Studies for Test 3 440

Trivia Study examining the Google Effect

required participants to learn random trivia facts and both groups were asked to memorize the facts. The first group was told that the information would be saved and the second group was told the information would go away. The second group did better.

Keppel’s Study on Massed vs Distributed practice

had participants remember nonsensical associations and were asked to give the corresponding word

after one day there wasn’t a differences but after a week the distributed group did much better at recall

The Hyde study examined intentional vs incidental in what way?

had participants memorize the list through intentional learning

asked participants to study it deeper and think about the semantic meaning

those who were told to really think about the word processed it better than those who thought of it in a shallow way

In Engelkamp and Krumnacker, a study that examined the enactment effect

those who had the best recall performed the action themselves. those who had the worst recall watched someone else perform the action

the higher level our processing is the more ability we have to remember something

Godden and Baddeley study done on Context-dependent learning

examined how some participants who learned under water were asked to recall under water. Then participants who learned on land where also asked to recall on land. The results were that those who learned on land were able to recall better on land and water with water. When it was the other way around land-water or water-land they had worse recall.

this was also done with college students

Bower et al Organization of Memory research

had participants remember 112 minerals/ words

wanted to test how organizing info into a hierarchy versus randomly affected how you remembered

out of the 4 different trials that participants completed, those in the hierarchy group have achieved 100% recall

overall, it is less likely that we remember information when it is random but when placed into groups we remember easier

Meyer and Schvanevedlt study

showed that when you were primed the reaction time in recognizing went faster

this was done through the lexical decision tas

Jacoby et al study on False framing

participants were part of an experiment in which they thought pronunciation was being tested. after the test (some were done immediately or 24 hours later) the experimenter had them categorize names if they were famous or not. some names were actually names of famous people, names that had been encountered in the pronunciation task, and new names. The group that was tested immediately were able to select the correct names but those who were tested a day later ranked the names encountered in the pronunciation task as famous people names

Begg et al study done on familiarity

participants were asked to rank if statements were true or false and how credible of a source they were on a likert scale from 1-5

even though some statements were false, after seeing them again they ranked them as true

Brown et al study on memory with photo lineups

participants watched a staged crime and afterword were presented a lineup without the actual Perp included. a few days later they were given photos (without the perp) but included new faces. Participants were more likely to chose someone from the 1st line up because their faces were familiar 

Case study of Retrograde amnesia with Married woman

a lady got into a car accident weeks after being married and could not remember her husband or getting married but was able to remember her childhood

Case study of Anterograde amnesia (Kent Cochrone)

lost of old and new memories

had semantic memory but lost episodic memory

his brother died and although he was able to describe what happened at the funeral he could not remember what exactly happened at his brothers funeral. He was reliant on what he knows happens at a funeral (semantic)

Case study for Anterograde (Henry Molaison)

Also known as patient H.M.

they removed a part of his temporal lobe to help get rid of his seizures

he could not form new explicit memories but could form implicit memories that could be introduced to LTM

researchers had him complete a mirror task where people typically get better at doing it as they go.

he claimed her could not remember completing it but his ability to compete the task got faster each time

Édouard Claparède’s findings with people who have Koraskoff’s syndrome (form of anterograde amnesia)

put a pin in his hand and shook the hands of those afflicted with this syndrome. patients would react initially but the next day they would not remember meeting him when asked explicitly but would not shake his hand upon meeting him

Schocter et al. (1981) with people who have Koraskoff’s syndrome (form of anterograde amnesia)

had cards with questions on them and if the patient did not know, he gave them the answer and put it back in the deck. The patients could then answer it the next time but claimed they didn’t remember seeing the card

Keil 1986 on differences between typicality and categorization

looked at how we make decisions on whether things are living or not and how er precieve their ability to change function

asked participants if we can turn a toaster into a coffee machine? yes

can we turn a skunk into a raccoon? well even though they look similar we cannot change things that are living because they are independent

Rips 1975 on how typicality guides our inferences

told participants that a particular bird had a disease and other bird species could catch it. they looked at participants concern about other birds depending on if it was a sparrow or a duck. Can the bird catch the disease sparrow versus duck: there was more concern when it was a sparrow but not when it was a duck. Why is this? because ducks are lower in typicality

Rothegerber 1977 study done on the Homogeneity effect

asked people about their university populations and their diversity. You believe your university is more diverse but that other universities are the same

What 3 trends did the Bartlett 1932 find?

1. people remember the main plot

2. upon the second recall, participants showed detailed loss

3. people typically normalize a story and de-misty it

Sulin and Dooling 1974 of semantic illusions

gave participants in one group a story and asked them to recognize what was said in it a week later. one group had the same story but a different name (Hitler). One sentence was not in the story but it fit with the schema for Hitler so participants did “recognize” it.

Owens et al. 1979 on intrusion errors

people were read a story and then asked to recall as many sentences as possible and researchers counted how many times things that were not a part of a story were included in their answers

Bower Study

had participants read 10 short stories. 8 of them happened in “normal” order and the other ones were in abnormal order

what was the result of these studies?

when participants memory was tested later, people put the events in order because it fit with their script

What was the case study of Becky and Markie?

Becky was diagnosed with autism but Markie was not. They could remember every day they had ever experienced.

Who developed the term ‘flashbulb memory’ and why was it created?

developed by Brown and Kulik in 1977 after a study was done on memory of the JFK assassination

Talarico and Rubin 2003 study done on flashbulb memories

tested participants memories for the day after 9/11 and personal details

found that people think they remember in detail but their memories are inconsistent as time passes

confidence level of memory stayed high but they were not consistent

Hirst et al 2009 on Flashbulb memory

a year later almost 40% of participants reported something they did in a different way after 9/11

Conway et al 1994 on Flashbulb memories

When Margaret Thatcher resigned they tested the memories of residents in England versus those in other parts of the world. Those who were from England remembered the day better than those from other parts of the world

What was found in the study for Crombag et al 1996 on reconstructed memory/ false framing?

more than half of people recalled seeing a film of a plane going into an apartment complex but there was never a video

people created/reconstructed an event that did not happen

What was found in the Ost et al 2002 study?

44% of British people reported seeing video footage of Princess Diana in a car crash but there was no video footage

What was found int the Brewer and Treyens 1981 study for errors based on schema?

it demonstrated how a stereotypical office schema can influence participants’ memories of an office setting, highlighting the power of schemas to shape our perceptions and recall

Hyman et al 1995 study on false memories reveled that

Memory for true events stayed the same a week later but they did recall the false memory because it had been mentioned to them

They came up with details for the event that never happened

wow shocking

Goldschmied et al 2017 study on how words can influence our perception of seriousness or severity

found that the power of suggestion was present when changing words like contact, smash, or bump to see how badly someone perceived a crash to be

Loftus and Palmer 1947

asked participants how fast cars were going when they smashed/collided/bumped/hit the car interchangeably

they changed the word and depending on which word was used people said the car was driving faster or slower

when the word was smashed they reported smashing glass

Loftus et al 1978

 “did another car pass the red Datsun when it was stopped at the ‘yield’ sign?”

They were later asked to circle what picture they saw yield or stop sign?

People picked the wrong picture because they were present with the ‘yield’ sign question

Loftus study for testing our scripts

“how fast was the car driving past the barn?”

“how fast was the car driving?”

There was not barn but it fits with our script of what happens in the country side 

Kassin and Kiechel 1996 False Confessions

told participants that while typing on a computer they should not press the ALT key because the computer would crash

they had a confederate say they said them press the key

participants can up with details like my hand slipped even though they had never hit the button

Rogers 1977 study on self-reference effect

when someone has the same name as yourself or someone else you know you remember it better; passwords are typically personal too

Brown and Murphy study on cryptoplagiarism

when researchers put participants into groups of four and asked them to put things into different categories. A week late they asked them same participants to put things in a group but this time individually and asked them to group again but this time they could only say what they had contributed earlier.