Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

AS Psychology > Memory > Flashcards

Memory Flashcards

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

Sensory store duration

A

0.25 - 2 seconds

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

Sensory store capacity

A

Large (attention moves into STM)

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

Encoding for sensory stores

A

Echoic - auditory

Iconic - visual

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

Capacity of STM

A

7+-2

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

Duration of STM

A

30 seconds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Study for duration of STM

A

PETERSON and PETERSON
3 letters and then count down backwards
Found it dropped from 3 seconds 90% - 18 seconds 10%
Lab study - low ecological validity, high control, repeatable, high reliability
Repeated measures, could get practice effects - counterbalanced by having people start at different times
Participant variables

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Encoding

A

Changing sensory input into a form or code to be processes by the memory system.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Study for encoding information into STM

A

BADDELEY 1966
List of acoustically similar and dissimilar + same for semantic
Acoustically similar were muddled up in short term
Suggests acoustic encoding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Encoding for STM

A

Acoustic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Types of LTM

A

Episodic - personal event (conscious)
Semantic - capital of country (conscious)
Procedural - riding a bike (unconscious)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Capacity of LTM

A

Infinite

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

Study for duration of LTM

A

BAHRICK ET AL
Had to recall people from their school: free recall test
Some could remember up to 50/60 years
Shown pictures and remembered more: photo recognition test
Or given names and have to match to photos: name recognition test
Within 15yrs: 90% recognise names and faces + 60% free recall
30 yrs: 30% free recall accuracy
48 yrs: name recognition 80% + photo recognition 40%
Lab study
Field study - high ecological val, hard to control variables (lowers reliability): some people might stay in contact, cant control independent variable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Study for duration of LTM

A

BADDELEY 1966
List of 10 words
Acoustic dis/similar, semantic dis/similar
Semantically remembered in LTM
Had a 20 min gap after told list
Lab study - artificial, highly controlled

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Encoding for LTM

A

Semantic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The multi store model of memory

A

ATKINSON and SCHIFFRIN 1968

Incoming stimuli -> sensory stores -> attention -> STM -> rehearsal -> LTM -> retrieval -> STM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Evidence that STM and LTM are separate

A
  • Encoded in different ways (Baddeley studies)
  • Primacy and recency effects in the serial position effect
  • Studies of patients following brain damage (HM and KF)
17
Q

Evidence of primacy and recency effects in the serial position

A

Primacy effect: first words of list in LTM as rehearsed.
Recency effect: last words in STM so easily recalled
Glanzer and Cunitz 1966
Put in a delay before people recalled 10 words, count backwards for 3 seconds at end of last word. Eliminated recency effect supports idea recency effect reflects STM.

18
Q

Evidence from studies of patients with memory problems following brain damage

A

HM
Surgery to fix epilepsy
Removed hippocampus
After that STM and LTM fine but no link between memory, couldn’t make new LTM
Supports multi store model of memory as both stores are separate
But he could remember how to do hard drawing games suggests LTM is separated into different stores supports working model but contradicts multi store model as too simple
Not lab study, good
Case study - Low population validity, cant generalise, unique situation

19
Q

Evidence from studies of patients with memory problems following brain damage

A

KF
Fell off motorbike, damage to brain
LTM fine, STM was reduced - remembered 3 things, so couldn’t make LTM
Evidence for MSM
But criticism of model as well as he could remember 7+-2 shapes - supports Working model

20
Q

Evaluation of multi-store model of memory

A

+ supported by primacy and recency effect
+ supported by HM and KF
+ supported by Baddeley’s encoding studies
- overly simple
- KF had good visual memory, so means there is another store
- HM could learn skills like puzzles and mirror drawing, suggests there is another LTM store

21
Q

Duration of LTM

A

Infinite

22
Q

Working memory model

A

BADDELEY and HITCH 1974
Central executive at top
Episodic buffer in middle
Visuo-spatial sketch pad: visual cache, inner scribe left
Phonological loop: articulatory control system and phonological store (inner ear and voice) right
Long term memory at the bottom

23
Q

Evidence that articulatory control processes and acoustic store are separate

A

Paul Esu
PET scans
Injected people with radioactive glucose while out in a pet scanner
Two tasks:
1. Remember series of letters, use inner voice and ear
2. Say whether they rhyme, inner voice
Found different parts of brain being used suggesting different/separate inner voice and inner ear
Unethical as injected radioactive glucose - low risk, necessary, important info and all consented

24
Q

Evaluation of working memory model

A

+ more complex
+ considerable research support
+ KF
+ practical applications: understand children with reading problems
- not enough information/evidence regarding the central executive - not a single system, consists of several interacting systems
- some evidence visuospatial sketchpad may need to be split into visual and spatial
- no information about LTM
- evidence is flawed

25
Q

Explanations for forgetting

A

Interference theory

Retrieval cue failure

26
Q

Interference theory

A

Proactive interference - old info interferes with new.

Retroactive interference - new info interferes with old.

27
Q

Problem with interference theory for forgetting

A

Only explains when two similar bits of info gets forgotten.

28
Q

Evidence for interference theory

A

BADDELEY and HITCH
Two groups of rugby players, group 1 played recently and lots of games, group 2 played long time ago but fewer games
Group 2 better as no interference, group played less remembered more
Quasi, not full control, more realistic

29
Q

Retrieval cue failure

A

Occurs when the info is still in LTM but there aren’t enough cues to retrieve the info.
Our memories can only be retrieved if we have cues or prompts to help retrieve them.

30
Q

Evidence for retrieval cue failure

A

GODDEN and BADDELEY
4 people in each group
1+2 learned water, 3+4 land
1+3 tested water, 2+4 tested land
Those that tested in same remembered more words as had retrieval cues
Field study, good ecological validity but very artificial study, not a normal situation
16 scuba divers, rich, poor population validity
Practical implications, learn where tested

31
Q

Problem with retrieval cue failure theory

A

Research supporting is highly artificial and with small sample sizes.

32
Q

Eye witness testimony

A

When an observer of a crime’s recollection of events is used as evidence in a criminal trial.

33
Q

Memory can be influenced by…

A

We can ‘reconstruct’ an account of events and this can be influenced by our prior knowledge and expectations and it may also influenced by things we’re told after the events.
Memory is reconstructive.

34
Q

3 factors that affect the reliability of EWT

A
  1. Anxiety
  2. Misleading information (and leading questions)
  3. Improving EWT using the cognitive interview
35
Q

Evidence for anxiety affecting EWT

A 
LOFTUS
2 groups one saw pen, one saw bloodied knife
Identify man : 49% pen, remembered but saw knife down to 33%
Anxiety and weapon focus
Not generalisable to real life
Deception - ethical
No risk 
High control
36
Q

Evidence for misleading information

A 
LOFTUS and PALMER
See video of car smashing in each other 
41 mph for smashed and 34 for hit
Misleading questions
Lab - no anxiety, not realistic
Always used uni students, not representative sample
Deceived
Practical implications - improve justice system, police be careful what they ask
37
Q

Post event discussion evidence

A

GABBERT ET AL
Participants group 1 watched video girls stealing wallet
2 watched everything but crime
Asked to meet and discuss on assumption both saw same video
Group 2: 71% said saw things they couldn’t see
60% said she was guilty
Supports idea post event discussion negative effect on ewt
Lab study
Police question asap so not influenced by others

38
Q

The cognitive interview

A

GEISELMAN
Cognitive interview
Context, Report, Order, Perspective
2 groups, one undergraduate saw video of crime and interviewed
One interviewed with cognitive
Cognitive interview - remembered more information but not more accurate
No anxiety and used students
Follow up with real crimes and found same results

AS Psychology (6 decks)

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