the names of teams they had played against
- players who played the most games (most interference) had the poorest recall
- this study shows that interference can operate in at least some real-world situations - increases the validity of the theory
- retrograde facilitation
- Coenen & Luijtelaar (1997) gave Ps a list of words & later asked them to recall the list (assuming the intervening experiences would act as interference)
- found that when learning under the influence of diazepam recall a week later was poor (compared to a control placebo group), but if list was learned before taking the drug then recall was better
- findings show that forgetting can be due to interference - reduce the interference & you reduce the forgetting
give some negative evaluation points for interference (memory)
- interference may cause some forgetting in daily life but it is unusual as the necessary conditions are rare
- this is unlike lab studies where a researcher can highly control variables
- two memories have to be fairly similar to interfere with each other but this is unlikely to occur in daily life
- this suggests that most forgetting may be better explained by other theories such as retrieval failure due to a lack of cues
- interference is temporary & can be overcome by using clues
- Tulving & Psotka (1971) gave Ps a list of words organised into categories (Ps were not told the categories)
- recall averages 70% for first list but got progressively worse
- at end Ps were given a cued recall test & accuracy rose back up to 70% (told names of categories)
- shows that interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material that is still in LTM (a finding not predicted by interference theory)
define retrieval failure (memory)
- a form of forgetting that occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues to access memory
- the memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided
What does the encoding specifity principle state? (memory)
- is a cue is going to be helpful it must be both present at encoding (when we learn the material) & present at retrieval (when we are recalling it
- if cues available at encoding & retrieval are different/if cues are absent at retrieval there will be some forgetting
what are the two types of dependent forgetting? (memory)
- context dependent forgetting
- state dependent forgetting
define context dependent forgetting (memory)
- recall depends on external cues
- e.g. weather/a place
define state dependent forgetting (memory)
- recall depends on internal cues
- e.g. feeling upset/being drunk
outline the 1975 Godden & Baddeley study into context dependent forgetting (memory)
- investigated if context during encoding & retrieval as impact in recall of information
- divers learned a list of words either underwater or on land & then were asked to recall the words either underwater or on land
- there were four conditions:
- 1: learn on land - recall on land
- 2: learn on land - recall underwater
- 3: learn underwater - recall on land
- 4: learn underwater - recall underwater
- recall was better when the recall environment matched the learning environment
- accurate recall was 40% lower in non-matching conditions
- when external cues available are not present at recall it can lead to retrieval failure
outline the 1998 Carter & Cassaday study into state dependent forgetting (memory)
- investigated if internal state during encoding & retrieval has impact on the recall of info
- Ps had to learn a list of words having either taken/not taken antihistamines (has a mild sedative effect that makes people drowsy)
- they then recalled the list, either under the influence or not under the influence of the drug
- when there was a mismatch between internal state at learning & recall, performance on memory test was worse
- when internal state is different, the cues are absent & can lead to more forgetting
give some positive evaluation points for retrieval failure (memory)
- supporting evidence
- studies show that a lack of relevant cues at recall lead to CDF & SDF in daily life
- other memory researchers argue that retrieval failure may be the main reason for forgetting in LTM
- evidence shows that retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as highly controlled lab settings
- real-life applications
- retrieval cues can help to overcome some forgetting in everyday situations
- cues don’t have a strong effect on forgetting but are worth paying attention to
- if you are having trouble remembering something, it is always good to go back to the environment you learned it in
- this shows how research can remind us of strategies used in the real world to improve recall
give some negative evaluation points for retrieval failure (memory)
- questioning context effects
- different contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen (e.g. learning & recalling in different conditions won’t lead to much forgetting)
- means that retrieval failure due to a lack of contextual cues doesn’t explain forgetting
- recall vs recognition
- context effects depend on the type of memory being tested
- Godden & Baddeley (1980) replicated scuba diver study with recognition
- found that no context dependent effect present = same performance across all groups
- suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting as it only applies when info needs to be recalled
- problems with encoding
- there is lots of evidence that forgetting occurs when there is a mismatch of encoding & retrival cues
- it is also difficult to establish whether or not a cue has been encoded
how can misleading information cause issues in the accuracy of eyewitness testimony? (memory)
- police may direct a witness to government a particular answer
outline the Loftus & Palmer (1974) study into leading questions (memory)
- misleading info
- aims
- to investigate the effect of language (misleading info) on immediate recall
- procedures
- student Ps were shown a film of the same road traffic accident
- after they were given a questionnaire that asked them to describe the accident
- critical question = ‘about how fast were the cars going when they (hit) each other?’
- 4 other groups given different verbs (smashed, collided, bumped, contacted)
- findings
- mean estimated speed was calculated —> ‘smashed’ = 41 mph, ‘collided’ = 39mph, ‘bumped’ = 38 mph, ‘hit’ = 3E mph, ‘contacted’ = 32 mph
- conclusions
- memory recall can be distorted by language used
- Ps have different interpretations of the speed & force from the use of different verbs - leading questions & misleading info affect memory recall
- strengths
- highly controlled - all Ps observed the same crash so Loftus could control what they were exposed to
- high reliability - study has been replicated many times
- real world application - changed how police question witnesses
- criticisms
- lacks mundane realism - watching a video of a car crash does not create the same emotions as being in/physically witnessing one
- Ps may lack motivation to be accurate as their account has no real consequence = not true to life
- lacks external validity - in real life people do not four on an event like they do in a lab
what does the response-bias explanation explain about leading questions? (memory)
- the wording of a question has no real effect on Ps memories, but influences how they decide to answer
what is post event discussion & how may it affect EWT? (memory)
- PED is when eyewitnesses to crime discuss their experiences & memories with eachother
- it can make EWT less accurate because of memory contamination (memory is changed) & memory conformity (memory stays the same but witnesses go along with each other’s accounts)
define ‘memory contamination’ (memory)
- when co-witnesses to a crime discuss it & their EWTs become altered or distorted
define ‘memory conformity’ (memory)
- witnesses often go along with eachother (for social approval or because they believe other witnesses are right)
- actual memory is changed
outline Gabbert et al’s 2003 study into PED (memory)
- Ps studied in pairs
- each P watched a video of the same crime but from different angles (this meant that each P could see elements in the event that the other couldn’t)
- both Ps then discussed what they had seen before individually completing a recall test, or just did the recall test (control group)
- found that 71% of Ps mistakenly recalled aspects of the event they did not see in the video but picked up on in the discussion
- in the control group (where no discussion took place) , the corresponding figure was 0%
- this is evidence for memory conformity
define anxiety (memory)
- a state of physical or emotional arousal
- emotions experienced include worries thoughts & feelings of tension
- physical changes include an increased heart rate & sweatiness
how can it be argued that anxiety has a negative affect on recall for EWT? How can it be studied? (memory)
- anxiety creates physiological arousal in the body, which prevents us from paying attention to important cues (makes recall worse)
- can be studied by looking at the effect of the presence of a weapon has on anxiety
- this leads to the weapon focus effect (a focus on the weapon), reducing a witness recall for other details of the event
outline the Johnson & Scott (1976) study into the negative effect anxiety has on recall (memory)
- AIM: to investigate the impact of weapons on the accuracy of recall
- PROCEDURE: Ps thought the were part of a lab study. Low anxiety group = heard a casual convo in next room & saw a man walk past carrying a pen with grease on his hands. High anxiety group = overheard a heated argument with the sound of broken glass, then saw a man walk out with a bloodied knife
- FINDINGS: set of Ps later picked out the man from a set of 50 photos, LAG = 49% identified, HAG = 33% identified
- CONCLUSION: tunnel theory of memory argues that a witnesses attention narrows to focus on a weapon as it is the source of anxiety
- CRITICISM: may not have tested anxiety, Ps focused on weapon as they were surprised by it. Other research in hair salon videos = Ps recall was higher when there were high unusualness in hand held objects (e.g. chicken, handgun), suggests weapon focus effect is due to unusualness so doesn’t tell us anything about the effect of anxiety on EWT
outline the Johnson & Scott (1976) study into the negative effect anxiety has on recall (memory)
- AIM: to investigate the impact of weapons on the accuracy of recall
- PROCEDURE: Ps thought the were part of a lab study. Low anxiety group = heard a casual convo in next room & saw a man walk past carrying a pen with grease on his hands. High anxiety group = overheard a heated argument with the sound of broken glass, then saw a man walk out with a bloodied knife
- FINDINGS: set of Ps later picked out the man from a set of 50 photos, LAG = 49% identified, HAG = 33% identified
- CONCLUSION: tunnel theory of memory argues that a witnesses attention narrows to focus on a weapon as it is the source of anxiety
- CRITICISM: may not have tested anxiety, Ps focused on weapon as they were surprised by it. Other research in hair salon videos = Ps recall was higher when there were high unusualness in hand held objects (e.g. chicken, handgun), suggests weapon focus effect is due to unusualness so doesn’t tell us anything about the effect of anxiety on EWT
how can it be argued that anxiety has a positive effect on the recall of EWT? (memory)
- witnessing a stressful event creates anxiety through physiological arousal in the body
- the fight or flight response is triggered, increasing alertness
- this may improve memory for the event as we become more aware of cues in the situation
how can it be argued that anxiety has a positive effect on the recall of EWT? (memory)
- witnessing a stressful event creates anxiety through physiological arousal in the body
- the fight or flight response is triggered, increasing alertness
- this may improve memory for the event as we become more aware of cues in the situation
outline the Yuille & Cutshall (1986) study into the positive effect anxiety has on recall (memory)
- PROCEDURE: conducted a study of a robbery in a gun store where the thief was shot & killed. Witnesses were interviewed 4-15 months after the incident & the results were compared to original police interviews. Accuracy was determined by the number of details reported in each account. Ps also reported how stressed they felt at the time
- FINDINGS: witnesses were very accurate with their accounts & there was little change in accuracy even after 5 months. Ps who reported higher stress levels were more accurate (88%) than less stressed groups (75%)
- this suggests that anxiety does not have a detrimental effect on the accuracy of EW memory in a real-world context & may even enhance it
outline the Yerkes-Dodson law (memory)
- the relationship between emotional arousal & performance looks like an inverted U (curvlinear relationship)
- lower levels of anxiety produce lower levels of accuracy
- memory becomes more accurate as the level of anxiety/arousal increases
- there is an optimal level of anxiety, which is the point of maximum accuracy (after this point, is a person experiences any more arousal their recall accuracy declines)
outline 2 strengths for the effect of anxiety on recall (memory)
- there is evidence supporting the theory that anxiety had a negative effect on the accuracy of recall
- London Dungeon Labyrinth - Valentine & Mesout (2009), Ps wore wireless heart monitors & were assigned to high & low anxiety groups
- in the study, anxiety clearly disrupted Ps ability to recall details about an actor they saw
- suggests that a high level of anxiety does have a negative effect on the immediate EW recall of a stressful event
- there is evidence supporting the theory that anxiety has a positive effect on the accuracy of recall
- Christianson & Hübinette (1993) interviewed witnesses of bank robberies in Sweden
- researchers assumed that directly involved witnesses (e.g. bank workers) would experience the most anxiety
- found that recall was more than 75% accurate, & that direct victims were most accurate
- these findings from actual crimes confirm that anxiety does not reduce the accuracy of recall for eye witnesses & may even enhance it
outline 4 weaknesses to the effect of anxiety on recall (memory)
- field studies lack control
- Yuille & Cutshall (1986) = Ps interviewed 4-15 months after the incident occurred
- researchers had no control over what happened to Ps in this time (e.g. PED) & the effects of anxiety may have been overwhelmed by other factors & therefore impossible to assess by the time of interviews
- lack of control over confounding variables may be responsible, which invalidates the study’s findings
- Yerkes-Dodson law ignores the fact that anxiety has several elements (physical, emotional, behavioural, cognitive)
- only focuses on physical arousal & assumes this is the only aspect linked to EWT
- however the way we think about the stressful situation (cognitive) may also be important
- ethical issues
- Ps in the Christianson & Hübinette study witnessed real robberies, which may have caused stress to Ps from reliving the trauma of it
- demand characteristics
- Ps may aspire to be helpful & act in the way they think they are expected to (Please-U)
- Ps may also behave in a rebellious way (Screw-U)
- thus means they are not true to life & lack external validity
state & outline the 4 stages of the cognitive interview. Explain why each is effective (memory)
- (1) recall everything
- witnesses are an outraged to recall every single detail if the event, even if it seems irrelevant or the witness doesn’t feel confident about it
- works because seemingly trivial details way be useful & may act as triggers/cues for other important details
- (2) reinstate context
- the witness should imagine the crime scene & imagine the environment (e.g. the weather) & their emotions at the time (e.g. happy, bored)
- related to context dependent forgetting, research by Godden & Baddeley has shown that recall is more accurate if info is recalled in the same environment it is learned in
- (3) reverse the order
- events should be recalled in a different order than the original sequence (e.g. from the final point back to the beginning)
- prevents people from reporting their expectations of what must’ve happened instead of what actually happened
- prevents dishonesty as it is harder to report an untruthful account if events are recalled in the reverse order)
- (4) change the perspective
- witnesses should recall the indecent from other people’s perspectives (e.g. other witnesses at different locations in the crime scene/the perpetrator)
- disrupts the affect of expectations & schemas on recall
- the schema you have for a particular setting generates expectations of what must’ve happened, & it is the schema that is recalled instead of what actually happened
who developed the cognitive interview? (memory)
- Fisher & Geiselman (1992)
outline the enhanced cognitive interview (memory)
- Fisher et al (1987) developed additional elements to the cognitive interview to focus on the social dynamics of the interaction
- e.g. the interviewer needs to know when to establish & relinquish eye contact
- also includes ideas like EW anxiety, minimising distractions, getting witnesses to speak slowly & asking open-ended questions
outline 2 strengths of the cognitive interview (memory)
- there is evidence supporting it
- meta analysis by Kohnken EWT al (1999) combined data from 55 studies comparing the CI & ECI to standard police interviews
- CI gave an average of 41% increase in accurate info compared with the standard interview
- shows that the Ci is an effective technique in helping witnesses to remember info that is stored in memory (available) but not easily accessible
- Stein & Memon (2008)
- cleaning staff in Brazil watched a video of an abduction
- Ps who had a CI provided better data that had more details compared to standard interview techniques
- this supports the CI & shows that it is effective
outline 3 weaknesses to the cognitive interview (memory)
- Kohnken et al (1999) also found an increase in the amount of inaccurate info recalled by Ps
- particular issue with ECI (produced more incorrect details than CI)
- CIs may sacrifice the accuracy of EWT in favour of quantity
- this means that police officers should treat EW evidence from CIs/ECIs with caution
- not all elements are equally as effective
- Milne & Bull (2002) found that each of the 4 techniques alone produced more info than the standard police interviews
- also found that using a combo of ‘report everything’ & ‘reinstate context’ produced better recall than any other elements or combo of them
- confirmed suspicions that some aspects of the CI are more useful than others
- this casts some doubt on the credibility of the overall CI
- police officers may be reluctant to use the CI as it takes more time & training than the standard police interview
- e.g. more time is needed to establish rapport with a witness & allow them to relax
- CI also requires special training & many forces don’t have the resources to provide it for long
- effectiveness of CI depends on the quality of training received
- this suggests that the complete CI is not a realistic method for police officers to use & it may be better to focus on a only a few key elements
