Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Psychology Year 12 Content > Memory > Flashcards

Memory Flashcards

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

Coding

A

-the format in which info is stored in various memory stores

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

Capacity

A

-the amount of info that can be held in a memory store

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

Duration

A

-the length of time info can be held in a memory store

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

STM summary

  • coding
  • capacity
  • duration
A
  • coding = acoustic
  • capacity = 7 (+/- 2)
  • duration = 18-30secs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

LTM summary

  • coding
  • capacity
  • duration
A
  • coding = semantic
  • capacity = unknown
  • duration = unlimited (lasting a lifetime)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Baddeley (1966) - Coding in STM & LTM, acoustic/semantic

  • procedure
  • findings
  • limitation
A
  • acoustically similar words (e.g. cat, cab) or dissimilar (e.g. pit, few)
  • semantically similar words (e.g. large, big) or dissimilar (e.g. good, hot)
  • immediate recall worse with acoustically similar words; therefore STM codes acoustically
  • recall after 20 mins worse with semantically similar words; therefore LTM codes semantically
  • limitation, words used in study had no personal meaning to participants, however when processing meaningful info people may use semantic coding even for STM; therefore results cannot be generalised so low ecological validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Jacobs (1887) - Capacity of STM

  • procedure
  • findings
  • limitations
A
  • digit span, researcher reads 4 digits and increases until participant cannot recall order correctly
  • on average, participants repeated back 9.3 numbers & 7.3 letters in correct order immediately after presented
  • capacity of STM = 7 (+/-2)
  • used in real world for car registration plates & postcodes
  • limitation, early research lacked adequate control of extraneous variables (e.g. some participants may have been distracted & so didn’t perform as well), results not valid as there were confounding variables that weren’t controlled
  • limitation, lacks ecological validity (cannot be easily generalised to real-life situations)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Wilder Penfield Casestudy (1891-1976) - Capacity of LTM

  • procedure
  • findings
  • limitation
A
  • wanted to locate source of seizure activity in brain, by opening patients’ skulls & stimulating temporal lobes of brain with electricity
  • could elicit meaningful, integrated responses (e.g. memory including sound, movement & colour)
  • found capacity of memory bigger than believed, could be unlimited
  • limitation, unethical as patients signed up to have seizures looked at, but due to experiment may have had to remember traumatic memories; psychological trauma
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Peterson & Peterson (1959) - Duration of STM

  • procedure
  • findings
  • limitation
A
  • tested length of time items could be held in STM when rehearsal was prevented
  • 24 students each given a trigram (e.g. YCG) to remember & a 3 digit number to count backwards from in 3s
  • after 3sec interval, average recall 80% correctly
  • after 18sec interval, average recall 3% correctly
  • suggests duration of STM without rehearsal is approx 18-30secs
  • limitation, lacks mundane realism, as remembering trigrams isn’t meaningful, study lacked external validity; however study not totally irrelevant as we sometimes remember meaningless things like phone numbers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Bahrick et al. (1975) - Duration of LTM

  • procedure
  • findings
  • limitation
  • strength
A
  • 392 American participants
  • recognition test, 50 photos from participants’ high school yearbook
  • free recall test, participants listed names of their graduating class
  • after 15 years, 90% accurate at photo recognition; 60% at free recall
  • after 48 years, 70% accurate at photo recognition, 30% at free recall
  • free recall less accurate due to no memory trigger
  • limitation, confounding variables not controlled (e.g. participants may have looked at yearbook photos & rehearsed memories over the years)
  • strength, real-life meaningful memories studied (faces & names), so more ecological validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Episodic memory - Types of LTM

  • summary
  • strength
  • limitation
A
  • stores personal events (episodes) from our lives
  • memories of occurrences, the people, places, objects & behaviours involved
  • memories retrieved consciously & with effort
  • e.g. last visit to dentist, favourite food being pizza
  • strength, supported by Clive Wearing case study (had difficulty recalling past events), however procedural memories unaffected (could remember how to play piano), supports view of different memory stores in LTM as one store can be damaged while others are unaffected
  • limitation, evidence based on clinical cases (one off events) when memory is damaged, so difficult to generalise findings of how LTM works in all people
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Semantic memory - Types of LTM

-summary

A

stores our knowledge of the world

  • less personal
  • includes facts, & knowledge of what words & concepts mean
  • need to be recalled deliberately
  • e.g. the taste of an orange, capital of France being Paris
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Procedural memory - Types of LTM

-summary

A
  • stores memories for actions and skills (how we do things - muscle memory)
  • recall occurs without conscious awareness or effort
  • e.g. driving a car, riding a bike
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Multi-store Model (MSM)

-diagram

A

…

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

Multi-store Model (MSM)

  • summary
  • strength
  • limitations
A
  • MSM describes how info flows through memory system (made of 3 stores linked by processing)
  • research supporting it (Peterson & Peterson/Jacobs studies), increases validity
  • has been repeated, so is reliable, increases scientific credibility
  • limitation, doesn’t say why people have flashbulb memories (meaningful memories that haven’t been rehearsed but can still be remembered)
  • limitation, only suggests 1 type of LTM when actually there are 3 types
  • limitation, suggests STM has limited capacity & doesn’t explain that STM can ‘multi-task’ doing 2 things at once, as model is over-simplified
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

-diagram

A

…

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

  • summary
  • strength
  • limitations
A
  • WMM explanation of how STM is organised & how it functions (model of STM)
  • strength, supported by KF case study, suffered damage to brain, verbal memory impaired with difficulty recalling sounds, but visual info processing normal as could recall letter/digits; suggests damage to phonological loop, but visuo-spatial sketchpad still intact, therefore supports existence of separate visual and acoustic store slave systems
  • limitations, evidence from case study may not be reliable as concerns unique cases with traumatic experiences
  • limitation, lack of clarity over CE suggesting that WMM hasn’t been fully explained
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

  • central executive (CE)
  • strength
A
  • CE moniters incoming data/info
  • allocates slave systems to tasks
  • limited storage/processing capacity
  • strength, support for brain scanning studies, Braver et al’s (1997) participants did tasks involving CE while having a brain scan, activity seen in area known as prefrontal cortex, activity in this area increased as task became more difficult, makes sense in terms of WMM as demands on CE increase it has to work harder to fulfil its function; study provides evidence that CE may have a physical reality in the brain
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

  • phonological loop (PL)
  • strength
A
  • PL is 1st slave system, preserves order in which info arrives
  • consists of phonological store (stores words you hear)
  • consists of articulatory process allowing maintenance rehearsal (repeats sounds in loop to keep in WM while they are needed, capacity of ‘loop’ approx 2 secs)
  • strength, Baddeley et al. (1975) word length effect supports PL, people have more difficulty remembering a list of long words (e.g. association) than short words, due to limited space for rehearsal in articulatory process (approx 2 secs); word length effect disappears if person is given a repetitive task tying up articulatory process, demonstrating the process at work
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

  • visuo-spatial sketchpad (VSS)
  • strength
A
  • VSS is 2nd slave system, stores visual & spatial info when required
  • limited capacity (according to Baddeley (2003) approx 3-4 objects)
  • subdivided into, visual cache (stores visual data e.g. shape & colour)
  • subdivided into, inner scribe (records arrangement of objects in visual field & transfers info to CE)
  • strength, dual task performance supports VSS, demonstrates ability to complete 2 tasks simultaneously if using different slave systems
  • e.g. pat head (visuo-spatial) & say alphabet (phonological) is easier as from different slave systems
  • e.g. pat head (visuo-spatial) & rub belly (visuo-spatial) is more difficult as from same slave system
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Working Memory Model (WMM)

-episodic buffer (EB)

A
  • EB is 3rd slave system, added in 2000 as temporary store for info
  • integrates visual, spatial & verbal info from other stores
  • maintains sense of time sequencing
  • links to LTM
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Interference Theory

  • interference
  • explanation for forgetting: no1
A
  • when 2 pieces of info are in conflict, resulting in forgetting one or both
  • proposed as an explanation for forgetting in LTM, as we can’t access memories even though they are available
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Interference Theory

-proactive interference (PI)

A
  • when old memories interfere with new

- e.g. a teacher has learnt many names of pupils in past, but can’t remember the names of her current class

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

Interference Theory

-retroactive interference (RI)

A
  • when new memories interfere with old

- e.g. a teacher learns many names of pupils THIS year, but can’t remember names of her current class

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

Interference Theory

-when is interference worse?

A
  • interference is worse when memories are similar
  • in PI, previously stored info makes new info more difficult to store
  • in RI, new info overwrites previous memories which are similar
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-procedure

A
  • participants asked to learn a list of words to 100% accuracy (could recall them perfectly)
  • given a new list to learn, new material varied in degree pf similarity to old list
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-procedure GROUPS

A
  • group 1, synonyms
  • group 2, antonyms
  • group 3, unrelated
  • group 4, consonant syllables
  • group 5, three-digit numbers
  • group 6, no new list (participants rested, so control condition)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-findings

A
  • performance depended on the nature of 2nd list
  • most similar material (synonyms) produced worst recall
  • when given different material (e.g. three-digit numbers) the mean number of items recalled increased
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-conclusions

A
  • shows that interference is strongest when memories are similar
  • in group 1 its likely that the words with the same meanings as original list blocked access, or that the new material became confused with old material
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-strengths

A
  • many lab studies carried out into interference, consistently demonstrating both types of interference as causes of forgetting in LTM
  • lab experiments controls effects of extraneous variables; gives confidence that interference is valid explanation
  • real-life studies have supported interference explanation; Baddley & Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall names of teams they had played so far in that season, accurate recall did not depend on how long ago the match took place, as more important was number of games played in the meantime; shows interference explanations can apply to some everyday situations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

McGeoch & McDonald (1931) - Effects of similarity in memories
-limitations

A
  • use of artificial materials, makes interference much more likely in lab, but may not be likely cause of ‘everyday’ forgetting, lacks mundane realism
  • time allowed between learning & recall is very short in lab, so does not reflect real life, so conclusions generated cannot be generalised outside lab (role of interference may be exaggerated)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Retrieval Failure

-explanation for forgetting: no2

A

-memory available but not accessible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)

A
  • Tulving (1983) recall is better when cues present at learning are also present at recall
  • helps retrieval
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Cues

A
  • a trigger that enables access to memories

- lack of cues can cause retrieval failure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Meaningful Cues

A

-cues linked to material to be accessed in a meaningful way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Context-Dependent Forgetting

  • cue
  • no meaningful link
A
  • recall in environment different from where learning took place
  • memory retrieval dependent on external/environmental cue (e.g. the weather or a place)
  • Godden & Baddeley’s deep sea divers
37
Q

State-Dependent Forgetting

  • cue
  • no meaningful link
A
  • physical or psychological state different to when learning took place
  • memory retrieval dependent on internal cue/state of mind (e.g. feeling upset, being drunk)
  • Carter & Cassaday’s study of hay fever medication
38
Q

Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Context-Dependent Forgetting

-method

A
  • deep sea divers learnt word lists & asked to recall later
  • group1: learn on land, recall on land
  • group2: learn on land, recall underwater
  • group3: learn underwater, recall on land
  • group4: learn underwater, recall underwater
39
Q

Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Context-Dependent Forgetting

-results

A

-when environmental contexts of learning & recall did NOT match (e.g. groups 2 & 3) accurate recall was 40% lower than when they did match (e.g. groups 1 & 4)

40
Q

Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Context-Dependent Forgetting

-conclusions

A

-when external cues available at learning were different from cues at recall, this led to retrieval failure due to lack of same cues

41
Q

Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Context-Dependent Forgetting

-strength

A

-divers used to being underwater, so contact may be ordinary for them, some mundane realism

42
Q

Godden & Baddeley (1975) - Context-Dependent Forgetting

-limitations

A
  • cannot generalise findings to everyone, as not all people are used to being underwater for long periods of time
  • extreme difference in context, so doesn’t demonstrate normal use of memory, so low ecological validity
43
Q

Carter & Cassady (1998) - State-Dependent Forgetting

-method

A
  • gave anti-histamine drugs to pts which made them slightly drowsy, created an internal physiological state different from the ‘normal’ state of being awake & alert
  • pts had to learn lists of words & passages of prose, & later recall
  • group1: learn on drug, recall on drug
  • group2: learn on drug, recall NOT on drug
  • group3: learn NOT on drug, recall on drug
  • group4: learn NOT on drug, recall NOT on drug
44
Q

Carter & Cassady (1998) - State-Dependent Forgetting

-results

A

-in conditions where mismatch between internal state at learning & recall, performance on test was significantly worse

45
Q

Carter & Cassady (1998) - State-Dependent Forgetting

-conclusion

A

-when cues were absent (e.g. drowsy recalling info but alert learning it) then there is more forgetting

46
Q

Carter & Cassady (1998) - State-Dependent Forgetting

-limitations

A
  • some people may react differently to the drugs effects, so low generalisability
  • not 100% ethical study
47
Q

Eyewitness Testimony (EWT)

A
  • the ability of people to remember details of events (e.g. accidents & crimes) which they themselves have observed
  • accuracy can be affected by misleading info, leading questions & anxiety
48
Q

Leading Questions

A

-a question which, because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer (e.g. “was the knife in the left hand?” - suggests the answer is left-handed)

49
Q

Post-event discussion (PED)

A
  • occurs when there is more than one witness to an event
  • witnesses may discuss what they have seen with co-witnesses, which may influence the accuracy in their recall of events
50
Q

Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Leading Questions

-aim

A

-to investigate how the wording for a Q can affect the recall of an event

51
Q

Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Leading Questions

-method

A
  • 45pts (students) watched film clips of a car accident & then answered Q’s about speed
  • critical Q: “about how fast were the cars going when they hit each other”
  • 5 groups of pts were each given a different verb in the critical leading Q (e.g. hit, contacted, bumped, collided or smashed)
52
Q

Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Leading Questions

-results

A
  • the verb “contacted” produced a mean estimated speed of 34mph
  • the verb “smashed” produced a mean estimated speed of 41mph
  • some pts also recalled having seen glass at incident after being questioned with verb “smashed”, though there was NO glass
53
Q

Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Leading Questions

-conclusions

A
  • the leading question (verb) biased eyewitnesses recall of events
  • the verb “smashed” suggested a faster speed of the car than “contacted
54
Q

Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Leading Questions

-evaluation

A
  • deception
  • used artificial materials, so lacks mundane realism
  • level of stress pts experienced is unlikely to be same as a real car crash, so the validity of study could be questioned
  • meaningless memory recall, pts may not have paid as much attention
  • lab study, so lacks ecological validity
  • pts may have worked out the aim of the study & therefore shown demand characteristics due to the lab environment
55
Q

Response-Biased Explanation

-why do leading Q’s affect Eyewitness Testimony?

A

-wording of Q does not affect their memory of the event, just how they chose to answer

56
Q

Substitution Explanation

-why do leading Q’s affect Eyewitness Testimony?

A

-wording of Q DOES affect their memory of the event; pts in “smashed” condition were more likely to say that they had seen broken glass, even after the event

57
Q

Gabbert et al. (2003) - Post-event Discussion

-aim

A

-to investigate whether memory of an event can be contaminated/changed after the event, due to post-event discussion

58
Q

Gabbert et al. (2003) - Post-event Discussion

-method

A
  • paired pts watched a video of the same crime, but filmed from different perspectives, so each pts could see elements in the event that the other could not
  • both pts discussed what they had seen on the video before individually completing a test of recall
59
Q

Gabbert et al. (2003) - Post-event Discussion

-results

A
  • 71% of pts mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they did NOT see in the video, but had picked up in the post-event discussion
  • could have occurred due to Informational Social Influence (wanted to be correct)
60
Q

Gabbert et al. (2003) - Post-event Discussion

-conclusion

A

-in a control group where there was no discussion, there were no errors

61
Q

Gabbert et al. (2003) - Post-event Discussion

-evaluations

A
  • lab study, so low ecological validity (watching a video of this event for purposes of recall also lacks mundane realism)
  • pts may suffer from demand characteristics
  • own-age bias, where all age groups are more accurate when identifying people of their own age group
  • older aged people were less accurate then younger people when giving eye witness reports
  • lacks external validity, real eyewitnesses search their memory with more effort because their testimony may lead to a successful conviction, or wrongful if inaccurate, as this is not true in research studies; EWT accuracy greater in real world because of the seriousness with which eyewitnesses undertake their roles
62
Q

Individual Differences

-old-aged bias

A
  • Anastasi & Rhodes (2006) found that older people were less accurate than younger people when giving eye witness reports
  • also found all age groups were more accurate when identifying people of their own age (own-age bias)
63
Q

How can research into misleading info in EWT be used in the real world?

A
  • police officers know to be more careful about how they phrase their Q’s when interviewing eyewitnesses
  • therefore has helped to improve the legal system
64
Q

Memory contamination

A

-when co-witnesses discuss a crime, they mix (mis)information from other witnesses with their own memories

65
Q

Memory Conformity

A

-witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or because they believe the other witnesses are right

66
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-procedure

A
  • pts sat in waiting room, believing they were taking part in a lab study
  • pts heard argument in next room
  • low-anxiety condition: man walked through waiting room carrying pen w/ grease on hands
  • high-anxiety condition: heated argument accompanied by sound of breaking glass, man walked through waiting room holding paper knife covered in blood
  • pts later asked to pick man from set of 50 photographs
67
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-findings

A
  • low-anxiety condition: 49% of pts correctly identified man

- high-anxiety condition: 33% of pts correctly identified man

68
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-conclusions

A

-tunnel theory of memory argues that witness’s attention is on weapon (weapon focus) because it is source of danger & anxiety

69
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-limitation e.g explained through Pickel (1998)

A
  • pts focus on weapon because they are surprised at what they see rather than because they are scared
  • Pickel (1998) used scissors, handgun, wallet & raw chicken as hand-held items in a hairdressing salon; EWT was poorer for high unusualness (chicken & handgun)
  • so weapon focus effect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety/threat & therefore tells us nothing specifically about the effects of ANXIETY on EWTterm-70
70
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-limitation e.g unethical

A
  • creating anxiety in pts is unethical as it may subject people to psychological harm purely for research purposes
  • so real-life studies are more beneficial as people are not subjected to psychological harm as the incident has already happened (don’t need to create it)term-77term-71
  • ethical issues don’t challenge the findings of Johnson & Scott (1976) but they do raise questions about conducting such researchterm-69
71
Q

Johnson & Scott (1976) - Anxiety with negative effect

-limitation e.g. demand characteristics

A
  • pts in lab studies are aware they are watching a filmed (& staged) crime for a reason to do with study
  • may work out questions they will be asked regarding what they have seen, may give responses they believe to be helpful to researcher
  • therefore research is not measuring the accuracy of EWT which reduces validity of research investigating the effects of anxiety
72
Q

Yuille & Cutshall (1986) - Anxiety with positive effect

-procedure

A
  • a real-life crime, gun-shop owner shot a thief dead; there were 21 witnesses & 13 agreed to participate in study
  • pts interviewed 4-5 months after incident
  • accountants compared to police interviews at time of shooting
  • witnesses rated how stressed they felt at time of incident
73
Q

Yuille & Cutshall (1986) - Anxiety with positive effect

-findings

A
  • witnesses were very accurate & there was little change of recall after 5 months
  • however some details were less accurate e.g. colours of items & age/weight/height of man
74
Q

Yuille & Cutshall (1986) - Anxiety with positive effect

-conclusions

A

-pts who reported highest levels of stress were most accurate at recall (approx 88% compared to 75% for less stressed group)

75
Q

Yuille & Cutshall (1986) - Anxiety with positive effect

-limitation e.g. extraneous variables

A
  • real-life witnesses are interviewed AFTER the event, and things occur in the meantime that researchers cannot control
  • e.g. eyewitness post even discussion, witnesses may also read or view accounts in the media, the police interview may influence their memory
  • these extraneous variable be may responsible for the (in)accuracy of recall, not anxiety; therefore it is difficult to isolate these variables
76
Q

Yerkes-Dodson Law

A
  • inverted U theory, states that performance will increase with stress, but only to a certain point, where it decreases drastically
  • looks like a bell curve
77
Q

Explaining contradictory findings

  • inverted U theory
  • affects memory
A
  • Yerkes & Dodson (1908) argue that the relationship between performance & arousal/stress is curvilinear rather than linear e.g. bell curve shape
  • Deffenbaucher (1983) found that lower levels of anxiety did produce lower levels of recall accuracy; recall accuracy increases with anxiety up to an optimal point; a drastic decline in accuracy of recall is seen when an eyewitness experiences more anxiety than the optimal point
78
Q

Inverted-U Theory

-limitation

A
  • anxiety is difficult to define & measure as it has many elements e.g. cognitive, behavioural, emotional & physical
  • this theory assumes that one of these is linked to poor performance, physiological (physical) arousal
  • the explanation fails to account for other factors e.g the effect of the emotional experience of witnessing a crime e.g. terror/fear on the accuracy of memory recall
79
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI)

-definition

A
  • based on psychological understanding of memory
  • Fisher & Geiseln (1992) claim EWT could be improved if police use techniques based in psychological insights into how memory works; called cognitive interview to indicate its foundation in cognitive psychology
  • rapport (understanding) is established with interviewee
80
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - Report Everything

- no.1

A
  • witnesses encouraged to include every detail of event, even if it seems irrelevant or witness is not confident about it
  • seemingly trivial details could be important and may trigger other memories
81
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - Reinstate The Context

- no.2

A
  • witness returns to original crime scene ‘in their mind’ & imagines the environment (e.g. the weather, what they could see) & their emotions (e.g. what they felt)
  • based on concept of context-dependant forgetting; cues from the context may trigger recall
82
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - Reverse The Order

- no.3

A
  • events recalled in a different chronological order (e.g. from end to beginning, or from middle to beginning)
  • prevents people from using their expectations of how the event must have happened rather than the actual events
  • also prevents dishonesty (harder to produce an untruthful account if it has to be reversed)
83
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - Change Perspective

- no.4

A
  • witnesses recall the incident from other people’s perspectives
  • this prevents the influence of expectations & schema on recall (schema are packages of information developed through experience; they generate a framework of interpreting incoming information
84
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - Enhanced Cognitive Interview

- no.5

A
  • Fisher et al. (1987) developed additional element of CI
  • includes a focus on the social dynamics of the interaction (e.g. knowing when to establish & relinquish eye contact)
  • the enhanced CI also includes ideas such as reducing the eyewitnesses’ anxiety, minimising distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly & asking open-ended questions
85
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - elements of full CI are useful
-strength

A
  • Milne & Bull (2002) found that each individual element of the CI was equally valuable
  • however, they also found that a combination of ‘report everything’ & ‘context reinstatement’ produced better recall than any of the other techniques individually
  • so at least these 2 elements should be used to improve police interviewing of eyewitnesses even if the full CI isn’t used
86
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - support for effectiveness of the enhanced CI
-strength

A
  • a meta-analysis by Köhnken at al. (1999) combined data from 50 studies
  • the enhanced CI consistently provided more correct information than the standard interview used by police
  • studies like this indicate that there are real practical benefits to the police of using the enhanced versions of the CI
87
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - time-consuming

-limitation

A
  • police are reluctant to use CI because it takes much more time than the standard police interview; more time is needed to establish the rapport with the witness to allow them to relax
  • Kebbel & Wagstaff (1997) point out that the CI also requires special training and many forces have not been able to provide more than a few hours
  • this means it is unlikely that the ‘proper’ version of the CI is actually used (which may explain why the police have not been that impressed with it)
88
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - research may be unreliable because of variations of the CI
-limitation

A
  • studies of the effectiveness of the CI inevitably use slightly different techniques
  • different researchers may use variations on the CI or enhanced CI, & police forces evolve their own methods
  • this means it is difficult to draw conclusions about the CI in general
89
Q

The Cognitive Interview (CI) - produces an increase in accurate information
-limitation

A
  • the techniques of CI aim to increase the amount of correct information recalled, but the recall of incorrect information may also be increased
  • Köhnken et al. (1999) found an 81% increase in correct information but also a 61% increase in incorrect information (false positives) when the enhanced CI was compared to a standard interview
  • the increase in correct information implies that the police should continue to use CI; however the results also suggest that police need to treat all information collected with caution

Psychology Year 12 Content (2 decks)

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