remembering and forgetting Flashcards
what are the models for memory?
multi store model of memory
levels of processing theory
working memory model
what is the multi store model?
composed of a short term and long term memory
main features: -sensory register -short term memory -long term memory [swag banter yolo putin]
describe the sensory register
senses are registered
information is held in the same sense it is registered
information is held for about half a second
describe the short term memory
sensory registered information is passed onto the short term memory
short term memory remembers in 7 +/-2
memory can be extended by chunking
if information in the short term memory is reheared, it is retained and transferred to long term memory
describe the long term memory
information stored here indefinitely
huge capacity and memories are stored semantically = information is stored in an organised and meaningful way
strengths of the multi store model
highly influential leading to further theories and research
empirical evidence to support these memory stores but done with laboratory studies = low ecological validity
PRIMACY AND RECENCY EFFECT/serial positioning curve - participants learn and recall words. first and last words are remembered because the start is rehearsed and the end are still in the STM
LEVELS OF PROCESSING MODEL - words processed semantically are remembered better than words processed = agrees with multistore
CLINICAL STUDIES - amnesiacs show that STM can be damaged but the LTM remains intact suggesting they are separate stores
weaknesses of the multi store model
over simplified as it suggests we only have single stores of STM and LTM memories
working memory model suggests STM has 3 components and there are different types of LTM
rehearsal is over simplified - some material is remembered without rehearsal eg flashbulb memories
study for the multi store model
baddeley: STM and LTM are coded differently
in STM tasks that required immediate recall of learned words = more mistakes were made when information sounded similar
phonological store = STM
in LTM tasks that required later recall (20 mins) mistaks were made for words with similar meanings
semantic stores = LTM
evaluation of baddeley’s study
highly controlled lab = low ecological validity
describe the working memory model
viewed as an extension to the multistore model’s view of stm
stm is made up of four components: the central executive
phonological loop
the visual spatial scratchpad
the episodic buffer
what is the central executive
controls how we direct our attention and selects what information we should retain and ignore
connects working memory with LTM
what is the phonological store
processes sound based information by verbal rehearsal (inner voice) or hearing our own thoughts (inner ear)
the articulatory process has a limited capacity to 3/4 items
what is the visual spatial scratchpad
manipulates visual (shape and colour) and spatial information eg navigation around a room
what is the episodic buffer
binds visual, verbal and spatial information - allowing the visual spatial scratchpad, phonological loop and central executive interact
name two studies for the working memory model
Paulesa and hunt
what was Paulesa’s study?
asked participants to memorise a series of letters or to rehearse the sounds in their heads
he measured the blood flow in the brains and found different patterns in the brains of memorising and rehearsing participants
phonological store has two components
what was Hunt’s study?
participants controlled a lever between two posts and at the same time completed an intelligence test consisting of spatial patterns
as the intelligence test got harder, the control on the lever deteriorated
both tasks used the same central processor and were competing for the limited capacity available
what is wrong with hunt’s study?
lacks ecological validity as participants performed two tasks which are not normal to everyday life
also, could it be the visuo spatial scratchpad being used?
strengths of the working memory model?
flexible and comprehensive view of the stm
provides insight into learning difficulties such as inability to read - children who can’t read very well perform badly on tasks for the phonological store
what is wrong with hunt’s study?
lacks ecological validity as participants performed two tasks which are not normal to everyday life
also, could it be the visuo spatial scratchpad being used?
hunt did not have evidence for the capacity of the central executive
strengths of the working memory model?
flexible and comprehensive view of the stm
provides insight into learning difficulties such as inability to read - children who can’t read very well perform badly on tasks for the phonological store
processing visual and sound information are highlighted as one being effected and one is not - brain damaged patients
weaknesses of the working memory model?
limited as it only explains the stm
little is known about the central executive
studies and experiments on the working memory model lack ecological validity
what is the levels of processing model?
three levels of processing information
shallow/structural level - what does it look like?
intermediate/phonetic level - sound like?
deep/ semantic level - meaning?
what does this theory predict?
words processed on a semantic will be remembered better than on a phonetic level which will be remembered better than on a structural level
what are the two types of rehearsal?
maintenance rehearsal - simple rote rehearsal, repetition
elaborative rehearsal - analysing the meaning of the rehearsed material and linking it with knowledge
what was craik and tulving’s study?
participants were presented with words and were asked questions based on the structure, sound and meaning
they were then asked to pick those words out from a bigger list
semantic level words were remembered much better 65% than phonological 37% and structural 17%
strength and weaknesses of craik and tulving study
relies on incidental learning - advantage of high ecological validity as participants will be unlikely to engage in extra processing
deception - ethical
strengths of levels of processing theory
focuses on the process involved in memory than structure which offers credible alternative to multistore model
can explain flashbulb memories - semantic
weaknesses of levels of processing theory
no independent measure - assumes words remmebered are deeply processed
simplification of levels? sometimes phonetic is better
what are the types of long term memory?
episodic
semantic
procedural
what is a procedural memory?
action based memory
non declaritive as it is hard to put into words
what is a semantic memory?
knowledge but doesn’t have a time or place linked to when the memory was aquired
declaritive as you can put it into words
what is an episodic memory?
events which we have experienced or others have experiences and we know about - autobiographical and experimental memories are an example of episodic memories
declaritive as you can put it into words
name two studies for the LTM
Tulving
Bower
What is the tulving study for LTM?
investigated episodic and semantic memories by injecting radioactive gold into his bloodstream
he thought about semantic and episodic memories whilst recording his blood flow in his brain
different tasks changed the blood flow suggesting two seperate types of LTM stored
what is the bower study?
two groups of people were presented with the same words to learn but were presented differently
they were either hierachically organised or random. they were asked to recall them
the organised condition remembered more words
evaluation of the bower study?
we assume participants make semantic associations between the words but it’s difficult to know precisely if it is or not
because it’s highly controlled - low ecological validity
strengths of the LTM
added more detail to the LTM after elaborating on the multistore model of it
good theory for HM - brain injury resulting in being able to learn procedural memories but not semantic/episodic memories
weaknesses of the LTM
evidence that different types of LTM involving different brain structures is limited
tulving experiment is inconclusive and he later revised it saying that episodic and semantic memories were in the same store
how many explanations of forgetting is there? name them
trace decay interference retrieval failure displacement lack of consolidation motivated forgetting
what is trace decay
biological explanation - unless information is rehearsed, the neural trace will be lost
memories create structural changes so you need to rehearse something a lot to create the change
the memories can still be lost if they are not regularly rehearsed
=> fade with time
what is a study for LTM trace decay?
ebbinghaus - law of disuse. learnt lists of nonsense words and rehearsed them over a period of time
as the days went on, he remembered less and found that forgetting had a pattern - forgetting curve = rapid forgetting in a short space of time that then leveled off after a while
evaluation of trace decay?
laboratory studies to support theory = low eco validity
interference theory states that over time there are distractions that distract us to prevent rehearsal this could be measuring interference and memory instead?
doesn’t explain how people can remember random things from years ago
structural differences can only be accounted for in alzheimers disease
what is intereference theory?
proposes we cannot rehearse things because of distractions. There are two types of interference: proactive and retroactive
what is proactive and retroactive interference?
proactive - previous memories interrupt new ones
retroactive - new memories interrupt our old ones
study for interference?
jenkins and dallenbach - two groups learned words. one group went to sleep, the other group didnt
sleeping group remembered much more words than the others
lacks eco validity
study for STM trace decay
waugh and norman
participants saw lists of 16 digits at a rate of 1 to 4 per secs
participants recalled the digit after the probe digit better at a shorter rate (4 per sec)
no relationship between speed and recall suggesting that interference was the reason p;
lacks eco validity
evaluation of interference theory
no clear explanation how interference affects memory
interference is greatest with similar things but less with different things = response competition
experiments lack eco validity
difficult to create non interference environment as anything can be distracting
what is retrieval failure
we need retrieval cues to remember things including:
context dependent: environmental variables
state dependent: psychological/mood variables
retrieval of words is better if they are organised under category headings
study for retrieval failure?
godden and baddeley: divers learned words on land and under water
participants remembered better if they were in the environment they learned them in
extreme conditions do not reflect everyday life even though it was a field experiment and effect would be less evidnt if the differences were more subtle
evaluation of the retrieval failure theory?
consistent with the levels of processing theory because cues are a form of deep and making links
this explains why lost memories can be remembered - cues which is better than trace decay
artificial conditions - low eco validity
effective in free recall tasks but less in other memory tests as recognition
what is displacement theory?
based on the view that STM has a capacity of 7 +/- 2 items. extra information coming into the STM displaces old information so we forget it and why memories are lost after a while in the STM
evaluation of the displacement theory
explains the primary recency effect - serial positioning curve
limited in that it only explains STM
theory is based on multi store model so is slightly dated
what is the lack of consolidation theory?
biological basis too like trace decay
permanent alterations of the brain substrate - repeatedly adtivate the STM (consolidation - going over it) and it will go into the STM but if something interrupts the process it will not be stored in the LTM
acetycholine has been identified as important in this process
study for lack of consolidation theory
drachman and sahakian: blocks action of acetylcholine
people who had drug didn’t remember as much words
yarnell and lynch: football players with head injury. remembered stuff when asked straight away after accident but not after a longer period of time (20 mins) after accident - didn’t reach LTM
evaluation of lack of consolidation theory
patients with concussion sometimes suffer retrograde amnesia - loss of memory for events priot to the concussion - consolidation process interrupted
electro convulsive therapy causes memory loss - essential consolidation requires an hour
what is motivated forgetting?
freud: experiences are painful so we repress them so we do not suffer
by repressing them we cannot access them.
we can remember them by removing defense mechanisms with free association, dream analysis
studies for motivated forgetting
gucksberg and lloyd: words with electric shocks accompanying them were less likely to be remembered
ethical implications
associated words with electric shocks = purposely didn’t mention it?
motivated forgetting is usually associated with personal and emotional memories
evaluation of motivated forgetting?
difficult to replicate traumatic experiences as it is unethical
inscientific approach as the unconscious cannot be scientifically proven so is very subjective
painful memories can be remembered very vividly (flashbulb memories and PTSD)
some evidence that painful memories are forgotten eg childbirth
evaluation of motivated forgetting?
difficult to replicate traumatic experiences as it is unethical
inscientific approach as the unconscious cannot be scientifically proven so is very subjective
painful memories can be remembered very vividly (flashbulb memories and PTSD)
some evidence that painful memories are forgotten eg childbirth
williams study for motivated forgetting?
investigated women who were sexually abused
they couldn’t recall them leading to williams believing it is repression
problems with williams study?
critisised for ignoring alternate reasons such as:
- may wish to move on with their lives
- or be embarrassed by these events
- don’t want to get anyone in trouble
- protect family members
