Memory P1 Flashcards
Coding, capacity and duration def
coding -> changing information so that it can be stored
capacity -> the amount of information that can be held in a memory store
duration -> the length of time information can be held in memory
short term memory, long term memory and sensory register def
STM = a limited capacity memory store
LTM = a permanent memory store
SR = Registers the immediate information coming in from the environment through our sense (can be visual/auditory/tactile)
sensory register (capacity)
SPERLING RESEARCH
- Using a tachistoscope presented a grid of letters for less than 1 second.
- On average, 4 of 12 items remembered.
= Shows that large amounts of info can be taken in but only recalled for a brief amount of time.
+ controlled lab setting
- low ecological validity
sensory register (duration)
=SPERLING RESEARCH
Approx 500ms
sensory register (coding)
CROWDER IDEAS
- The sensory register codes into two different stores…
1) visually -> iconic store
2) auditory -> echoic store
=Dependent on sensory input/stimuli
STM (capacity)
MILLERS THEORY
= Capacity reached at 7 plus or minus 2 items and the amount of information increased by chunking -> organizing info into meaningful chunks.
Supported by……
JACOBS RESEARCH
= Added a digit each time to a sequence of numbers. Ps could recall 9.3 numbers and 7.3 letters accurately.
STM (duration) + eval
PETERSON + PETERSON’S RESEARCH
-Ppts asked to recall trigrams (three consonants eg BHJ)
- Interference tasks (eg counting back from 60) to prevent rehearsal
- After 3sec delay = 80% recalled acc
- After 18sec delay = 10% recalled acc
= STM duration is around 18seconds or less
= Overtime our STM will degrade without active recall
eval:
1) Easier to establish cause and effect/ standardized
= Used distraction tasks to prevent rehearsal. They use the task of counting backwards from a given number in threes. This prevented rehearsal meaning that only recollection of the trigrams wasn’t influenced from active recall. Meaning it was easier to establish cause and effect through the distraction tasks.// standardized procedure meaning the study had both high replicability and reliability as all participants were made sure to have experienced the same process. Therefore, producing valid conclusions as any findings of duration of memory could not have been caused by active recall.
2) artificial stimuli not replicable to real life
STM (coding) + eval
BADDELEY’S RESEARCH
- Presented words acoustically similar (eg cat,hat,mat) or acoustically dissimilar (eg pen, shoe, glass).
- Ps asked to recall immediately.
- Ps recall better for acoustically dissimilar words
= We code STM acoustically, with words that are auditory clear
eval:
1) Lacks ecological validity
= It was a lab experiment in which all participants were asked a series of acoustically similar and dissimilar words in a highly controlled, unrealistic environment. This means that any findings initiator cannot be applied certainly to real life instances of human memory coding as behaviours shown may be different to that in real life. It is unlikely for participants to be asked such tasks in their day-to-day life. Therefore, the study lacks validity as it may not be sufficient evidence for the coding of humans memory as it could be studying unrealistic behavior due to the unrealistic condition.
2) controlled and standardised
LTM (capacity)
WAGENAAR
- Conducted research on himself, creating a diary of 2400 events over 6yrs.
-recall was excellent
= LTM capacity is unlimited
+ stimuli reflect real life memory so has eco validity
- case study so unrepresentative
LTM (duration) = eval
BAHRICK ET AL RESEARCH
- 392 US graduates asked on either
1) photo recognition (matching name to pic)
2) free recall (name person in picture)
Findings:
1)photo rec
after 15 yrs -> 90% recall
after 48 yrs -> 70% recall
2) free recall
after 15 yrs -> 60% recall
after 48 yrs -> 30% recall
= LTM duration is up to years
=Therefore, loss is fast to begin with, then slows down.
eval:
1) High ecological validity
= Study used real life memories that participants record by matching pictures of classmates with their names. Therefore, these results reflect our memory for real life events, so it can be applied to everyday human memory.
2) Lacks population validity
= The sample consisted of 392 American university graduates. Psychologists are unable to generalize the results to other populations as it’s culturally biased. For example, students from the UK may recall their names better/ worse after 48 hours due to their education systems or relationships with classmates etc (if spent a lot of time with them more likely to remember them). Therefore, we are unable to conclude whether other populations would demonstrate the same ability to recall names and faces after 48 years.
Three modalities of coding
visual
auditory
semantic
LTM (coding) + eval
BADDELEY’S RESEARCH
1) semantically similar (huge, tall, big)
2) semantically dissimilar (snow, skirt, pen)
20 mins after dissimilar recalled better
= Therefore, LTM uses semantic (meaning) coding
eval:
1) Real life application
= For instance, they found that the LTM was semantically coded meaning these findings can be used by students to strategize their revision techniques better. This means that if a student is struggling to recall information from a couple of topics ago, they may find it useful to acknowledge the meaning of their work rather than just active recall. Therefore, giving Baddeley’s research value as it can be used universally, benefiting lives.
2) Lacks ecological validity
= It was a lab experiment in which all participants were asked a series of acoustically similar and dissimilar words in a highly controlled, unrealistic environment. This means that any findings initiator cannot be applied certainly to real life instances of human memory coding as behaviours shown may be different to that in real life. It is unlikely for participants to be asked such tasks in their day-to-day life. Therefore, the study lacks validity as it may not be sufficient evidence for the coding of humans memory as it could be studying unrealistic behavior due to the unrealistic condition.
The Multi store model of memory (atkinson and shiffrin)
A representation of how memory works in terms of three stores called the sensory register, short term memory and long term memory. It also describes how information is transferred from one store to another, what makes some memories last and what makes some memories disappear.
Types of forgetting + what store they occur at
SR -> lack of attention
STM ->
Decay : The gradual fading of information that is not paid attention to until it is forgotten.
Displacement: When new information pushes out the old due to ‘full capacity’ in the STM.
LTM->
Decay: The gradual fading of information that is not paid attention to until it is forgotten.
Retrieval failure: Inability to recall information because the cue needed to trigger the memory is not present.
Interference: When information is similar and so it gets confused/muddled.
General eval of MSM
Pro:
1) HM
= underwent surgery to relieve his epilepsy
-> removed hippocampus (crucial for memory) on both hemispheres.
-> LTM for events that happened before his accident were still intact BUT could not create new memories as he was unable to transfer information from his STM to LTM
(meaning he was trapped in a world that lasted as long as his STM)
= memory split into different stores, which likely have different brain locations.
2) Primary recency effect
= A serial position curve shows that when a participant was shown a list of words, the first and last word or remembered better than those in the middle. This is because words at the beginning of the list have been rehearsed into the LTM while those at the end are still currently in the STM. Words from the middle are poorly recalled as they do not have a chance to be rehearsed into LTM or enter STM, as its capacity is full. Therefore, supporting MSM as it shows our memory is split into different stores rather than just one- STM and LTM; And that information will remain in each store based on the capacity, duration and rehearsal of information.
Con:
- Lacks ecological validity
= Lab based setting using artificial tasks (ie PRE /SPC using list of words ) showing it is hard to know whether the processing that occurs to form memories of everyday information can be applied in the same way. Therefore, it is difficult to use findings to offer support for the MSM as an explanation for our memory.
Working Memory Model
= Baddeley and Hitch
- Wanted to replace the short-term memory of the MSM because…
1) STM must be more complex than just a single unitary store that only exist pass information on to LTM.
2) STM must be an active processor holding multiple different types of information simultaneously while being worked on
WMM: a representation of the STM that suggests it is a dynamic processor of different types of information using subunits coordinated by a central decision making system.
- Components differ in terms of capacity and coding
- Not only stores info but it processes it (hence working)
episodic buffer (slave store)
ADDED BY BADDELEY IN 2000
= Acts as a ‘backup’ store, which holds and integrates visual, spatial and verbal information from the VSS, PL, CE and LTM.
- coding : visual + acoustic
- capacity: approx 4 chunks
EXAMPLE:
- someone giving you verbal instructions on a route to Petersfield (uses both acoustic and visual coding)
- watching a film
central executive
- Monitors and coordinates the operation of the other components of the store
- The ‘Boss’ acting as a filter choosing what to ignore and what to pay attention to (does not store info)
-Capacity : very limited (4 items) - Modality free (can code in different formats)
Ie reading a book, sister comes in turns on tv, the central executive will decide whether to continue using the phonological loop or switch to the visusopatial sketchpad to watch what’s on tv