Researchers Flashcards
Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968)
- came up with the multi -store model.
Crowder (1993)
Divided sensory register
- iconic > 500 milliseconds (Walsh & Thompson)
- school > 2/3 seconds
- supports that info is coded into different memo stores
Javitt et al (1996)
SR
- capacity is biological
- relates to efficiency of the nervous system
- includes individual differences
Baddeley 1996
Acoustic & semantic
- acoustic and semantic in LTM and STM
- 75 pps
- 1 of 4 word lists
- list with similar acoustic words (sound) 10%
- list w/ similar semantic words ( meaning) 55%
- rearrange original words
- LTM (2o min break)
- confusion = coded
Miller 1956
Chunking 5-9
Increases STM capacity
- words grouped together.
Peterson & Peterson
DURATION OF STM
Read nonsense trigrams 2 pps
- got them to count backwards from a large number
- 90% trigrams recalled after 3 secs
- 5% @ 30 secs
HOWEVER
- may be due to interference between trigrams
- lacks Eco validity
-
Bahrick et al ( 1975)
400 pps - 17-74 - photos and list of names - some ex school friends Asked to identify them -left high skl 15 yrs - 90% identified - left 48 years - 80% name 70% face
SUPPORTS LTM IS LONG LASTING
Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
Argued STM was more complex then transferring info to LTM.
Baddeley (1996)
Pps found it difficult to multi task
- suggests CE can only handle one task at a time due to its limited capacity.
Baddeley (1986)
Phonological loop
Divided PL into 2
- Primary acoustic store - takes in what is recently heard.
- Articulatory process - linked to speech production. (Repetition of sub-vocal in PL keeps info).
Baddeley et al
PL
The capacity of PL is set by how long it takes to say a word.
Pps recalled more short words than long words.
Tulving 1989
Investigated the differences in processing semantic and episodic memory.
- used 6pps he knew
- 8 episodes 4 semantic 4 episodic - 80 seconds each
- injected radio active gold.
- found Episodic and semantic are involved with different brain Aires suggesting they are separate.
- 3/6 showed differences in processing.
Vicari et al (2007)
Case study
8 year old CL suffered from brain damage
- lead to a faulty LTM - could not make episodic memories
- BUT could make semantic memories
- SUGGESTS THE TWO STORES ARE DIFFERENT.
Clive Wearing
Case study
Virus - brain damage - amnesia
- damaged LTM , could not remember anything after the Virus.
- procedural memory still intact - can play the piano without knowing it.
Underwood &Postman (1960)
- pps asked to use a list of word pairs
- presented with first word (stimulus) and must recall the paired word.
- another list with same stimulus word that has a different pair.
Retroactive - recall 2nd pair
- proactive - recall first pair
Baddeley and Hitch 1977
- real life study
- rugby
- interference better explanation of just passing of time?
- rugby players asked to recall the teams they had played in the last season
- some players hadn’t played for a while
- player who hadn’t played much games - better recall
- no new games to interfere with the old.
recall does not depend on passing time
Godden & BAddeley
Retrieval failure.
Got divers to learn words either
- on land or under water
- recall was worse wen it was recalled in different context
- eg: recalling on land when it was learned under water.
Tulving + pearlstone 1966
48 words 2 learn
- 12 cats
- heading for each cat
- pps who had headings for cues recalled more.
- pps who facilitated recall - worse.
- suggests cues help recall.
Bartlett 1932
Schemas
- ‘the war of the ghosts’
- western pps recalled war not ghosts as they could associate themselves with it more.
- supports schemes can interfere with recall.
- schemas can direct response
- schemas can leave out information individual deems unnecessary
Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Exp 1
To see whether pps watching a video of speeding cars could be influenced by
-MISLEADING QUESTIONS .
9 pps X5 conditions =45 pps
- watched the same video.
- question: how far were the cars going when they ……
- pps estimated differently for different words.
- intensity of word-
- hit = 34 mph
- Smashed = 40 mph
-LEADING QUESTIONS = FALSE MEMORY
Exp 2
150 students
- 50 had question with word ‘contacted’ ‘smashed’
- 50 controlled
- key q “was there any glass” (there was none)
- pps more likely to falsely recall broken glass with the word “smashed”
-MISLEADING INFO in the form of POST EVENT.
Can cause false memory
Loftus & picrell 2003
- 120 pps who went to Disneyland as a child
- 4 conditions
- read a fake magazine with bugs bunny
- ready a fake mag with Bb and saw a cardboard figure
30-40 % recalled meeting be when they didn’t.
Post event info - false memory
Pictorial suggestions - false memories
APP : ADVERTISERS USE NOSTALGIC IMAGES
CREATES FALSE POSITIVE MEMOS.
Lotus et al 1987
Person carrying a weapon
The weapon will be focuses on more than the details of the person.
Hard for them to recall.
Anxiety > decreases recall.
YERKES DODSON INVERTED U
Moderate amounts of anxiety - improve recall
- further anxiety = decline in recall
Geisel man
& fisher (1992)
Came up with the CI
Cognitive interview.
Works best if interviewed shortly after crime.
ECI - enhanced
MCI - modified - for children.
Gobbert 2003
Repeat interviewing
- pps in pairs - same video
- control recalled straIght away
- exp discussed before recalling
- 71% inaccurate recall.
- recalled from discussion. Not video.
Loftus & Burns
Pps showed video of boy shot in the face
Lead to impaired recall of events running up to violent bit.
