memory

coding - Baddely

different word lists to recall in the same order

• STM = acoustically

• LTM = semantically

Baddely weakness

artificial stimuli = no reason to remember

Capacity - Jacobs

increased length of time until couldn’t recall

• digit span = 9.3

• letter span = 7.3

Capacity - Miller

STM = 7 (+/- 2)

chunking info = 7 chunks

Duration - Bahrick et al

photo recognition & free recall

15 years = 90% photo, 60% free

48 years = 70% photo, 30% free

LTM = lifelong

Bahrick weakness

confounding variable = looked at photos over year

Duration - peterson & peterson

STM = short duration unless we rehearse

Peterson & Peterson weakness

artificial stimulus material

Multi-store model researchers

Atkinson and Shiffrin

what is the multi-store made up of

• sensory register

• short-term memory

• long-term memory

sensory register coding

senses, iconic, echoic

sensory register capacity

hold lots of info

sensory register duration

½ second

H.M case study

retrograde amnesia = only childhood memories, no new ones

• hippocampus removed

shows separate stores for short and long-term memory

strength of multi store

Baddely = STM and LTM coded differently, showing they have different memory stores

weakness of multi store

type of rehearsal is more important than prolonged rehearsal

episodic

ability to recall events

time stamped memories

hippocampus

semantic

knowledge of the world

less vulnerable to distortion

temporal lobe

procedural

skills, actions,

unconscious

motor cortex

Clive wearing

lost episodic memory

7 second memory

procedural and semantic still intact

strength of 3 types of LTM

real-life application in treatment of memory problems

weakness 3 types of memory

debate over whether semantic and episodic are different stores.

not possible to have a fully functioning episodic alongside damaged semantic.

working memory researchers

Baddely and Hitch

central executive

Monitors incoming data and assigns slave systems

Visospatial sketchpad

Stores visual/spatial data

• visual cache - visual data

• Inner scribe - arrangement of objects

Phonological loop

auditory info and preserves order

• phonological story - stores words

• articulatory process - allows maintenance rehearsal

episodic buffer

temporary store

integrates info processed by other stores

strength of working model

K.F - phonological loop damaged but visuospatial sketchpad not

weakness of working model

lack of clarity over nature of central executive

proactive interference

old memories disrupt learning new ones

retroactive interference

new memories interfere with old ones and disrupt us from recalling them.

McGeoch and Mcdonald - effects of similarity

interference is worse when the memories for learning are similar

Mcgeoch and Mcdonald - procedure

changed the amount of similarity between 2 sets of materials. they had to learn a list of 10 words until they remember them with 100% accuracy. they then learnt a new set of words with differing relations e.g., synonyms

Mcgeoch and Mcdonald findings

when participants recalled the original word list their performance depended on the nature of the second list. the most similar material produced the worst recall

strength of interference research (Baddely & Hitch)

wanted to know if interference was a better explanation than the passing of time. asked rugby players to remember the faces of the teams they have played against. the recall didn’t depend on how long ago the matches were played, but the number of matches. those who played in fewer games recalled more names.

strength of interference (Keppel & Underwood)

examined the effect of proactive interference

presented 3 letter trigrams. to prevent rehearsal they had to count back in 3s. they usually remembered the trigrams they were presented with first.

weakness of interference (tilting)

gave list of 24 words organised in 6 categories. recall was at 70% for first list, but fell with each additional list. when given a cued recall test recall rose again to 70%, showing they were stored in LTM not forgotten.

retrieval failure

when we don’t have the necessary cues to access memory. it is available yet not accessible till a suitable cue is provided.

encoding specificity principle (Tulving)

found a consistent pattern, if a cue is to help with recall, it must have been present at encoding and at retrieval. if cues are different or absent, there will be some forgetting.

Godden & Baddely - context depending forgetting - procedure

learned a list of words on land or underwater and were then asked to recall words on land or in water. accurate recall was found to be 40% lower in non-matching conditions. when external cues are different from at learning, retrieval failure will occur.

strength ( CD forgetting G&B)

lots of supporting evidence that increases validity. takes place in real-life conditions, as they were real divers diving. this gives it more external validity.

weakness (CD forgetting - G&D)

contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen e.g., not different rooms. this means the real-life application is limited.

Carter and Cassidy state dependent forgetting.

gave antihistamine drugs to participants which made them feel drowsy, creating an abnormal state. when there was a mismatch between internal state and recall, the memory test performance was worse.

strength (SDF C&C)

lab studies are easily replicable, so supporting replication of the study would increase validity

weakness (SDF C&C)

lab studies and artificial material decrease the validity of the study and make it lack mundane realism.

leading questions

because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer. this is a form of response bias.

loftus and palmer - leading questions procedure

45 American students divided into 5 groups of 9 and all watched a video of a car crash. manipulated the verb in the question e.g., smashed, collided.

loftus and palmer - leading questions findings

the harsher the verb, the faster people said the car was going.

when asked if they saw any glass, when the verb was smashed more people said yes than the other verbs.

the memory of the event was distorted by the question asked a week ago.

post event discussion

when co witnesses to an event discuss what they saw it can lead to inaccurate recall as people change their version of events. people may influence them to change their recall or they may agree because of social desireability

gabbert et al - post event discussion - procedure

watched a video of stealing money from a wallet. they were tested individually or in pairs. participants in pairs were told they had watched the same video but they had seen different perspectives and only 1 had seen the girl directly steal the money.

gabbert et al - post event discussion - findings

71% recalled information they had not actually seen

60% said the girl was guilty despite not actually seeing the crime.

strength of leading questions

important practical use when consequences regarding eyewitnesses can be serious e.g., in court. they make a positive difference to the way the legal system works.

post event discussion weakness

watching filmed clips is different from watching a real life crash and lacks the stress. we cannot have an accurate understanding as it does not take into account factors such as anxiety.

anxiety as a negative impact

creates psychological arousal in the body which prevents us paying attention to important cues which makes recall worse

Johnson and Scotts research (anxiety as negative) - procedure

participants waited in a reception area and were exposed to a man running past with a knife or a man walking past with a pen.

they had to identify the man from 50 photos.

findings - Johnson and Scott

in the high anxiety condition, identified the man 33% of the time

in low anxiety, identified 49% of the time

due to the weapon focus effect

anxiety with a positive effect (Yuille & Cutshall) - procedure

study of a shooting in a gunshot, where the owner shot a thief dead. 21 witnesses were interviewed by police and 13 agreed to take part in investigation. interviewed again 4-5 months later and compared to original. they were also asked to rate how stressed they felt. more stressed = more accurate

contradictory findings of anxiety explained

it looks like an inverted u. lower levels or too high levels create worse recall. for recall to be most accurate, anxiety must be at an optimal level. it is the level of anxiety experienced that determines if it has a positive or negative impact.