Test 2. end of term Flashcards
Flashbulb memory theory researcher + year
Brown & Kulik 1977
Brown & Kulik AIM + PROCEDURE + RESULTS + (CONCLUSION)
FBM
- to investigate whether surprising & important events could lead to the formation of FBMs.
- questionnaire, 80 males (40 white, 40 black)
- used 9 events, JFK & MLK, individually - asked questions, “who were you with when it happened, how did you find out, how did you feel, how important is it to you, have you talked about it since, where were you.”
- 90% had formed FBMs. 1 difference.
FBM theory, what does it say?
FBMs are highly detailed, exceptionally vivid, snapshots of a moment, when something surprising or emotionally arousing happens.
- different from everyday memories
- resistant to forgetting
- special mechanisms hypothesis: there is some kind of biological mechanism behind it.
- consequential
Neisser & Harch (year +…)
FBM, reconstructive memory
1992
aim: to investigate the accuracy of FBMs + confidence
- m+p: case study: challanger 1988, asked same question as B + K on 2 occasions, 1 after accident and 1 2,5 years later. Interviewed them the 2nd time.
- results: difference in answers between the 2 occasions. CONFIDENCE was high!
Conclusion: FBMs are not as accurate as the theory suggests, but we are highly confident in them and believe they are correct.
Sharot
2007, conclusion: close, personal experiences may be critical in engaging the neural mechanisms that produce vivid memories of FBM.
Schema theory, what does it say? (when, who?)
what they help us with (5/6) humans. .
Bartlett 1932
- a mental representation derived from prior knowledge and expectations.
- help us make sense of the world, make it predictable, help us organize knowledge “packets of info”, help our memory, allow us to fill in gaps when info is missing, culture specific.
- humans are active processors of information, we don’t take in info passively.
- cognitive processes are affected by schemas- what we remember and perceive is influenced by what we already know.
Bransford & Johnson (year+...) (schema theory) (hint: how schemas ... memory) (co: encode, not a copy) (evaluation)
1972
aim: to investigate how schemas help us store info in our memory,
procedure: Ps are randomly divided into 3g. Read a paragraph (before, after, not).
- asked to recall as much as possible.
- results: g1 that was told before remembered a lot more.
conclusion: schemas help Ps encode new information by making it possible to organize and interpret the info.
- memory is not just storing a copy, have to actively interpret what u hear based on previous knowledge.
Evaluation: easy to replicate, high reliability, same results
- cause and effect IV and DV
- artificial task
- independent measures design, participant variability .
high control of variables.
Allport & Postman
(year+ …ev)
-schema theory
h: picture, stereotypes
1947
aim: to investigate how pre existing schemas inclfuence memory of a picture
- p: showed a drawing, white & black man, razor, asked P to retell up to 7ps.
- r: over half the trials, the weapon switched hands & black man was threatening.
- c: stereotypes are a social schema, affect the retelling. bc blacks = ‘violent’. old, but relevant.
Evaluation of schema theory
Testable: yes
Empirical evidence: yes
Application: applied across many fields of psychology,. understand how people work, therapies have eben developed
unbiased: theory itself is unbiased.
Reconstructive memory (who, when, what?)
- INTRODUCED by Bartlett (1932)
“memory is not a tape recorder” - Claims that our episodic memories are not like photos.
- memories are reconstructed. every time a memory is retrieved, it is changed based on schemas and details from the actual event.
- relevant schemas are activated when we try to retrieve a memory.
- make assumptions, fill in gaps.
Loftus & Palmer
(reconstructive memory)
h: eyewitness, estimation
1974
aim: to investigate whether the usage of leading questions would affect eyewitness estimation of speed.
- p: 2 exp were conducted, students Ps.
prediction: the word ‘smashed’ would result in a higher speed estimation, than “hit”.
- IV: itensity of the verb used in the critical question
- DV: estimation of speed.
p: divided into groups, shown 7 films, REPEATED measures design.
- answered questionnaires with different questions including critical q.
- some words used: hit, collided, bumped, smashed, contacted.- r: higher estimation when using smashed. critical word in the question kept affecting estimation.
c: Ps memory of an accident could be changed by using suggestive questions.
Loftus Palmer evalutaion
- low ecological validity: labratory, Ps were students. not necessarily how peopel remember in real life.
- confounding variables were controlled, IV affected DV. cause and effect
- biased: only students used, lack of driving experience, don’t reflect the population.
- high reliability
TEACUP reconstructive memory
Testable
Empirical
Application- explain many behaviours, applied to improving the processing of gathering info from eyewitnesses.
Thinking and decision making theory
Thinking: using information, deciding something, doing something with the info.
D-making: type of thinking. cognitive process. selecting pone possible action, making a choice, analyzing.
Dual process model
h: cognitive load high, law of least effort (demanding9
addressing a problem
practice.
Claims: 2 basic models of thinking.
s1: fast, prone to errors, used when cognitive load is high, automatic, intuitive, effortless, influenced by biases, established schemas, makes impressuions. Use this because we are cognitive misers. law of least effort
S2: slower, requires effort &c, concsious, goal directed, analyses for biases, more effort, thinking about all the possible ways we could interpret a situation, eliminates, arrive at a solution.
Problem: s1 will reach a quick conclusion and s2 will go further into it and reach a correct conclusion.
s1 is activated first, interferes with the effectiveness of s2.
practice can lead to s1 taking over.
Stroop 1935
(thinking)
ev:
Color study. State color, read color. Aim: if automatic process of reading a word interferes with naming the color the word is printed in.
Dependent measures design.
p: c1: to name the color a word is printed in, ignoring the word.
c2. read the actual word & ignore the color. Researchers measures how long it took to go through the list. R: took longer to go through the list when they had to name the color it was printed in than to read it.
Con: s1 of thinking (automatic reading of the word) interferes with namking a mismatching color which needs s2 to work on it).
Ev: high internal validity (controlled exp), results are reliable, has been applied.
TEACUP of t & d-making.
biological evidence that s1 and s2 are processes in different parts of the brain.
studies are reliable, successfully replicated
testable
application: why we make mistakes (s1 is quick-prone to errors)
defintiions are not clear
reductionist, how is thinking influenced?
Biases in t & d-making
(what is a cognitive bias?)
+ bias
- pattern of thinking and d-making that is consistent but inaccurate.
- system 1 is used, fast but prone to errors.
anchoring bias: tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of info offered “the anchor” when making decisions. we cling to the anchor.
Tversky & Kahneman
biases
1974
aim: test the influence of anchoring bias on d-making.
method: lab experiment
IV: whether the anchor was low or high
c1: asked to estimate the product of 1234567*8
c2: same but in descending order.
Ps given 5sec to estimate the product. s1 used bc no time for s2.
Dv: estimated product.
Independent measures design, if it were dependent they wouldve figured it out.
R: when the anchor was low, the estimation was low and vice versa.
c: the first nr (anchor) seems to have biased the final estimate. had to make an estimation based on the first few nrs.
Evaluation of T & K 1974
- easily replicated, establish the reliability of the results. highly controlled, high internal validity
- low ecological validity: we don’t often only have 5 secs to count.
- independent measures design, participant variability,
English & Mussweiler - LAW
ev
2001
aim: to see whether ancoring bias would influence the suggestion of a sentence in a rape case.
ps: 44 german senior law students.
p: given a scenario of a rape case, including a prosecuter’s demand of either 34 or 12 months sentence. these were the anchors, IV. Dv was the suggested sentence by the students.
r: when told the higher sentence, they recommended on average eight months more than the lower sentence, for the same crime.
c: anchoring bias plays a significant role in determining sentences in courtrooms, even when they’re experts.
Ev:
- cause and effect can be established.
high level of control of extraneous variables (lab)
- lack of ecological validity
- high mundane realism.
what is memory
the cognitive process by which information is encoded, stored and retrieved,
what is a model of memory
propose how memory works & representation of how memories work
hypothetical, changes over time
Multi store model MSM
types of LTM
Atkinson & Sheriff 1968.
Dividing memory into different components. Sensnory - short term- LTM. Bombarded with sensory stimuli,, when we pay attention to it, -> stm. held until other info replaces it, moved to LTM. when we remember, we move it back to stm. REHERSAL ATTENTION RETRIVAL
3 stores.
Types of ltm:
1. declaration “knowing what”, memory of facts (semantic) and events (episodic) can be recalled.
2. episodic: specific events that occured at a given time & place
3. semantic: contains general knowledge of facts and people, concepts and schemas.
4. procedural “ knowing how”, unconcious memory of skills and how to do things.
