Memory Flashcards
steps of learning and memory
- Encoding of information into memory;
- Storage of information within the memory system;
- Retrieval of stored information from memory.
iconic store
brief sensory store for visual information
George Sperling 1960
experiments to understand iconic store :
12 lettres in grid array
flashed for .. ms
“partial report” condition: participants had to report either the top, middle or bottom row of letters
able to report most of the letters from the requested line, but only if the delay between removal of the array and presentation of the prompt was ~1 s or less.
–> information in iconic storage decays in less than a second.
echoic store
sensory store for auditors modality
Anne Treisman 1964
participants presented with an auditory message to one ear
asked to repeat the message back aloud while ignoring a second message being presented to the other ear.
If the second, ignored, message was actually identical to the first but started at a different time, participants only noticed they were the same if they started within 2 seconds of each other.
–> persistence of unattended information in the echoic store is ~2 s, otherwise information decays.
George Miller ( 1965 )
capacity ( span ) of short term memory
recall of strings correctly up to a length of 7 +- 2 digits
also letters/ words
–> short-term memory : 7 integrated units of information ( chunks )
short-term store:
Atkinson & Shiffrin
information currently held in mind
limited capacity
retention of information in short term memory
rehearsing
longer in short-term –> higher chance in long term
Rundus 1971
hypothesis: longer in short-term –> higher chance in long term
20 words :
rehearse the list out loud.
asked to recall the words –> more frequently a word had been rehearsed, the more likely it was to be recalled on the word recall test.
The exception to this was the last few words in the list, which always had a high likelihood of recall irrespective of the amount of rehearsal. the recency effect
recency effect
observation that the last few items in a list are often much better remembered than items from the middle of the list
last few items still being present in the short-term store from the end of list presentation
supported by Glanzer & Cunitz ( 1966 )
–> recency effect eliminated if participants counted backwards prior to recall –> information displaced from short term memory –> supports link with short term memory
Peterson & Peterson (1959)
duration of short-term memory
remember a 3-letter stimulus for a few seconds while counting backwards in threes. The ability to remember the stimulus diminished rapidly, suggesting that information decays from short-term memory within a matter of seconds.
however, Waugh&Norman ( 1965)
Waugh&Norman ( 1965)
remember a 3-letter stimulus for a few seconds while counting backwards in threes. The ability to remember the stimulus diminished rapidly,
manipulated the speed with which digits that were to be remembered were presented to participants and found that digit recall was (more or less) unaffect
–> short- term memory forgetting is due to interference from exposure to additional information, rather than the passage of time
primacy effect
Earlier items in a list also tend to be better remembered than those in the middle
Atkinson & Shiffrin : items are recalled from long-term memory.
Glanzer & Cunitz :
primacy effect was unaffected by counting backwards after list presentation –> supports. hypothesis of long term memory
Criticism Multi Store Model
processing in the short-term store is required for encoding into long- term memory
underestimates importance of depth of processing ( vs time in short term memory ) for information to be stored in long term memory
short-term and long-term stores are unitary, operating in a single, uniform way
patient KF
defective short-term memory (digit span)
but preserved long-term learning and recall
–> evidence against claim that need short for long
Warrington & Shallice (1972):
worse short-term memory for auditory letters and digits than for visual stimuli, suggesting that there may be distinct short-term memory stores for different kinds of material
Baddeley & Hitch (1974)
dual-task methodology:
auditory rehearsal of digits did not affect the number of errors made in a concurrent grammatical reasoning task.
–> distinction between an auditory-verbal short-term store and a central information processing system involved in reasoning.
Working Memory Model
Baddeley & Hitch (1974) to address limitations of multi-store model : determined on basis of numerous dual-task experiments
4 primary components:
an auditory-verbal phonological loop
–> short-term storage of speech-based information
a visuo-spatial sketchpad
–> short-term storage of spatial and visual information
a multimodal episodic buffer –> holds and integrates information from the phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad and long-term memory;
a modality-free central executive
–> responsible for selecting and initiating cognitive processing routines.
phonological loop
a slave system for the temporary retention of spoken verbal material such as a phone number
storage capacity determined by rate of rehearsal ( Baddeley 1975)
visiospatial sketchpad
a slave system for the temporary storage and manipulation of spatial and visual information, such as the location of a phone number on the page of a phone book
episodic buffer
a limited capacity system for integrating phonological and visuospatial representations with information from long-term memory
central executive
a modality-free processing system involved in coordinating the operation of the other systems for performing demanding cognitive tasks
Robbins et al. (1996)
involvement of working memory components in chess move selection
testing the effect of several concurrent tasks: rapid word repetition, sequential key pressing and random number generation.
The key pressing task (which involved the visuo-spatial sketchpad) and the random number generation task (which involved the central executive) affected the quality of chess moves selected,
word repetition task (which involved the phonological loop) had no effect.
–> chess move selection involves the central executive and visuospatial sketchpad, but not the phonological loop.
phonological similarity effect
Baddeley (1966):
serial recall of a list of phonologically similar words (such as FEE, HE, KNEE, etc.) was significantly worse than from a list of phonologically dissimilar words (such as BAY, HOE, IT, etc.), whereas visual or semantic similarity had little effect on recall
- -> speech-based representations used to store words
- -> recall requires discrimination between memory traces
- -> more difficult if words sound same
–> attributed to confusions between similar representations in the phonological store
world length effect
Baddeley et al 1975
recalling long words worse than recalling same words
mean digit span differs across cultures:
digit span in speakers of Chinese (in which digits are relatively quick to say) is greater than in speakers of Welsh (in which digits take longer to say)
depends on phonological loop:
word length effect eliminated if participants mouthed words ( articulatory suppression )
- -> phonological storage capacity determined by rate of rehearsal
- -> time taken to rehearse longer words via the articulatory control process induce world length effect
