MOCK memory Flashcards
reconstructivist theory
Bartlett -memory is an active process, we change our memories to fit in with what we already know even tho we think we remember exactly what happened.
store fragments then recall fragments and build into a meaningful whole. Remember meaning of events rather than specific details - this is after meaning
Reconstructivst theory of war of the ghost
showed 20 students American ghost story which had unusual features that were specific to that culture and unfamiliar to the students
students changed the story to make more consistent with own culture
remembering is an active process and information is retrieved and changed to fit prior knowledge
evaluate reconstructivist theory
lacks control-participants not given clear instructions about what they should do before taking part.
No standardisation about when and how people recall information
encoding meaning
taking in information into memory and change it into a form that can be stored
semantic encoding
changing written/visual image to a memory of what the words mean
encoding
STM-acoustic
LTM-semantic
S+W of multistage model
S-provides a testable model for researchers to gather evidence
Evidence to support the STM and LTM are separate stores
W-most of researchers is lab based so lacks realism
High internal validity but lack external validity
Stores have seperate parts. STM is separated into acoustic and visual. LTM episodic, semantic and procedural memory
serial position in recall
Murdocks serial position curve study
evaluation of Murdocks serial position curve study
high internal validity- high level of control bc lab based study
Murdock confident that the change to the iv is responsible for the probability of it being recalled
Artificial task-task does not represent the normal everyday function of our memory. making lists only one way we utilise our memory
uselfulness fairly limited and the findings cannot be generalised beyond the artificial task
MSM
3 separate stores
sensory-STM through attention]
STM-duration:18-30secs
capacity:5-9
LTM-duration:unlimited
capacity:unlimited
LTM-STM=RECALL
Interference
proactive-previously learnt information has interferences with new information you are trying tom store
retroactive: a new memory interferes with the old information you are trying to recall
2 explanations of forgetting
interference
retrieval
context depending forgetting
memory recall is dependent on external cues e.g.place,weather increases when those cues are present
accuracy of memory study
golden and Bradley
18 divers learned lists of spoken words on dry land and underwater
-after 4 minutes asked to recall words on original learning and alternate environment
lists were recalled significantly better underwater
evaluation of accuracy of memory
standardisation-all people experienced the same controls
la ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;high number of words were still not recalled even when in the same learning enviornment. this suggests there must be other explanations for forgetting other than cues
two types of binocular depth cues
convergence-both eyes rotate inwards to focus on an object
retinal disparity-the fact that the left eye and right eye produce slightly different images when focusing on an object
affordances
we automatically know what to do when we something we don’t know what it is
Gregorys constructivist theory
sensation provides an ambiguous and incomplete information about the environment
use past to interpret the world around us
perception develops nurture not nature
S+W of constructivist thoery
seagal showed muller flyer to non western participants and they weren’t fooled
theory can explain some visual illusions-his mistaken hypothesis has been useful in explaining misinterpreted depth cues and size constancy illusions
cant explain how perception gets started in the first place
Gibson visual cliff experiment
dantz face experiment
Gibsons direct theory of perception
perception is innate
born with perceptual abilities
everything we need is in our optic array
visual cliff experiments
s+w of Gibsons direct theory off perception
visual cliff experiment
real world pilots in ww2 only need pattern of light entering the eye
real world relevance gives this theory high ecological value
w-doesnt explain visual illusion
Gibson says all we need in information received at our retinas but visualvillusions are good examples of when our brain makes perceptual errors
explain necker cube
ambitious figure(brain doesn’t know how to interpret the image)
visual illusion consists on 2 dimensional shapes representation of a 3 dimensional shape frame cube. When two lines cross the picture does not show which is in front and which is behind
motivation
forces that drive our behaviour
motivation study
Glichrist and Nesberg
26 students
1group not allowed to eat for 20 hrs
1group ate normally
s+w of motivation study
s-high internal validity-high control
participants didn’t eat for 20 hrs so would’ve been actually hungry so the iv could be studied directly
w-could be considered unethical
discomfort for participants
factors that affect perception
motivation-hunger study
emotion-saying words that popped up on a screen
expectation-interpretation of an ambiguous figure
12
A 13 c
14
culture
culture s+w
showed how we perceive things based on ur culture
language barriers
instructions may be unclear
conducted a long time ago so its outdated
emotion s+w§
use of biological response is more scientific way of getting data increases validity
embarrassment could delay not anxiety
awkwardness is an extraneous variable
expectation s+w
controlled enviormnt
use of independent groups
not representative of everyday life
schemas
mental fragments of beliefs and expectations that help us understand the world
assimilation
adapting existing shims
accomadation
child forms new schema
s+w of Piagets conservation
supported by Donaldsons naughty teddy study
theory based on schemas which is a hypethertiucal structure meaning it isn’t scientific so cant be proven wrong
s+w of Donaldsons naughty teddy study
more robust than Piagets
greater controls so had higher internal validity
Piaget asked kids same question twice so made the kids think they had to give a different answer, this confusion lead to poor performance and Piaget underestimated their abilities
all children from the same school, cant be generalised
s+w of hughs policeman study
more realistic than piagets
Hughes took lot of effort to make sure children understood rules=able to understand capabilities better
experimenter bias may have affected the results. Huhges may have unsubconsciously hinted at the correct answer
types of different mindsets
fixed
growth
decks minset theory
Blackwell found that children who had been taught growth mindset saw an improvement in their grades
mixed evidence-many studies have failed to replicate impact of mindset on students performance
self efficacy
persons understanding of what theyre able to do. based off past experiences
praise
praise effort instead of reward
must be honest, sincere and deserved others it is seen as empty praise and will become meaningless
evaluate field experiments
evaluate opportunity sampling
quick easy and convenient
cant be generalised
evaluate systematic sampling
avoids researcher bias
time consuming
evaluate independent groups
no order affects
individual differences
evaluate repeated measures
no individual differences
order affects
independent variable
factor that varies in the study
dependent variable
factor that is measured by the researcher (outcome)
evaluate coordinates
can be used to study relationships when it may be unethical or impractical to directly manipulate the variables
measure how two variables are related
tell us how variables are related but not why
not under controlled conditions so cant establish a cause and affect relationship
