paper 1 - memory Flashcards
Describe The Sensory Register:
- Stimulus from the environment passes into the sensory register
. Coding - Modality specific
. Duration - 0.5 seconds
. Capacity - High
Describe The Short Term Memory:
- Information passes through the sensory register to the STM through paying attention
. Coding - Acoustically
. Duration - 18-30 seconds (unless rehearsed)
. Capacity - 5-9 items
Describe The Long Term Memory:
- If maintenance rehearsal occur (repeating the info to ourselves) it can increase the length of time information is held in the STM. If info is rehearsed enough it will be passed into the LTM.
. Coding - Semantically
. Duration - Potentially up to a lifetime
. Capacity - Potentially unlimited
How to recall information:
The information must be transferred from the LTM to STM, through retrieval
Strength: The Multi Store Model
The multi store model of memory is supported by research that show that STM and LTM are different stores. E.g. research found (Baddeley) that ppts mixed up words that sound similar in the STM, but mixed up words that have similar meanings in the LTM. This study clearly shows that coding in STM is acoustic and coding in the LTM is semantic. This supports the multi store model of memory because it supports the view that the STM and LTM are separate.
Strength: The Multi Store Model
Further research to support Atkinson and Shiffrin’s multi store model of memory comes from a case study of Clive Wearing. He suffers from amnesia in which he cannot transfer information from his STM to his LTM, this is evident as when his wife re-enters the room after leaving just seconds before, he greets her as if it is the first time he has seen her in years. This supports the multi store model of memory because it shows that STM and LTM are separate stores and that information must flow through in a linear way, first to STM then LTM.
Weakness: The Multi Store Model
However, critics would argue that the case study to support the Multi store model is flawed, as it has low population validity.The research was a case study of just one person, Clive Wearing, who has an unusual illness involving damage to the brain. Therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings to the wider population as their memory may operate differently, thus limiting the support that the research provides for the multi store model of memory.
Weakness: The Multi Store Model
Moreover, it suggests that the MSM could be too simplistic in the stating that STM and LTM are unitary stores. For example. Other researchers conducted research into the STM on patient, who suffered from amnesia, found that recall in STM for digits was very poor when the digits were read aloud, but recall was much better when you could read the digits to urself. This suggests that there must be different stores within the STM, one to process visual and one to process auditory info, casting doubt on the theories assumption that the STM is unitary.
STUDY: Coding for the sensory register
Sperling:
Modality specific (different coding for different stores)
Procedure: Ppts shown a grid of 12 symbols and displayed for 0.5 seconds. High tone was played and they had to recall the first line. Medium tone was played and they had to recall middle line. Low tone was played and they had to recall the last line
STUDY: Capacity for the sensory register
Sperling:
Potentially unlimited
findings: if the capacity was 3/4 symbols on the line suggets retained information is 76%, meaning sensory has a potentially unlimited capacity
STUDY: Duration for the sensory register
Sperling:
Iconic (visual) memories last less than 1 second
Findings: If a delay occured information was forgotten. After 0.3 seconds 50% of info was recalled. After 1 second accuracy reduced to 33%. Suggesting duration is less than 1 second
STUDY: Coding for the STM
Baddeley:
STM codes acoustically as there was better call with acoustically dissimilar words
Procedure: Showed list of words in 4 categories
- Acoustically similair
- Acoustically dissimilar
- Semantically similar
- Semantically dissimilar
immediately after each they had to recall in the CORRECT ORDER
Finding: More mistakes on Acoustically similar (STM codes acoustically)
STUDY: Capacity for the STM
Miller:
Limited 5-9 items were recalled using the digit-span technique
Procedure: digit span technique
- ppts given unrelated digits that incresed by 1 digit each time. Span was measured until they could no longer recall the digits in the correct sequence.
Findings: ppts able to recall 5-9 items (capacity of STM is 5-9 items)
STUDY: Duration for the STM
Peterson & Peterson:
18-30 seconds, however maintenance rehearsal will increase duration
Procedure: ppts breifly presented with trigram then given a 3 digit number and asked to count backwards from this number (prevent rehearsal). Stopped at different intervals and asked to recall trigram
Findings: After 3 seconds 80%. After 18 seconds 10% recalled correctly
STUDY: Coding for the LTM
Baddeley:
LTM codes semantically, as here was better recall with semantically dissimilar words after 20-minute prevention task
Procedure: showed ppts lists of words in 4 categories
- semantically similiar
- semantically dissimilar
- acoustically similiar
- acoustically dissimilar
After ppts had to recall in the CORRECT ORDER
Findings: Mistakes made on semantically similar (LTM codes semantically)
STUDY: Capacity for the LTM
Standing:
Unlimited 90% recognition of photos after a few days
Procedure: over a week showed ppts 10,000 photos for a few seconds each
Findings: when tested a few days later 90% recall (LTM is unlimited capacity)
STUDY: Duration for the LTM
Bahrick:
Potentially a lifetime. Recall of classmates remained accurate after 47 years, improved with the use of correct cues (photos)
Procedure: tested 392 American graduates on their memor of former classmates.
conditon 1: recall names of classmates using yearbook
Condition 2: recall names without photo cue
Findings: conditon 1 - 70% accurate recall after 48 years
conditon 2 - 30% accurate recall after 48 years
(Potentially last a life time)
Weakness: Studies into Sensory register + STM + LTM
The research into coding of LTM conducted by Baddeley lacks mundane realism, as the task of recalling semantically similar or acoustically similar words is artificial. Therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings as there was higher recall for the acoustically similar words as this research does not reflect most real-life memory therefore, lowering the external validity of the research into the coding of LTM.
Strength: Studies into Sensory register + STM + LTM
The research into the capacity of STM conducted by Miller has high control over extraneous variables as it was carried out in a controlled setting (lab), for example ppts were given strings of unrelated digits that increased by 1 digit each time. This means that we are more likely to establish a cause and effect between the IV list of words and the DV how accurate the recall of words where. Therefore, increasing the internal validity of the research into the capacity of the STM.
Strength: Studies into Sensory register + STM + LTM
Research into the duration of STM conducted by Peterson & Peterson is high in reliability this is because the research was carried out in a controlled environment (lab) therefore the research could be repeated in the same conditions. For example, ppts were presented with a trigram and given a three-digit number and had to count back in 3s then asked to recall the trigram. In order to check for consistent results into the duration of the STM.
Strength: Studies into Sensory register + STM + LTM (Bahrick evaluation)
Bahrick’s research into duration of the LTM is high in mundane realism, as the research assessed real life memories of the individual’s old classmates. This is a strength because it is something you might find yourself doing in everyday life, for example, searching for an old friend on social media. Therefore, it may be easier to generalise the research findings of the duration of LTM to other real-life applications, increasing the external validity of the research into the duration of LTM
Types of LTM: Procedural memory
“Knowing how”
. Responsible for knowing how to do things E.g. motor skills (riding a bike)
. Do not involve conscious thoughts and are non-declarative
. Area of the brain that is responsible is the Cerebellum + Motor cortex
Types of LTM: Semantic memory
“Knowing that”
. Responsible for storing knowledge about the world (own encyclopedia) E.g. facts Paris is the capital of France
. Involves conscious thoughts and are declarative
. Area of the brain that is responsible is the Temporal Lobe
Types of LTM: Episodic memory
. Responsible for storing information about events E.g. first day of school
. Involve conscious thoughts and are declarative as well as timestamped
. Area of the brain that is responsible is the Hippocampus
Strength: Types of LTM
A strength into the different types of LTM is that there is neuroimaging evidence to support the notion that there are different types of LTM. E.g. Ppts were asked to perform various memory tasks whilst their brains were scanned using PET scanner. It was found that episodic memories were associated with the hippocampus, whereas procedural memory was associated with the cerebellum and motor cortex. Therefore, this supports the different types of LTM because the 3 different types of LTM were found in different areas of the brain, indicating that they are separate.
Strength: Types of LTM
Moreover, the research into the different types of LTM, can be praised as it uses scientific methods. Objective and empirical techniques such as brain scans, which are used to identify the different parts of the brain that become active when completing different types of LTM tasks, Therefore, it could be argued that this increases the overall internal validity of the research into types of long-term memory, thus raising psychology’s scientific status.
Strength: Types of LTM
To further evaluate the different types of long-term memory, it has real life evidence from a case study of Clive Wearing. He suffers from amnesia in which from his past, e.g. his musical education. However, Clive’s procedural memory was still working as can remember how to play the piano. This supports the idea that there are different types of long-term memory because if only certain parts of his LTM are damaged, this indicates that they are separate.
Think further: However, Clive Wearing’s amnesia was caused by a virus that damaged his hippocampus, further supporting the idea that the episodic memory is located is located in this area of the brain
Weakness: Types of LTM
However, this research to support can be critisiced as it has low population validity. This is because the research was a case study, using only Clive as a ppt who suffers from an unusual illness involving damage to the brain. Therefore, it is difficult to generalise the findings of the different types of LTM to the wider population as their LTM may operate differently, thus limiting the support that the research provides the different types of LTM.
What does Interference theory sugget:
Suggests that forgetting occurs due to 2 lots of information, coded at different times becoming confused in the LTM, one memory disrupts the ability to recall another memory. (Occurs mostly when the information is similar).
What is Proactive interference?
(Pro - Past information)
. Proactive interference, forgetting occurs when past information stored disrupts the recall of new/recent information stored.
E.g. The memory of an old phone number disrupts attempts to recall a new phone number
What is Retroactive information?
(Retro - Recent information)
. Retroactive information, forgetting occurs when recent information stored disrupts the recall of past information stored.
E.g. The memory of a new care registration number prevents recall of a previous one.
Strength: Interference theory
Research to support interference theory as an explanation for forgetting was conducted by McGeoch and McDonald, who gave ppts a list of 10 adjectives (words) to learn - List A. Once the ppts had learnt this list they were given a 10minute break where they had to learn a second list of words - List B. Ppts were then asked to recall List A. It was found that is List B was a list of similar meaning words to List A recall was poor (12%), however, if the words in List B were different to List A recall was higher (26%). This supports the interference theory as an explanation for forgetting because it demonstrates that interference is strongest the more similar the items are, which is what the theory predicts.
Strength: Interference theory
A strength of interference as an explanation for forgetting is that much of the research, such as McGeoch and McDonald is high in reliability. It is conducted in a controlled, lab setting and therefore can be repeated in the same conditions for example give each ppt the same time to learn the wordlist in order to gain consistent results into the effects of interference on forgetting.
Strength: Interference theory
Baddeley and Hitch conducted research using a real life setting where ppts performed a real-life task, which also supported interference theory. Baddeley and Hitch asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against over the rugby reason. Some players had played all of the games, and some had not, due to injury. The time interval from start to end of season was the same for all players. Baddeley and Hitch found that those ppts who had played more games forgot proportionally more games than those who had played fewer games. This supports interference theory because it demonstrates that the games became confused in memory and therefore less likely to be recalled, rather than being due to the amount of time that had passed.