Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Psychology set 1 > Memory > Flashcards

Memory Flashcards

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

What is the coding of;
(i) STM
(ii) LTM
And who found it?

A

STM = acoustic, e.g. cat, cab
LTM = semantic, e.g. large, big
Baddeley (1966)

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

What’s an evaluative limitation of Baddeley’s (1966) work?

A

It used artificial material:

- no personal meaning, may use semantic for STM if meaningful –> generalise?

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

What is the capacity of the STM?

A

1) Jacob (1887):
- researcher recalls digits until they can’t be recalled correctly.
- = 9.3 numbers, 7.3 digits on average.
2) Miller (1956):
- span of 7+/-2 = improved by chunking

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

What’s an evaluative limitation of Jacob’s (1887) work?

A

Conducted a long time ago:

  • early research lacked control of EVs, e.g. distraction.
  • effects validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What’s an evaluative limitation of Miller’s (1956) work?

A

Cowan (2001) concluded it was about 4 chunks, so lower end of 7+/-2 chunks.

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

What is the duration of the STM?

A

Petersen and Petersen (1959):

  • 24 students given consonant syllables to remember and 3 digit number to count backwards from.
  • = 80% after 3s, 3% after 18s
  • = 18-30s
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What’s an evaluative limitation of Petersen + Petersen (1959) work?

A

Used artificial stimuli:

  • syllables don’t reflect real life memories.
  • external validity, phone numbers?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What’s the duration of the LTM?

A

Bahrick et al. (1975):

  • American participants ages 17-74 face recognition and free recall of high school photos.
  • = 40 years after = 70% in photo recognition, free recall less accurate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What’s an evaluative positive of Bahrick et al. (1975) work?

A

External validity:

  • real life meaningful memories.
  • Shepard (1967) found recall was lower if pictures wer meaningless
  • any CVs?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the 3 types of LTM?

A

1) Episodic memory
2) Semantic memory
3) Procedural memory

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

What is the episodic memory?

A

Events from our lives, e.g. breakfast this morning.
- remember WHEN they happened, involve several elements such as people, place, also a conscious effort is needed to recall them

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

What is the semantic memory?

A

Our knowledge of the world, e.g. taste of an orange.

- not time stamped, less personal –> knowledge based.

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

What is the procedural memory?

A

Our actions and skills, e.g. riding a bike.

- recall effortless or without awareness, but hard to explain

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

Give 2 evaluative strengths of different types of LTM

A

1) Supporting evidence for episodic memory:
- HM + Clive Wearing both had difficulty recalling past events; but semantic memory almost unaffected.
- = one damaged, another unaffected.
2) Brain scans show different stores:
- Tulving et al. (1994).
- participants performed various tasks whilst being scanned with a PET scanner.
- semantic in left prefrontal cortex, episodic in right.

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

Give 2 evaluative limitations of different types of LTM

A

1) Problems with clinical evidence:
- based off case studies about damage done to memory.
- cannot control variables like location of brain damage.
- generalise?
2) Actually only two types of LTM?
- Cohen + Squire (1980)
- episodic and semantic together in one store called ‘declarative memory’ as they are consciously recalled.
- procedural different, and non-declarative
- = what is exact difference?

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

Who made the Multi-Store model of memory?

A

Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q 
How does stimuli pass into the sensory register, and what is the;
- Duration
- Capacity
- Coding 
(of the SR)
A

Passes into SR using our senses.
D - less than 1/2s
Ca - high
Co - depends on sense

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

How does SR pass info on to STM?

A

By attention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q 
What is the:
- Duration
- Capacity
- Coding
(of the STM)
A

D - 18-30s
Ca - 5-9 items
Co - acoustic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How does STM pass info on to LTM?

A

By maintenance rehearsal.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q 
What is the:
- Duration
- Capacity
- Coding
(of the LTM)
A

D - up to a lifetime
Ca - up to a lifetime
Co - semantic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Give evaluative weakness of the MSM

A

1) Evidence suggesting more than one type of STM:
- Shallice + Warrington (1970)
- KF had amnesia, STM for digits was poor but when listening but better when he read them to himself.
- = one for auditory, one for visual?
2) MSM only explains one type of rehearsal:
- Craik + Watkins *1973) suggest there is;
(i) maintenance = already in MSM
(ii) elaborative = linking info. to existing knowledge
3) Research supporting MSM uses artificial stimuli:
- e.g. digits in Petersen+ Petersen’s (1959) study.
- memories about facts, places, people etc not random letters.
- MSM lacking external validity, lab only?
4) MSM oversimplifies LTM:
- evidence to suggest LTM is not just one store.
- facts of the world (semantic), riding a bike (procedural)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Who made the Working Memory Model?

A

Baddeley and Hitch (1974)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What bridges the Central Executive and the LTM?

A

The Episodic buffer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What does the Central Executive do?

A

Monitors data and allocates slave systems the relevant tasks; dependent on sense.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What comes under the Phonological Loop, and who do they do?

A

1) Articulatory Control System
= allows maintenance rehearsal to keep it in WM
2) Phonological store
= words you hear

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What other slave system is there apart from the Phonological loop, and what does it do?

A

The Visuo-spatial sketchpad:

= stores visual and/or spatial info, such as how many windows are on a house.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Which case study supports the separate STM stores of the WMM?

A

Shallice + Warrington (1970) - KF had brain damage.
- Poor verbal ability but could process verbal info.
= phonological loop damaged; others intact.
- unique experiences however?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Apart from case studies, give 2 evaluative strengths of the WMM

A

1) Dual task performance studies support the VSS:
- Baddeley et al. (1975).
- found participants had difficulty performing two visual tasks than doing a visual and verbal task.
= both compete for same attention.
2) Support from brain scanning studies:
- Braver et al. (1997).
- participants did tasks involving the CE while being scanned.
- = found prefrontal cortex worked harder as the task harder –> physical location?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Give an evaluative criticism of the WMM

A

Lack of clarity over CE:

  • doesn’t really explain anything.
  • more than simply just paying attention
  • separate components?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What is the definition of forgetting?

A

The inability to get access to memories in the LTM even though they’re available.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What are the two types of interference?

A

1) Proactive interference: old memories disrupting new ones.
2) Retroactive interference: new memories disrupting old ones.

Interference worse when memories are similar.

33
Q

Who did research into the effects of similarity on interference?

A

McGeoch and McDonald (1931)

34
Q

Describe McGeoch and McDonald’s (1931) study

A
  • Participants asked to recall a list of words 100% accurately, they were then given a new list of words.
  • 6 different lists, e.g. antonyms, synonyms.
    Found:
  • Similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall.
  • Different material increased the mean number of items recalled.
35
Q

Give 2 evaluative strengths of interference as an explanation of forgetting

A

1) Lab study demonstrates interference in memory:
- show both types of interferences are likely causes of forgetting.
- labs control EVs –> more valid
2) Research support in real life:
- Baddeley + Hitch (1977).
- Asked rugby players to recall every rugby team they had played, week by week.
- = recall depended on games played in meantime, not how long ago.

36
Q

Give 2 evaluative limitations of interference as an explanation of forgetting

A

1) Research uses artificial materials:
- different from things we remember in everyday life, e.g. someone’s face.
- lab explanation but not ‘every day’ forgetting?
2) Time allowed between learning in research:
- time for learning words very low.
- lab studies reduce experience into short time period.
- may not reflect how we learn and remember in real life?
- can we generalise from labs to real life?

37
Q

What can a lack of cues cause?

A

Retrieval failure

38
Q

What is the ‘encoding specificity principle’ and who came up with it?

A

(i) Tulving (1983).

(ii) Cues help retrieval if the same cues are present at encoding and at retrieval.

39
Q

What are the two types of cues that can help retrieval?

A

1) Context-dependent forgetting: external/environmental cue e.g. weather.
2) State-dependent forgetting: internal cue, state of mind e.g. drunk.

40
Q

Who’s the key study for context-dependent forgetting?

A

Godden and Baddeley (1975)

41
Q

What was the procedure for Godden + Baddeley’s study?

A
  • The cues were the location of learning and recall; in this case land or underwater.
  • The context varied where they were asked to learn and recall the word lists.
42
Q

What were the findings of Godden + Baddeley’s study?

A
  • If the environmental context of learning and recall did not match, the accuracy was 40% lower than if they did.
  • When external cues at learning were different from the ones at recall, this led to retrieval failure.
43
Q

Give 2 evaluative strengths of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

A

1) Range of evidence supports this explanation:
- e.g. Godden + Baddeley’s research with deep-sea divers.
- Eysenck (2010) - most important/main reason for forgetting in LTM –> increased validity.

2) Context-related cues have everyday applications:
- common in every day life, e.g. going upstairs and forgetting what you went upstairs for.
- shows = when we have trouble remembering something, we should go and revisit environment in which you first experienced.
- also seen is ‘context reinstatement’ of cognitive interview.

44
Q

Give 2 evaluative limitations of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

A

1) Context effects not strong in real life:
- Baddeley (1966) says contexts have to be very different to notice a significant effect
- e.g. learning in one room, and recalling in a different room would not have a significant effect.
- much real-life application?

2) ESP (Tulving) cannot be tested:
- leads to tautology.
- when a cue produces recall, we assume cue must have been present at learning.
- if there’s no recall, we assume cue was not encoded.

45
Q

What are the two types of consequences come from leading questions?

A

1) Response-bias = influences kind of answer given.

2) Substitution = interference with eyewitness memory; distorting accuracy.

46
Q

Who’s the key study for leading questions?

A

Loftus + Palmer (1974)

47
Q

What was the procedure of Loftus + Palmer’s study?

A
  • 45 participants watched clips of car accidents.
  • Each asked ‘how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’
  • 5 groups, all had a different verb = contacted-smashed.
48
Q

What were the findings of Loftus + Palmer’s study?

A
  • Contacted produced a response of 31.8mph.
  • Smashed produced a response of 40.5mph
    = Smashed suggested a faster speed than contacted.
49
Q

What are the two possible consequences of discussing an event after it happened?

A

1) Memory contamination = mixing of memories with others.

2) Memory conformity = go along with others for NSI + ISI.

50
Q

Who is the key study for post-event discussion?

A

Gabbert et al. (2003)

51
Q

What was the procedure of Gabbert et al.’s (2003) study?

A
  • Paired participants watched a videoed crime, but each saw different elements of the video.
  • Both discussed it, after watching it, then individually recalled.
52
Q

What were the findings of Gabbert et al.’s (2003) study?

A
  • 71% recalled aspects of the event that they did not see, but had from a PED.
  • Control group; no discussion = no errors.
53
Q

How has research into misleading info had real-life applications?

A
  • Practical use for police officers; consequences of using inaccurate EWT can be very serious.
  • Loftus says police need to be careful about how to phrase questions; so not to distort memory.
  • Improves legal system works.
54
Q

Give a limitation of Loftus + Palmer’s study?

A

Used artificial materials:

  • watching clips of accidents very different from experiencing it.
  • Yuille + Cutshall (1986) found witnesses of a roberry had high accuracy.
55
Q

Who suggested there may be individual differences in accuracy of EWT, and what do he/she/they mean?

A
  • Anastasi + Rhodes (2006)
  • Found that older people were less accurate than younger people when giving eyewitness testimony; but all age groups were more accurate when identifying their own age.
56
Q

How does research into EWT lack external validity?

A
  • Foster et al. (1994) - say what you remember as an eyewitness is more important than remembering in real life
    = b/c the testimony may lead to a successful conviction.
  • Same not true for studies?
57
Q

Which 2 psychologists say anxiety has a negative effect on memory?

A

Johnson + Scott (1974)

58
Q

Describe the procedure of Johnson + Scott’s study?

A
  • Participants sat in a waiting room, and heard an argument where one person immerged.
  • Low-anxiety situation = a man comes through with pen + greasy hands.
  • High-anxiety situation = heated argument, followed by someone holding a paper knife with blood on it.
59
Q

What were the findings of Johnson + Scott’s study?

A
  • 49% of participants in low anxiety identified him successfully.
  • 33% of participants in high anxiety identified him correctly
60
Q

Why was there a lower percentage of recall in the high anxiety situation?

A

Weapon-focus effect; source of danger and anxiety.

61
Q

Which 2 psychologists say anxiety has a positive effect on the memory?

A

Yuille + Cutshall (1986)

62
Q

Describe the procedure of Yuille + Cutshall’s study?

A
  • Real-life crime, where the thief was shot dead.
  • 21 witnesses, 13 agreed to participate.
  • Participants interviewed 4-5 months after incident.
63
Q

What were the findings of Yuille + Cutshall’s study?

A
  • Very accurate, little change after 5 months for main aspects.
  • Participants who reported the highest levels of stress were most accurate;
    = 88% compared to 75% for the least-stressed witnesses.
64
Q

Who came up with the Inverted-U theory?

A

Yerkes and Dodson (1908)

65
Q

According to the Inverted-U theory, the relationship between performance and arosual/stress is what?

A

Curvilinear.

66
Q

Give 2 limitations of Johnson + Scott’s study

A

1) May test surprise not anxiety:
- may focus on weapon because they are surprised not scared.
- Pickel (1998) - used scissors, handgun, wallet and raw chicken: accuracy was poorer for unusualness
= effect of anxiety EWT is what exactly?

2) Ethical issues:
- creating anxiety purely for research purposes
- real-life studies beneficial; psychologist don’t have to created traumatic event.
- don’t challenge findings, just how research is conducted.

67
Q

Give 1 limitation of Yuille + Cutshall’s study

A

1) Field studies lack control of variables:
- things may happen in the meantime which researchers cannot control, e.g. discussing event with media.
- EVs may be responsible for (in)accuracy.

68
Q

How is the Inverted-U theory too simplistic?

A
  • Anxiety has many elements inc. cognitive, emotional, behavioural and physical.
  • I-U only assumes poor performance is linked to physiological arousal.
69
Q

Who came up with the different elements of the cognitive interview?

A

Fisher + Geiselmann (1992)

70
Q

What is the cognitive interview based off?

A

Psychological insight into how memory works

71
Q

What does ‘report everything’ mean?

A
  • Include all details of the event, even if they’re irrelevant = may trigger other memories.
72
Q

What does ‘reinstate the context’ mean?

A
  • Return to the crime and imagine the environment, based on context-dependent forgetting.
73
Q

What does ‘reverse the order’ mean?

A
  • Events recalled in a different chronological order; prevents people using expectations rather than actual events and prevents dishonesty.
74
Q

What does ‘change the perspective’ mean?

A
  • Recalling from other people’s perspectives; prevents the influence of expectations and schema on recall.
75
Q

Give an evaluative strength of the CI?

A

1) Some elements are useful:
- Milne + Bull (2002) found each element was equally valuable.
- Combo of ‘report everything’ and ‘reinstate the context’ produced the best recall than others individually.

76
Q

How do Kebbel + Wagstaff criticise the CI

A
  • Much more time-consuming than a standard police interview.

- Requires special training; forces can only spare a few hours.

77
Q

How do Kohnken et al. (1999) criticise CI

A
  • Produces an increase in inaccurate info as well as correct info.
  • 81% increase in correct info; 61% increase in incorrect info.
    = treat all info cautiously?
78
Q

How might research into CI be unreliable?

A
  • Variations of it are used of CI, enhanced CI, and police forces use their own methods.
    = conclusions?

Psychology set 1 (9 decks)

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