Memory Flashcards
coding
the format which information is stored in the various memory stores
capacity
the amount of information that can be stored in a memory store
duration
the length of time information can be held in memory
short-term memory store
the limited-capacity memory store, coding is mainly acoustic, capacity 7+-2 with duration between 18-30 seconds
long-term memory store
the permanent memory store, coding is mainly semantic, it has unlimited capacity and can store memories for up to a lifetime
research on coding
Baddeley
gave different lists to 4 groups of participants
1-words sound similar
2-words sound different
3-words with similar meanings
4-words with different meanings
shown words and and asked to recall in order
recall straight away, worse with acoustically words
recall after 20 minutes, worse with semantically similar words
research on capacity
digit span
jacobs
gives participant a 4 digit number ask to recall, every time they are correct add another digit
mean score for letter-7.3
mean score for numbers-9.3
research on capacity
chunking
miller
things come in 7-days of the week
7+-2
chunking-recall 5 words as well as 5 letters
research on duration of STM
peterson and peterson
24 undergraduate students
on each trial participant given a consonant sound and a 3 digit number to count back from
STM has a short duration unless repeated over again
neisser and harsch
challenger space shuttle
recollections of when participants heard about it
repeated 2 years later
at least 1/4 of major details were wrong
10% gave same answer
confidence in memories has no correlation with their accuracy
Duration of LTM
Bahrick
392 participants from American hgih school between age 17 and 74
photo-recognition and free recall
participants tested within 15 years of graduating were 90% right with photo recognition compared with 70% accuracy after 48 years
after 15 years 60% accuracy of free recall compared to 30% after 48 years
evaluation for coding research
artificial stimuli- less ecologically valid
evaluation for capacity research
lack validity
evaluation for duration research STM
lack external validity
evaluation for duration research STM
high external validity
Who designed multi-store model
Atkinson and Shiffrin
MSM
Atkinson and Shiffrin
sensory memory, if attention paid transfers to short-term memory if rehearsed passes into long term memory if not decay or displacement takes place
in the long term memory store decay or interference can take place
MSM
sensory memory
stores information from each of the 5 senses
iconic register-visual
echoic register-acoustic
information lasts from short amount of time(less then half a second)
MSM
shot-term memory
capacity-miller-7+/-2
duration-12-30 seconds
maintenance rehearsal to transfer to long-term memory
MSM
long-term memory
unlimited
potentially permanent
to retrieve information has to transferred back into STM called retrieval
strengths of MSM
Baddeley- mix up words with similar sounds when using STM but mix up words with similar meanings in LTM
weaknesses of MSM
KF
studies use artificial stimuli(ecological validity)
doesn’t explain flashbulb memories
weakness of MSM
case of KF
shallice and warrington amnesiac patient stm damage memory of digits very poor aurally but recall better when read digits himself LTM wasn't affected
strength of WMM
case of HM
removed hippocampus to stop epileptic fit
lost LTM
couldn’t make new memories
memory eroded with no hippocampus as can’t be retained
asked to draw a start in the middle of the other 2 stars, got better after repeating
different memory stores- procedural episodic and semantic
case of clive wearing
sever form of amnesia
could remember to play the piano
types of long-term memory
episodic
semantic
procedural
types of long term memory
episodic
personal event
includes memories of when the events occurred and of the people, objects, places and behaviours involved
memories from this store have to be received consciously and with effort
types of long term memory
semantic
knowledge of the world
facts and knowledge of what words and concepts mean
these usually need to be consciously recalled
types of long term memory
procedural
how we do things
includes our memories of learned skills
usually recall these memories without making a conscious/deliberate effort
strengths of LTM
scientific-objective
supportive research, HM and clive wearing
weaknesses of LTM
case studies
cohen and squire- episodic and semantic are one store
working memory model
Baddeley and Hitch
STM is made up of central executive, phonological loop, episodic buffer and visuo-spatial sketchpad
WMM
central executive
co-ordinates the activities of the 3 sub-systems
allocates processing resources to those activities
WMM
episodic buffer
added later
brings together material from the toher sub-systmes into a single memory rather then separate strands
provides a bridge between working memory and long term memory
WMM
phonological loop
auditory information
phonological store- words you hear
articulatory store-allows maintenance rehearsal (capacity believed to be 2 seconds)
WMM
Visuo-spatial sketchpad
processes visual and spatial information
visual cache- stores visual data
inner scribe-records arrangement of objects in the visual field
Baddeleys research
the central executive
asked participants to thing of random digits either on its own or by: reciting the alphabet/ counting from 1/ alternating between letters and numbers
generated number steam was less random in condition 3- were competing for the same central executive resources
baddeley et al reseatch
visuospatial sketchpad
participants were given a visual tracking task(track a moving line with a pointer) at the same time they were asked to either: describe the angle of the letter F or to preform a verbal task
strengths of the WMM
research support-KF
support from brain scanning-objective, more activity in the prefrontal cortex increase as task gets harder-Baddeley
weaknesses of the WMM
less reliable as episodic buffer added later
minimal research for the central executive
retrieval failure
occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues available to access the memory
encoding specificity principle
Tulving and Thompson
if a cue of to help retrieve a memory it needs to be present at encoding and at retrieval
context dependent forgetting
environmental cues
state dependent forgetting
emotional cues
research into context dependent forgetting
Godden and Baddeley
divers were given a list of words to recall and learn. 4 conditions:
learn on land recall in water
learn on land recall on land
learn in water recall in water
learn in water recall in land
accurate recall was 40% less when 2 conditions didn’t match
research into state dependent forgetting
carter and cassaday
participants were given a hay fever tablet which made them slightly drowsy 4 conditions:
learn on drug recall on it
learn on drug recall off it
learn off drug recall on drug
learn off drug recall off it
performance worse when 2 conditions didn’t match
strengths of retrieval failure
practical application(revisions) supportive research
weaknesses of retrieval failure
tasks low in ecological validity
can’t explain all memory- procedural
baddeley-ESP is impossible to test for
interference theory
proactive interference
older memories already stored disrupt the recall of newer memories
degree of forgetting is greater when memories are similar
interference theory
retroactive interference
a newer memories disrupts the recall of an older memory already stores
the degree of forgetting is higher when memories are similar
research into interference theory
McGeoch and McDonald
participants learnt a list of words until they were 100% accurate and then learnt a new list
words with similar meaning
words with opposite meaning
nonsense syllables
3 digit numbers
no new list
words of similar meaning produced worst recall of first list
strengths of interference
lab experience-increased validity
supportive evidence
construct validity(Baddeley and Hitch rugby players)
interference
Baddeley and Hitch
asked rugby players to recall the teams they played that season
accurate recall depended on amount of teams played
weaknesses of interference
artificial stimuli (lack mundane realism) order effects-boredom
eye witness testimony
experiment 1
Loftus and Palmer
45 American students watched a series of car crashes
participants were asked to recall what had happened and how fast was the car going when they (smashed, collided, bumped, hit, contacted)?
eye witness testimony
experiment 1 findings
loftus and palmer
smashed-40.8mph collided- 39.3mph bumped- 38.1mph hit-34mph contacted-31.8mph
eye witness testimony
experiment 2
loftus and palmer
150 students were shown a car driving followed by a series of accidents
then asked how fast was the car going when they(smashed/hit)
control group asked nothing
then asked if they saw broken glass when there was no broken glass
eye witness testimony
experiment 2 findings
loftus and palmer
smashed/saw broken glass-16 hit/saw broken glass-7 control/saw broken glass-6 smashed/no broken glass-34 hit/no broken glass-43 control/no broken glass-44
strengths of loftus and palmer
lab experiment- increased validity practical application(memory isn't reliable)
weaknesses of loftus and palmer
reduced validity- watched a film
unethical
eye witness testimony
response bias explanation
the wording of a question has no effect on memory but influences how a participant answers
eye witness testimony
substitution explanation
the wording of a question changes the participants memory
critical verb alters the memory
EWT
post event discussion
Gabbert et al
participants in pairs watched a video of crime from different view points and then discussed what they saw before
71% recalled aspects of the event they didn’t see
control group
strengths of misleading information
real life application
use of control group-increased validity
weaknesses of misleading information
individual differences
ethics
anxiety and EWT
Yerkes and Dodson
Deffenbacher
inverted U
lower levels of anxiety produce low levels of recall
increased anxiety improves recall up to a point
