Memory Flashcards
Name one limitation of the different types of LTM
P:Might be 2 types of LTM compared to the 3 Tulving suggested.
EV: Cohen+Squire (1980) suggested that declarative(semantic=episodic)=stored together in one LTM.Procedural= in another.
Ex: Episodic+Semantic=stored in 1 declarative memory - both require the same amount of conscious effort to recall- seen as one.
L:Casts doubt on accuracy of Tulvings claim.
State one STRENGTH of the different types of LTM.
P:Diff types memory- stored in DIff parts of the brain (LTM= diff stores)
Ev: Tulving (1994) P’s performed various memory tasks + scanned using PET scan.
Found left-prefrontal cortex=semantic. Right prefrontal cortex =episodic.
Ex: Shows that there is diff physical space for each type of memory.
L:Lends validity to the suggestion that there are 3 diff types of LTM.
State a second strength of the Diff types of LTM
P: Ideas of LTM= have clinical Ev
Ev: Wearing + Molaison have provided usefu information about what happens when memory is damaged.
Ex: Helped researchers understand now memory is supposed to work + put appropriate support in place for people with memory decline.
L: Increase usefulness =applied to real-life problems
State a third STRENGTH of the different types of LTM.
P: Diff types.of LTM→Support From Case Study Research
Ev: Both cases of HM+ Clive Wearing= demonstrate how diff types of LTM can funchion diff.
E.g. HM=asked to draw a star, got better each time-even though he has no memory of doing it.
Ex: LTM is made up of diff types of memony. Procedural= drawing the star. Episodic= memory functioning.
L: Increases the validity= shows that central claims of the theory are true.
Retrieval Failure theory:
What is a ‘Cue’?
A ‘trigger’ or information that allows us to access a memory. Such cues may be meaningful or may be indirectly linked by being encoded at the same time of learning e.g. cues may be external (environmental context) or internal ( mood or degree of drunkenness)
Retrieval Failure Theory:
What is retrieval failure?
A form of forgetting. It 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.
State one Strength of the Retrieval Failure Theory of Forgetting.
P: Retrieval cues can help to overcome forgetting in everyday situations
Ev: many people = experienced being in one room + wanting to get something from another room but forgetting what they went to get once getting to the other room
Ex: Research into use of cues = remind us of what strategies we can use in the real-world to improve recall. Valuable real-world applications.
L: Retrieval Failure = useful explanation
State a second STRENGTH of the retrieval Failure Theory of Forgetting
P: Impressive range of research that supports it.
Ev: Baddley + Godden - Show lack of relevant cues at recall, lead to context-dependant forgetting.
Ex:Research support shows how retrieval failure occurs in real-life situations as welll as the lab.
L: Highly valid explanation of forgetting.
State a LIMITATION of The Retrieval Failure Theory of Forgetting
P: Effects may have been overstated.
Ev:Different contexts have to be very different before effects are seen.
EX:May not actually explain much everyday forgetting, we may need to look into alternative explanations to fully understand it.
L: Lacks value as it isn’t a complete explanation.
State a second LIMITATION of The Retrieval Failure Theory of Forgetting
P: The effects may depend on the type of memory
Ev: Godden+Baddely replicated with recognition test, performance was the same for all 4 conditions.
Ex: Only applies when a person has to recall information rather than recognise it.It is a limited explanation of forgetting.
L: Lacks explanatory power.
EWT:
What is Eye Witness Testimony?
The ability of people to remember the detail of events such as, accidents + crimes, which they themselves have observed. Accuracy of EWT can be affected by factors such as misleading questions, leading questions and anxiety.
EWT:
What are Misleading Questions?
Incorrect information given to an eyewitness usually after the event ( hence called post-event discussion) it can take many forms such as, leading questions and post-event discussions between co-witnesses and\or other people.
EWT:
What are Leading Questions?
A question which, because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer e.g ‘Was the knife in the left hand?’ Suggests the answer is the left hand.
EWT:
What is the research into Misleading Questions?
.Loftus+ Palmer
Aim: They wanted to see if memories of a car accident witness = accurate after the event.
Sample: 45 students
Procedure: Students shown 7 different car accidents. After each they were given a questionnaire about it. The P’s were split into groups of 5, each with a slightly different critical question. Asked ‘About how fat were the cars going when they ___ each other’. The blank = filled in with either hit, smashed, collided, bumped or contacted.
Findings; The mean speed= calculated for each group. Group given ‘smashed’ estimated 41 mph. Group given ‘contacted’ estimated 30 mph.
Conclusion: EWT= generally unreliable. Form of questioning can have a significant effect on eye-witness answers. But this is a lab study, so may not effect the recall of those who witness real-life car crashes.
EWT:
What is Post-event Discussion?
Occurs when there is more than one witness to an event, witnesses may discuss what they have seen with co-witnesses/other people. May influence the accuracy of each witnesses recall of the situation.
EWT:
What is the Research into Post-Event discussion?
Gabbert (2003):
Procedure: Studied P’s in pairs. Each P watched a video of the same crime but filmed at different viewpoints- each P = see different elements in the event that the other couldn’t e.g. one person could see the title of the books the young women was carrying. Both P’s discussed what they saw before individually completing a recall test.
Findings: 71% P’s mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they hadn’t seen but picked up on post-event discussion. Control group = 0% discussion.
Conclusion: Post-event discussion can lead to memory conformity.
Sate the one STRENGTH of research into EWT and misleading information?
P: Useful real-life applications
Ev: Loftus + Plamer (1975) who found that leading questions can have distorting effects on memory. Police officers need to be more careful on how they phrase questions.
Ex: Findings from research into EWT this area= help real-life work context of people within society.
L: Increase Usefulness of research + external validity.
State one LIMITATION of research into EWT and Misleading Questions?
P: Research into EWT = often has demand characteristics
Ev: Zaragosa + McCloskey (1989)- many answers P’s give in studies of EWT = result of demand characteristics.
Ex: P’s usually don’t want to let the researcher down - appear to be useful = attentive. Guess the answer in especially Yes or No questions.
L: Decreases the internal validity- isn’t their actual response.
State a second LIMITATION of research into EWT and Misleading Questions?
P: Research doesn’t capture individual differences in the accuracy of EWT
EV: Older people= less accurate than younger people - in giving eyewitness reports. Anatasi + Rhodes (2006) people in age groups 18-25 + 35-45 =-17 more accurate than people in groups from 55-78 years old.
EX: All age groups= more accurate when identifying people their own age (own age bias)
L: Research = lack of reliability- mainly uses young people.
State a third LIMITATION for research into EWT and Misleading Questions?
P: Tasks are artificial
EV: P’s watched film clips of car accidents - very diff experience from witnessing a real accident - emotion= influence on memory.
EX: Research evidence used to suggest the importance of misleading information= doesn’t accurately reflect how we use our memory in every day life.
L: Decrease the usefulness of research- tell little about how leading questions affect EWT in real accidents + crimes
Anxiety:
How does anxiety affect recall in eyewitness testimony research?
Johnson and Scott (1976)
Johnson and Scott (1976) study:
Procedure: Led P’s to believe= taking part in a lab study. While P’s sat in a waiting room, they could hear an argument in the next room. Low anxiety condition.-man walked out carrying a pen and with grease on his hands. High anxiety condition.-same argument+ breaking glass. Man walked out with a paper knife that was covered in blood.
Findings: P’s picked out the man from a set of 50 photos. 49% P’s but had identified him. Only 33% P’s that had seen him carrying the knife that was covered in blood identified him. Tunnel theory of memory argues that witness attention narrows focus on a weapon because it is a source of anxiety.
Anxiety:
How does anxiety affect recall in eyewitness testimony?
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
Procedure: real life shooting in a gun shop in Vancouver Canada. Shop owner shot a thief dead. 21 eye witnesses and 13 agreed to take part in the study. Interviews held for 4 to 5 months after the incident and those were compared with the original police interviews made at the time of the incident. Accuracy.= determined by the number of details reported in each account witnesses also asked to write how stressed they felt at time of incident-7-point scale and asked if they had any emotional problems since the event.e.g. Sleeplessness.
Findings: witnesses= accurate in their own account+ there was little change in the amount of accuracy after six months-some details were less accurate such as a collection of the colour of items-age/height/weight estimates.P’s who reported the highest levels of stress= most accurate (about 88% compared to 75% for the less stressed group)
State one lIMITATION of research into anxiety and EWT?
P: The validity of Johnson+ Scott’s study may be questioned.
EV: Pickel (1998) conducted an experiment using scissors, handgun, wallet or raw chicken= handheld item in hairdressing salon. Scissors= low anxiety+ low unusualness.EWT= poorer-high unusualness conditions(chicken+ handgun)
EX: Might be unusualness not anxiety
L: limitation-Johnson+ Scott might not be measuring anxiety.
State a second Limitation of research into anxiety and EWT ?
P: internal validity of the studies could be questioned
EV: Yuille + Cutshall (1986) researchers interviewed witnesses sometime after the event. Things could have happened to the witness in between-affect memory.e.g. Witnesses may have had discussions with co-witnesses or other people or read information in media= affect memory.
EX: these extraneous variables may be responsible for accuracy of recall rather than anxiety+ factors= impossible to assess by the time P’s are interviewed.
L: lack of control in field studies= problematic when trying to understand the effect of anxiety on EWT.
State a third LIMITATION of research into anxiety and EWT ?
P: ethical issues when creating anxiety for the purpose of research
EV: creating anxiety in P’s = risky and potentially unethical-subject people to psychological harm. Criticism of money lab experiments.e.g. Johnson and Scott.
EX: questioned whether lab research inducing anxiety should be undertaken at all due to potential harm caused.
L: decreases the internal validity of research studies into anxiety.
State a Fourth LIMITATION of research into anxiety and EWT ?
P: demand characteristics may play a part in the results
EV: most studies show P’s film of staged crime. P’s = aware watching it for a reason-work it out themselves that they are likely to be asked questions on what they have seen.
EX: result in the screw you affect = P’s give answers-ruin the research or result in desirability affect = P’s give purposively pleasing answers
L: internal validity of the results is decreased.
Cognitive Interview:
What is Cognitive Interview ?
A method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate memories. It uses four main techniques, all based on evidence-based psychological knowledge of human memory-report everything, reinstate the context, reverse the order and change perspective.
Cognitive Interview:
What is Report Everything ?
Report every detail you can even if they seem irrelevant or trivial.e.g. Why were you going to that thing? Where were you going? What was the offender wearing?age? Smell? Hear?. travel details can be important and might trigger important memories.
Cognitive Interview:
What is context reinstatement?
Witness should return to the original crime scene ‘ in their mind’ + imagine the environment+ emotions e.g. weather? Setting? Thinking? Feeling?. This can enhance recall through cues.
Cognitive Interview:
What is reverse the order?
Event should be recorded in a different order from the original sequence.e.g. Point in the middle or the end back to the beginning this is done to prevent people reporting their expectations of how the event must have happened preventing dishonesty.
Cognitive Interview:
What is change in perspective?
Witness should recall the event from other people’s perspective e.g. Perspective of victim done to disrupt the effect of expectation+ effect of schema recall.
Cognitive Interview:
What is a schema ?
A mental framework of beliefs and expectations that influence cognitive processing. They are developed from experience.
State one STRENGTH of cognitive interview ?
P: some element= more useful than others
EV: Milne + Bull (2002)- each individual element was equally valuable but a combination of report everything and context reinstate produced better recall than the other conditions.
EX: some aspects of CI = more useful than others (confirmed police officer suspicions) two elements alone can be useful.
L: increases the credibility of CI amongst those who use it. E.g. Police officers.
C: however the idea that two parts can work alone, undermines the whole idea of the cognitive interview.
State a second STRENGTH of the cognitive interview?
P: research suggests ECI = offer special benefits
EV: meta-analysis by Köknken (1999) -combine data from 50 studies.ECI consistently provided more correct information than standard.
EX: indicate real practical benefits to the police of using the ECI. Give police back a chance of catching criminals+ charging criminals-beneficial to whole society
L: lead to more accurate outcomes for the police.
State one LIMITATION of cognitive interview ?
P: creates an increase in inaccurate information
EV: Köhnken (1999) 81% increase of correct+ 61% increase of incorrect information when ECI was compared to a standard interview.
EX: police need to treat information with caution
L: inaccuracy may decrease the usefulness-lead to false information/prosecution.
State a second LIMITATION of the cognitive interview ?
P: CI= time consuming
EV: takes more time than standard police interviews-police= reluctant. CI also require special training.-mini forces= not able to provide more than a few hours (Kebbell + Wagstaff 1996)
EX: unlikely that ‘ proper’ version of the CI is actually used- explain why police have not been that impressed by it
L: lacks usefulness in real life situations.
Describe the research into the Multi Store Model of Memory ?
- Proposed by Atkinson + Shiffrin (1968)
-memory= composed of 3 main memory stores
-attempts to explain how information is processed and transferred to each different memory store.
-SM= detect mass of information-enters through our senses
-SM= Modality specific
Unlimited capacity
Limited duration (2 sec)
-Information = receive attention-no attention= fade/decay
-If attention is received= transferred to the STM
-STM=Limited capacity (7+ or -2)
Duration (30 secs or less)
Codes information acoustically
-Maintenance rehearsal-transfer information to the LTM
-LTM= has to be elaboratively rehearsed-remember information in a meaningful way
-LTM= unlimited capacity+ duration
Codes information semantically
-To remember information stored in the LTM= retrieve it-send it back to the STM - Some information= lost in process of interference.
State one STRENGTH of The Multi Store Model ?
P: research support-studies that show STM and LTM are different
EV: Baddley = tend to mix up similar sounding words when using STM. Mix up similar meanings when using LTM.
EX: STM= acoustic. LTM= semantic.
L:two memory stores= separate+ independent
State one Limitation of The Multi Store Model ?
P: STM = unitary store
EV: Shallice + Warrington (1970) studied patient with amnesia - known as KF. KF’s STM four digits= very poor when read out loud to him compared to being read by himself
EX: At the very least= one STM to process visual information+ another one to process auditory information
L: Lack of explanatory power
State a second LIMITATION of The Multi Store Model ?
P: artificial materials
EV: every day life = form memories related to peoples faces, names, facts, places
EX: research studies= use none of these materials. Instead use digits, letters, numbers and words (consonant syllables)
L: model= not accurate for real life memories.
State a third LIMITATION of The Multi Store Model ?
P: research evidence that LTM= not a unitary memory store
EV: one LTM for our memories of facts about the world. Different one for our memories..E.G how to ride a bike.
EX: undermines MSM-LTM has at least 3 different parts to it.
L: MSM= doesn’t accurately explain LTM-does not acount for these multiple parts
Definition of Capacity ?
The amount of information that can be held in the memory store.
Definition of Duration?
The length of time something can be held in the memory
Definition of Coding ?
Weigh in which information is transferred into something that can be stored
What is the research into Coding?
Baddley (1887)
Procedure: Gave different lists of words to 4 groups of P’s to remember
- Group 1 ( acoustically similar) e.g. Cat, cab, can.
- Group 2 (acoustically dissimilar) e.g. Pan, few, clock.
- Group 3(semantically similar) e.g. Small, petite, tiny.
-Group 4 (semantically dissimilar) e.g. Big, hat, good.
-P’s = shown words+ recall incorrect order
Found: Asked to recall after 20 mins. Recalling from STM = worst with acoustically similar words and recalling from LTM= worse with semantically similar words.
Suggest: information= coded acoustically in STM. LTM= semantically.
State one STRENGTH of Coding ?
P: Baddely identified a clear difference between 2 memory stores
EV: later research= showed exceptions to B’s findings
EX: idea that STM uses mostly acoustic coding+ LTM semantic= stood test of time
L: important step in understanding memory system+ lead to multi store model
State one LIMITATION of Coding ?
P: Baddley’s study= used artificial stimuli rather than meaningful materials
EV: word list= no personal meaning to P’s
EX: findings= don’t tell us much about coding in different kinds of memory tasks e.g. Every day life-processing more meaningful materials-use semantic coding even for STM.
L: findings= limited application
Describe one research into Capacity?
Digit Span
Jacob (1887)
-P’s presented with a sequence of digits-required to repeat back in same order
-Given one digit to repeat at a time to begin with
-Gradually increased by one more digit e.g. One, 84, 723, 3857…..
-Capacity of STM= measured by the percentage of correct recall
-When P’s failed to recall 50% of digits= reached digital span capacity
-mean span (digits)= 9.3 items
-Mean span(letters)= 7.3 items
Describe another research into Capacity ?
Miller (1956)
-observations of everyday practice
-Noted things come in sevens
-7 notes on musical scale, 7 deadly sins, 7 days in a week.
-Span/capacity of STM=7 items + or - 2
-Miller noted people recall 5 words as well as 5 letters-done by chunking(group together)
Sate one STRENGTH of research into Capacity ?
P: Jacob study= replicated
EV: study= very old+ early research in psychology= lacked adequate controls.E.g.some P’s digit spans= underestimated because they were distracted during testing (confounding variable)
EX: despite this, Jacob’s findings= confirm confirmed by other/better control studies E.g Bopp + Verhaeghen in 2005
L: Jacob study= validate four digit span in STM
State one LIMITATION of research into Capacity ?
P: Millers research= overestimated STM capacity
EV: Cowan (2001) reviewed other research+ conducted capacity of STM= only about 4 + or - 1 chunks.
EX: lower end of Miller’s estimate (5 items) = more appropriate than 7 items
L: findings= overestimated/less useful
Describe research into Duration ?
Peterson’s (1959)
Lloyd + Margaret Peterson (1959)
-investigated how long information remains in STM without verbal rehearsal
-P’s = briefly presented a nonsense trigram ( e.g. Three letters such as CLD, NWQ)
-Immediately followed by a three digit number (e.g. 382)
-Asked to count backwards in threes from the specified number-until told to stop
-done to prevent them from rehearsing the 3 letter digit and remaining fresh in the STM or being transferred to their LTM
-Measure the duration of STM, percentage of trigrams recall incorrect order was recorded after each time intervals of 3,69, 12, 15 or 18 seconds.
Describe a research into Duration of LTM?
Bahrick (1975)
Bahrick (1975)
-conducted a natural experiment-investigate duration of LTM
-400 American ex high school students - left school between 3 months+ 48 years ago
-Duration tested using photographs+ names from high school yearbooks
-Bahrick (1975) found P’s had 90% correct recall in photo+ name recognition from name recognition tests even 15 years after graduating high school.
-Left 48 years earlier scored lower(80%= name recognition + 70% photo recognition).
-P’s= less accurate in the free recall test(remember names of ex classmates) 60% correct after 15 years+ 30% after 48 years
Findings : provide strong information that information is held in LTM for very long time+ still some memory loss overtime. Duration of information in LTM is better for visual recognition, than attempting to freely recall information without help from pictures acting as cues.
State one STRENGTH of research into Duration
Bahrick
P:Bahrick study= high external validity
EV: research investigated meaningful memories (e.g. Peoples faces + names)
EX: studies on LTM conducted with meaningless pictures-recall rates= lower(e.g. Shepard 1967)
L: Bahrick findings= reflect more ’real’ estimate of the duration of LTM.
State one LIMITATION of research into Duration?
Peterson’s
P: meaningless stimuli
EV: we sometimes try to recall meaningless things= study not completely irrelevant
EX: recall of consonant syllables-doesn’t reflect meaningful everyday memory tasks
L: study lacked external validity
WMM:
What is the Central Executives Capacity, Coding and main function?
-decide which slave system to allocate information to
-Capacity= limited
-Coding= modality free
WMM:
What is the Phonological Loops Capacity, Coding and main function?
-Controls auditory information
-Capacity=2 secs
-Coding= acoustic
-Subdivided into 2-phonological store(inner ear) + Articulatory process (inner voice + maintenance rehearsal)
WMM:
What is the Episodic Buffers Capacity, Coding and main function?
-temporary store for information
-Integrate visual, spatial+ verbal information
-Record events as they happen
-Capacity= limited(about 4 chunks)
Coding= modality free
WMM:
What is the Visuo-Spatial Sketchpads Capacity, Coding and main function?
-process visual+ spatial information
-Coding= visual
-Capacity= limited(3-4 objects)
-Subdivided into two sections= The inner scribe(records the arrangement of objects) + the visual cache(store visual data)
State one STRENGTH of the WMM
P: the word length effect supports the phonological loop
EV: Baddley (1975) P’s have a hard time remembering a list of long words than short words-word length effect
EX; limited space for rehearsal in the articulatory process(2 SECS)
L: word length affect disappears-given repeating task, tying up the articulatory process. Show it at work.
State a second STRENGTH of the WMM
P: evidence supporting WSM suggests-different stores within WM
EV: Shallice + Warrington (1970) studied KF. KF.= brain damaged + poor STM ability for verbal information. Process visual information= normally
EX: just phonological loop damaged-other components intact
L: multiple stores within WMM at least a visual+ auditory component
State a third STRENGTH of the WMM
P: affirming experimental evidence
EV: Baddley (1975) showed P’s have more difficulty using two visual tasks than doing a verbal+ visual task at the same time. Difficulty increased= use same slave system. Visual + verbal= same slave system
EX: separate slave systemS. 1 process verbal input..2= process auditory input.
L: support idea that WMM= made up of more than one store.
State one LIMITATION of the WMM
P: cognitive psychologists= believe central executive= unsatisfactory+ doesn’t explain anything
EV: Baddely recognised the CE= most important component+ least understood. More explanation than just ‘ attention’, consists of separate components.
EX: WMM= not fully explained
L: key weakness of model-argued to be incomplete
Interference Theory of Forgetting:
What is interference ?
Forgetting because one memory blocks and another, causing one or both memories to be distorted/forgotten
Interference Theory of Forgetting:
What is Proactive Interference?
Forgetting occurs when older memories already stored, disrupt the recall of newer memories.
Interference Theory of Forgetting:
What is Retroactive Interference?
Forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories already stored
Describe the research into Interference Theory of Forgetting
McGeoch + McDonald(1931)
-Interference= worse when the memories are similar
-Studied RI by changing the similarity between two sets of materials
-P’s = presented word list-until remember them with 100% accuracy
-Split into groups of 6
-Presented new list, varying in similarity from the 1st
-Synonym synonyms from 2nd list-harder to recall 1st list(1.2 recalled)
-Group with no new list (4.4 recalled)
-Interference does occur worse for stimuli that is similar.
State one STRENGTH of the Interference Theory of Forgetting
P: research support from a natural setting
EV: Baddley + Hitch (1977) asked rugby players= recall names of teams they played against during rugby season
EX: players did not play same number of games(injuries). Played most= poorest recall (more interference)
L: interference operates in some everyday situations. Increasing validity of the theory..
C: interference in everyday situations= unusual-necessary conditions of selectively rare e.g. Similarity of memories/learning does not occur often. Most every day forgetting= but to explain explained by other theories.eg. Retrieval failure to lack of cues.
State a second STRENGTH of the Interference Theory of Forgetting
P: supporting research evidence
EV: McGeoch+McDonald (1931)-both types of interference= common ways we forget in LTM. IV was whether P’s were exposed to similar, dissimilar or no information after learning a list of words.
EX: similar words= higher level of forgetting
L: strength= support into research findings into interference
State one LIMITATION of the Interference Theory of Forgetting
P: lack of ecological validity
EV: studies tend to be laboratory experiments-focused on learning word lists
EX: does not represent situations in which people forget in the real world e.g. Peoples names, faces, what time?
L: decreases the realism of experiment+ makes it less useful
State a second LIMITATION of the Interference Theory of Forgetting
P: interference effects may be overcome using cues
EV: Tulving + Psotka (1971) gave P’s lists of words-organised into categories (not told what they are)
EX: 1st less recall= 70%-fell with each new list (proactive interference). Given a cured recall test (names+ categories) recall rose back up to 70%.
L: interference causes just a temporary loss of access to material still in the LTM-not predicted by the theory.
