Memory & Cognition Psychology Flashcards

Question

Deese (1959), Roediger & McDermott (1995)

Answer 1

- DRM paradigm - Wanted to see how our general knowledge influences our memory - Read a list of words that would be related to something - Asked them to remember as much as possible - Often people would say the word that you never said (critical lure)

Answer 2

- Think of the word 'cold' > you generate a list of words associated with this word > snow, winter, icy etc

Answer 3

- Words that we think people will say even though we never said them

Answer 4

- Showed that people remember the critical lure just as much as studied words - Showed them a list of words and asked them what words they remember (recognition) shows that there is an extreme likely hood someone will say they seen the word that wasn't there

Answer 5

- People were warned BEFORE studying the list > did reduce 'false memories' - People were warned AFTER studying the list > did not reduce 'false memories' - Part of effect happens at encoding/ when taking memory in

Answer 6

- Interested in the complexities involved in memory - Investigated the errors participants made when recalling complex stories - The role of meaning and organisation on encoding and retrieval

Answer 7

- Participants actively strive to gain meaning from the material to be learned, and to organise effectively - Postulated the role of schemas

Answer 8

- Long-term knowledge structures that participants use to make sense of new information when encoding and recalling it

Answer 9

- He got a story from Native American time and changed them slightly so they didn't make sense - Presented to students that don't have the same knowledge of that time - Asked them to recall story

Answer 10

- People made mistakes - They would try and fill in the blanks where they didn't understand - Things they've heard from other paces they'd try to match - They'd also add and leave things out

Answer 11

- By Bergman & Roediger (1999) > done exact same experiment > found over time people missed things out

Answer 12

- Schemas are not only used when things are difficult to comprehend - They are flexible and differ across individuals - We have them for everything - Happen without you knowing

Answer 13

- Gave participants (1/3 of them) a passage with no description about the text - Asked to reproduce it when participants but weren't great (remembered 3 things roughly) - Another group (1/3) were told that the text was about doing laundry - Telling them this the participants recalled nearly double of information - Another group (1/3) - They were given the passage then told it was about laundry - Didn't help > didn't increase performance relative to those who hadn't been told anything

Answer 14

- Telling someone its about laundry helped to activate their schema - Their schema of what its like to do laundry - As they take the information in they can filter it, pay attention to important parts making it easier to remember

Answer 15

- Graduate students office - Participants waiting in a room before an experiment - Naturalistic setting & incidental learning situation - Waited 35 seconds and then interviewed about what they say

Answer 16

- There was objects that were consistent with the surrounding, inconsistent and then some things that you would expect to be there were not present

Answer 17

- Higher recall and recognition of schema - Poorer recall of inconsistent - Higher false recall & recognition (and confidence) for scheme consistent

Answer 18

- Took in information around you, used it in a schema and then able to reproduce over testing

Answer 19

- Schema effect (Bartlett, 1932): remembering what you expect to see: memory distortions caused by influence of expectations

Answer 20

- Recall of bank robbery (from video) contained more information relevant to bank robbery schema - Ambiguous conditions in simulated crime reveal bias: gender of masked robber assumed male

Answer 21

- Provided people with passages of text - Containing either Gerald Martin or Adolf Hitler - Then they were asked if the sentence "He was obsessed to conquer the world" - Right after they all said "no" - After a week people that had heard Hitler said "yes" and Martin "no" - Schematic knowledge effect at longer retention interval - Long as the statement is consistent with your schema and what you know about that person > increase in effective schemas over time

Answer 22

- Trying to find out how much anxiety or arousal contributed to weapon focus - Found unusualness of the context determined what individuals took in - Found it didn't matter where the weapon was aimed at > on what people remembered

Answer 23

- People were witnesses to a very violent crime in Canada - People were interviewed immediately afterwards and also a number of weeks later - People were pretty consistent with their information despite being in a high anxiety condition

Answer 24

- Looked at a series of tasks where it was a moderate complexity as eye witness tasks are - There seemed to be a benefit to levels of anxiety then it tapered off

Answer 25

- They had videos of crimes that were either violent or less violent between two conditions - They found that actually people were quite impaired when there was a violent version

Answer 26

- They found the more anxious it made people feel the more impaired memory was for details prior to incident - Violent version of crime - Affected what they had taken in as well as after

Answer 27

- From real-life studies - Higher % of correct identification in low anxiety or stress - Higher anxiety levels > less likely to remember - Holds for identification, scene details and actions

Answer 28

- Ira Hyman study > asked participants to walk across campus and they were in a variety of conditions > some were just walking, some were with someone else and some were talking on the phone - They had a unicycling clown go past

Answer 29

- Found if a participants was on their phone and asked if they had seen anything strange only 8.3% did - 25% of people said yes they seen a clown if asked

Answer 30

- Showed a series of videos of car crashes - To show just how fragile our representatives are even by just watching a video - Asked them how fast the car was when it either hit, smashed, bumped, collided - Hit= 34mph smashed= 42%

Answer 31

- After one week they asked them if they had seen the broken glass - Control= 12%, hit=14%, smashed=32% - BY varying one word after someone has seen a video, you almost double the answer of 'yes I seen the broken glass' - Misinformation acceptance (observer's likelihood of acceptance incorrect information) increases with time since event

Answer 32

- "Did you see THE broken headlight" - "Did you see A broken headlight" - Affect the response people gave

Answer 33

- "Do you get headaches... and if so how often" - …= frequently vs occasionally - estimate per week 2.2 vs 0.71

Answer 34

- "Did you see the television film of the moment the plane hit the apartment building?" - >50% said yes - However, no footage existed/shown on TV but people could give details about it

Answer 35

- People were able to give details about going missing in a mall even when it did not happen when they were younger - People have suggested that we have schema for what it is like to be lost in a mall/ be in a mall - So are willing to expect this information to fall into our schema

Answer 36

- Tests like "did you see this" create issues - To find out if something is permanently lost or inaccessible but retained then we need to incorporate guessing - Its not that the knowledge is gone its just that they can mistakenly access the newer information

Answer 37

- May not be influenced by what you have seen

Answer 38

- Said a story about another child who ate eggs and got a stomach ache - Then asked them later about the child who ate cereal and got a headache - These kids are more likely to go along with the new story - Tend to be suggestible, affecting their recall of events

Answer 39

- Had children witness either someone mistreating dolls or cleaning dolls - Asked children questions about what happened either asking questions on how bad the person was treating them or how acceptable - Results: The way children report of the actions of others can be lead by the line of questioning

Answer 40

- Can result in errors (Bruck & Ceci (1997)

Answer 41

- Due to increase social compliance in children, and their limited cognitive ability: > Interviewers must avoid bias, context could be reinstated where possible and children should be allowed to produce drawings > Repeated testing can increase accurate recall (neutral questioning) > Repeated testing following misleading information can increase effect of misleading information

Answer 42

- Misleading information van have a greater effect following early testing - Suggestibility effect is also affected by retention interval

Answer 43

- The distinction between knowing and remembering (Tulving, 1985) - The extent to which you are just familiar with the item, rather than fully recollecting it - SO, familiarity = based recognition (fast automatic) - Recollection = (slow, attention -demanding)

Answer 44

- Source misattribution errors | - Unconscious transference

Answer 45

- Failure of source monitoring = the process of examining contextual origins of a memory - Prevalence of perceptual detail can help identify 'memory' as real or imagined

Answer 46

- Tendency of eyewitnesses to misidentify an innocent face (or property) on the basis of familiarity - (Experimentally) effects can be reduced by informing witness that bystander is a distinct person from culprit (Ross et al 1994)

Answer 47

- Someone who spent 11 years in prison for a crime they didn't commit - Jennifer Thompson was raped and blamed Ronald Cotton - She studied the attackers face as she wanted to remember him - Bobby Pull in prison discussed the case and only by DNA evidence was Cotton exonerated and Pull charged

Answer 48

- Asked participants to watch a video and make an identification - Then one group got confirmation feedback and the other did not - They were asked questions about the identification on the video they watch - Huge differences in confidence between the two group (confirmation much higher)

Answer 49

- Eyewitness identification very poor - Found on average 40% identified suspect, 20% identified the non-suspect - 40% weren’t able to make confident judgment

Answer 50

- Improved by earning that culprit may not be present | - Not choosing a ‘best of’

Answer 51

- Improved by sequential line-up and ‘no return’ | - Seeing people one at a time is better

Answer 52

- Does not not correlate with accuracy | - blind or computer administration of line ups

Answer 53

- Suggest that sequential presentation isn’t the best idea

Answer 54

- The EW re-creates the context at the time of the crime including environmental and internal information - The EW reports everything he or she can think of about the incident, even if the information is fragmented - The EW reports the details of the incident in various orders - The EW reports the event from various perspectives

Answer 55

- People are bad at remembering (unknown) faces in general (Bruce et al presented images as well) - More accurate working own race and age - Suggested it is based on familiarity? > Appears not entirely (shrivel et al 2008) > ‘Ingroup’ benefit can be based on economic and social factors (shrivel et al 2008)

Answer 56

- 23% of 160 American judges say that only in exceptional circumstance should eyewitness testimony be solely used - Eyewitness is enough evidence to convict > 35.6% say yes with a degree > 48% say yes with no degree

Answer 57

- Change blindness blindness - We overestimate our own abilities - People believe they’d see changes when changes happen not in view but reality 0% do not

Answer 58

- Laboratory conclusions may underestimate eyewitness failures (Ihlebaek et al 2003) - Should jurors be informed of research findings? > evidence expect testimony can have extreme effects (leippe et al 2004) > otherwise EW testimony can have extreme effects!