Memory -

Question 1

Who did research into capacity of STM?

Answer 1

Miller (1956) - 7 (+ or - 2) trigrams
People remember best by chunking.
Jacobs (1887) - mean span of digits was 9.3. Mean span for letters was 7.3.

Question 2

What is the capacity of LTM?

Answer 2

Infinite

Question 3

Who studied the duration of STM?

Answer 3

Peterson and Peterson (1959) - did the recall test

18 second duration without rehearsal.

Question 4

Who studied duration of LTM?

Answer 4

Bahrick (1975) - did studied on recall of people using yearbooks. Recognition of 90% of faces after 15 years.
Recall dropped to 70% after 48 years.

Question 5

Who studied encoding of STM?

Answer 5

Conrad (1964) - Acoustic encoding (remember better thorough sound)

Question 6

Who studied encoding of LTM?

Answer 6

Baddeley (1966) - Semantic encoding (remember better through meaning)

Question 7

Evaluation of capacity, duration and encoding studies?

Answer 7

\+ reliable,
\+ strictly controlled, 
\+ high internal validity,
\+ cause and effect, 
\+ other studies got similar results

• Dated,
• extraneous variables,
• lacks mundane realism, ARTIFICIAL.

Question 8

What are the 2 main models of memory?

Answer 8

Multi - store model of memory (Atkinson and Shiffrin)

Working memory model (Baddeley and Hitch)

Question 9

What is the multi - store model of memory?

Answer 9

By Atkinson and Shiffrin. Suggests that incoming data passes through a sensory store, into STM (if attention is paid). If rehearsed, information is passed to LTM.

Question 10

Evaluation of multi - store memory model?

Answer 10

+ Case studies support idea that STM and LTM are separate stores (KF, LTM still in tact but impaired STM)
+ Idea that STM and LTM differ in terms of encoding, capacity and duration is supported (all studies on these)

• Too simplistic (there is likely to be more than one type of LTM e.g procedural, episodic etc. )
• People don’t always spend time rehearsing information but it still goes into LTM e.g smells (Tulving 1967)
• Information doesn’t only go in one direction (Groot 1966, STM was influenced by LTM.

Question 11

What is the Working Memory Model?

Answer 11

Baddeley and Hitch.
Suggests that our memory consists of a general executive which monitors incoming data, makes decisions and allocates slave systems. Has limited capacity.
One slave system is the phonological loop which deals with auditory info. Divided into phonological store (stores words you hear) and articulatory process (allows maintenance rehearsal).
Second slave system is the visuo spatial sketch pad, stores visual info (limited capacity, Baddeley says 3/4 objects)
There is also the episodic buffer which integrates processing of slave systems and records order of events. This then links to LTM.

Question 12

Evaluation of Working Memory Model?

Answer 12

+ Brain scans support (different parts of brain light up for verbal and visual tasks)
+ Case studies eg KF (poor auditory but good visual memory)
+ Evidence for phonological loop (Baddeley’s 1975 word length effect experiment)
Evidence for visuo spatial store (Baddeley’s 1973 tracking task experiment)

• function of central exclusive never been clarified.
• Central exclusive difficult to investigate (capacity never been measured)
• Concentrates on STM (not comprehensive explanation)
• Doesn’t explain how practice and time changes processing ability.

Question 13

What are the different types of LTM?

Answer 13

Episodic memory (memory of events), have to be recalled consciously. 
Semantic memory (store for knowledge eg, language and words), have to be recalled consciously.
Procedural memory (automatic and learned skills), recalled unconsciously.

Question 14

Evaluation of types of LTM?

Answer 14

+ Case Studies (Clive Wearing, still had procedural memory)
+ Brain Scan evidence
+ Real life application

• Problems with case studies (lack of control, cannot be generalised)
• Cohen and Squirrel (1980) - episodic and semantic link, 2 types of LTM.

Question 15

What are the explanations for forgetting?

Answer 15

Interference theory (one memory blocks another)
Retrieval failure theory (forgetting because of lack of cues)

Question 16

What is the interference theory?

Answer 16

The idea that one memory gets in the way of another leading to us forgetting it. There are 2 types of interference:
- Proactive (old memories disrupt new ones)
- Retroactive (new memories disrupt old ones)
There is also evidence for the effect of similarity (McGeoch and McDonald - similar words create more interference)

Question 17

Evaluation of interference theory?

Answer 17

+ evidence from highly controlled lab studies
+ Real - life studies (Baddeley and Hitch, Rugby players)

• Artificial materials (list of words not like everyday memory)
• May overemphasise interference as explanation
• Interference may be overcome using cues.

Question 18

What is the retrieval failure theory?

Answer 18

The idea we forget due to a lack of cues.
Tulving said that cues are most effective if present at coding and at retrieval, so if sufficient cues aren’t present at this time, we will forget. This is usually a meaningful link.
2 types of forgetting:
Context - dependent forgetting (Godden and Baddeley - deep sea - divers) recall is better when external context is matched.
State dependent forgetting (Carter and Cassaday - anti - histamine) recall better when internal states matched.

Question 19

Evaluation of retrieval failure theory?

Answer 19

+ supporting evidence (Eysenck claims retrieval failure is most important reason for forgetting).
+ Real - life applications

• questions context effects (no forgetting unless -
  context very different eg land and water, Baddeley)
• The absence of cues affects recall but not recognition.

Question 20

What has research into eyewitness testimony told us?

Answer 20

Witnesses often inaccurate in recall and there is little relationship between accuracy of recall and confidence.

Question 21

What did Loftus and Palmer (1974) study? EWT

Answer 21

Studied the role of leading questions into accuracy of EWT.
45 students were shown 7 films of different traffic accidents and then asked to fill in questionnaire about accident with one crucial question about how fast cars were going when they hit each other.
- Key word were changed - smashed, collided, bumped or contacted in place of hit. (one group was given hit).
FINDINGS - mean speed calculated for each group.
Smashed group estimated highest speed - 41 mph.
Contacted group estimated lowest speed - 32 mph.
LEADING QUESTIONS DO AFFECT EWT.

Question 22

Evaluation of Loftus and Palmers EWT study?

Answer 22

+ real life applications - improved the legal system and the way the question witnesses.

• lacks ecological validity - lab experiment, artificial tasks.
• individual differences - Anastasia and Rhodes (2006) age differences, older people have worse recall - people better and recall people of own age (own age bias).
• demand characteristics - lab experiment.
• consequences of false EWT can be severe.

Question 23

What is post - event discussion?

Answer 23

When witnesses discuss the crime with each other.
Decreases accuracy of EWT as they share information with each other which may not be accurate.
– Gabbert (2003) - 71% recalled aspects they didn’t see as a result of discussions compared to 0% from control group.

Question 24

What is Loftus (1978) other study into misleading questions? EWT

Answer 24

Stop and yield signs. - photo before accident
One group was shown photos with junction with stop sign and the other a yield sign.
They were then asked questions that were either consistent with the slides they saw or contradicting – then shown slides again and had to pick correct one.
FINDINGS - 75% of those with consistent questions picked correct slide compared to 41% with misleading questions.

Question 25

What evidence is there that anxiety has a negative effect on recall?

Answer 25

Johnson and Scott (1976): fake lab experiment.
P’s sat in waiting room and hear argument in next room.
Low-anxiety condition - man walks in carrying a pen covered with grease.
High-anxiety condition - same argument but accompanied with sound of broken glass: man walks in with paper knife covered in blood.
FINDINGS - low-anxiety condition - 49% could identify man
high-anxiety condition - 33% could identify man.
WEAPON FOCUS EFFECT.

Question 26

What evidence is there that anxiety has a positive effect on recall?

Answer 26

Christianson and Hubinette (1993): real - life bank robbery.
58 witnesses of real life bank robbery were questioned.
FINDINGS - those who had been threatened in some way had more accurate recall than onlookers - still true 15 months later.

Question 27

What is the Yerkes - Dodson law?

Answer 27

Deffenbacher (1983) applied this to EWT.
Recall improves with increased anxiety up to optimal point - after that, recall declines.
(small/medium increase in anxiety is positive but high levels have negative recall effect).

Question 28

What is the weapon focus effect?

Answer 28

Presence of a weapon decreases accuracy of recall as they are focussed on looking at the weapon and not the person or anything else.

Question 29

Evaluation of anxiety affecting EWT?

Answer 29

• weapon focus effect may be irrelevant - surprise rather than anxiety. (Pickel 1998, unusualness of item).
• field studies lack control - extraneous variables, post event discussions.
• ethical issues - creating psychological harm.
• yerkes - dodson law too simplistic - anxiety is complex but it only links one thing to recall.
• demand characteristics - lab experiment.

Question 30

What is the cognitive interview?

Answer 30

Fisher and Gieselman (1992) - to improve EWT and police techniques. (based on psychological research)
4 components:
1. report everything - every detail even if it seems irrelevant.
2. reinstate the context - interviewee mentally recreate environment (context-dependent forgetting).
3. reverse order - prevent people from reporting their expectations of event.
4. change perspective - recall from other perspectives.

Question 31

Evaluation of cognitive interview?

Answer 31

+ research support - Kohnken (1999) meta-analysis 50 studies, increase of 34% in amount of correct information.
+ some elements more valuable than others - combination of report everything and reinstatement produced good recall, makes it more likely to be used (Milne and Bull 2002)

• time consuming - rapport is needed, specific training (police reluctant to use)
• variations are used - police use different methods of CI so not as effective.
• could increase recall of inaccurate information - Kohnken (1999), 81% increase of accurate information but also 61% increase of inaccurate information.