PSYCH 3VV3

explain the steps of the scientific approach to memory

1. Theory/model: Describes how memory works.

2. Hypothesis: A testable, causal explanation of how something might work.

3. Prediction: A specific “if–then” statement about what should happen if the hypothesis is correct.

4. Test: Test the prediction using research/peer-reviewed studies.

Key idea: Theory = big idea → Hypothesis = explanation → Prediction = expected outcome → Test = see if it's true.

what are memory metaphors?

compare memory to things like a video camera, filing cabinet, or computer. They can be misleading because they suggest that memories are exact copies of experiences, stored as separate things in specific brain locations.

• They can also suggest that different systems store different types of memories, like “muscle memory.”

• Key idea: Memory metaphors are useful for understanding memory, but they do not accurately describe how memory actually works.

what are the key processes?

1. encoding

2. storage

3. retrieval

Explain encoding

Getting information into your brain.

Example: Your professor explains a new concept in class, and you pay attention and learn the information. The information is being put into your memory.

explain storage

You learn the concept on Monday and still remember it on Friday, even though you haven't thought about it since Monday. Your brain held onto the information.

explain retrieval

Getting information out of your memory when you need it.

Example: Your professor asks you about the concept on an exam, and you remember the answer. You are pulling the information out of memory.

What is the Standard (Modal) Model of Memory?

It suggests that information moves through short-term storage and can then move into long-term storage through rehearsal.

explain how does the standard (modal) model of memory works?

Stimuli/Input → Short-Term Store → Rehearsal → Long-Term Store

• Short-term store: Limited capacity, used for information you are currently thinking about (“online storage”), and memories can rapidly decay without rehearsal.

• Long-term store: Has unlimited capacity and can hold memories for a long time with rehearsal.

Example:
You hear a phone number → keep repeating it in your head (short-term) → repeated rehearsal helps you remember it later (long-term).

Key idea: Short-term = limited + temporary → Rehearsal → Long-term = unlimited + lasting.

What is the purpose of theories and models in memory research?

they provide testable hypotheses that researchers can use to see how well the model explains real remembering behaviour.

Key idea: A good model should match how people actually remember.

What did the Brown-Peterson Task test about memory?

It tested whether information in short-term memory decays quickly without rehearsal, whether STM has limited capacity, and whether rehearsal helps information enter long-term memory.

How does the Brown-Peterson Task work, and what was the prediction?

Participants:

1. See a 3-letter trigram (e.g., D-B-X).

2. Immediately count backwards by 3s to prevent rehearsal.

3. Wait for 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, or 18 seconds.

4. Try to recall the letters.

• Prediction: The longer the person waits without rehearsal, the worse their recall becomes.

• Key idea: No rehearsal + more time → more forgetting.

What is the serial position curve?

A U-shaped pattern showing that people tend to remember the first and last items in a list better than the items in the middle.

• Beginning of list: remembered well

• Middle: remembered least well

• End: remembered well

Key idea: Best memory = beginning + end; worst memory = middle.

What is the primacy effect?

Better memory for items presented at the beginning of a list because you have more time to rehearse them.

Key idea: Beginning = more rehearsal → better memory.

What is the recency effect?

Better memory for items presented at the end of a list because they haven’t had much time to decay in short-term memory.

Key idea: End = still in STM → better memory.

what does Nairne (2002) talk about?

He's going to argue that the serial position curve provides weak evidence in terms of the standard model

What was the Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) end-of-list distractor task?

Participants:

• Studied a list of words

• Had either no delay, a 10-second delay, or a 30-second delay

• Then recalled as many words as they could

What did Glanzer & Cunitz predict would happen with a longer delay?

A longer delay would eliminate the recency effect, leaving mainly the primacy effect.

Key idea: Longer delay → recency effect disappears, but primacy effect remains.

What happened to the recency effect as the delay increased in Glanzer & Cunitz (1966)?

• With no distractor, there was a strong recency effect for the last items.

• As the delay increased, memory for the last items dropped off/decayed.

• This provided additional evidence supporting the Standard Model.

Key idea: Longer delay → end items decay → recency effect decreases.

What did Experiment 1 of Nairne (2002) do?

It replicated the Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) End-of-List Distractor Effect.

• Participants:

  1. Studied a list of words

  2. Had either no distractor or a 30-second distractor

  3. Recalled as many words as possible

What did Nairne (2002) find in Experiment 1?

He found the same results as the original Glanzer & Cunitz experiment, supporting the Standard Model of Memory.

• No distractor → recency effect
  30-sec distractor → recency effect decreases
  Same result as Glanzer & Cunitz → supports Standard Model

What was Experiment 2 in Bjork & Whitten (1974)?

It tested the Continuous Distractor Effect by having participants study a list of 12 words, with a 12-second distractor task after every word to prevent rehearsal.

After all 12 words, participants either had:

• No additional distractor → 12+0 condition

• 30-second distractor → 12+30 condition

Then they recalled as many words as possible.

Key idea: Bjork & Whitten (1974) = 12-second distractor after EVERY word, then either 0 or 30 seconds at the end.

In Experiment 2 in Bjork & Whitten (1974) Why did they put a 12-second distractor after every item?

To prevent rehearsal of each item. They wanted to see whether the items would still be remembered even when people couldn't rehearse them.

Key idea: No rehearsal → if the Standard Model is correct, memory should decay.

What was surprising about the results in Bjork & Whitten (1974)?

There was still a strong recency effect, even though each item had a 12-second distractor after it.

• There wasn't much of a primacy effect, but the recency effect was still strong.

in Bjork & Whitten (1974), what did the results suggest about decay?

They suggested that decay may not be what causes forgetting.

Even after the distractor tasks, the last items were still remembered well. So the 30-second delay wasn't necessarily causing working-memory information to decay.

How does the serial position curve provide evidence for a distinction between short-term and long-term memory?

The primacy effect is linked to long-term memory, while the recency effect is linked to short-term memory, suggesting they are separate memory systems.

What key idea supports the distinction between short-term and long-term memory?

Short-term and long-term memory are subject to different forms of forgetting.

What is interference, and how do retrieval cues relate to it?

Interference happens when other information gets in the way of remembering a memory.

A retrieval cue is a clue connected to the memory that can help you find it again, even when interference makes it hard to remember.

Example: You can’t remember your friend’s name because lots of other names are coming to mind. Hearing the song that played when you met them helps you remember their name.

Basically: Interference = blocks the memory. Retrieval cue = helps bring it back.

How do retrieval cues help us remember information?

Memories are connected to other thoughts and information. A retrieval cue activates those connections, helping us access a target memory that may have been difficult to remember.

• Key idea: The memory may still be stored; you just need the right cue to access it.

• Example: You can’t remember your friend’s name, but hearing the song that played when you met them suddenly makes you remember. The song acts as a retrieval cue.

How does interference cause forgetting?

• Your memories have clues (cues) that help you find them.

• If lots of memories have the same clues, they can get mixed up.

• This makes it hard to remember one specific memory.

Example:
You eat cereal for breakfast every day. Later, you might remember eating cereal, but not remember which day you ate it.

Key idea: Cue specificity

• Unique clue → easier to remember

• Same clue → harder to remember

Example: You’re more likely to remember breakfast on vacation because it was different and special.

What was Turvey et al. (1970) trying to find out?

• They wanted to find out whether forgetting is caused by time passing or by interference from other memories/trials.

• They tested this by seeing if memory got worse as the number of trials increased, even when the amount of time before recall stayed the same.

Key idea: If memory gets worse because of more trials, this suggests interference is causing forgetting, not just the passage of time.

What was the method used in Turvey et al. (1970) to test whether interference causes forgetting?

• Participants saw a trigram (e.g., C-J-X).

• They then counted backwards by 3s for 5, 10, 15, 20, or 25 seconds.

• They then recalled the trigram.

• This was repeated across multiple trials.

• Researchers looked at whether recall got worse as the number of trials increased, while the retention interval stayed the same.

Key idea: If recall gets worse across trials even when the time is the same, this suggests interference from previous trials causes forgetting.

What did Turvey et al. (1970) find, and what do the results suggest? (to test whether interference causes forgetting?)

• Recall got worse as the number of trials increased, even when the retention interval stayed the same.

• This suggests that interference from previous trials caused forgetting, rather than simply time passing.

Key idea: More similar trials → more interference → worse memory.

Why did memory get worse as the number of trials increased in Turvey et al. (1970)?

Each new trial gave participants more similar information to remember.

• The old information started to interfere with the new information, making it harder to remember the correct one.

• Important: The amount of time they had to remember stayed the same, so the worse memory was caused by interference, not time passing.

Basically: More trials → more similar memories → more interference → worse memory.

What did the 0 + 30, 12 + 0, and 12 + 30 conditions in Bjork & Whitten (1974) show about the recency effect?

• 0 + 30: No recency effect because there were no distractor tasks between study items, causing interference.

• 12 + 0: Recency effect because the 12-second distractor between each item reduced interference.

• 12 + 30: Recency effect because the 12-second distractors between each item reduced interference.

• Keep in mind that the study items were very similar, which is why it was hard to distinguish each one from each other, which is one of the main causes of interference

Key finding: The distractors between study items, not the 30-second distractor at the end, were important for preventing interference and preserving the recency effect.

explain what it means when we say that memory may be “cue-driven”

We may not forget because the memory is gone. Instead, we have trouble finding the memory because many similar memories interfere with each other.

• Current state = cue: Your thoughts, feelings, surroundings, time of day, etc. can help you find a memory.

• Internal states: How you are thinking/feeling at the moment.

• External context: Your surroundings, time, weather, etc.

• Internal representation of time: Brain processes that help track when things happened.

• The memory system connects experiences to each other, so similar experiences can interfere.

Example: You have many memories of eating breakfast. When trying to remember what you ate last Tuesday, the similar breakfast memories interfere, making it hard to pick out the correct one.

Forgetting may be a retrieval problem, not necessarily the memory being destroyed by decay.

What is temporal context, and how can it cause interference in memory?

the time period when something was learned or experienced.

• We have multiple study sessions leading up to a test.

• Forgetting is not simply because time passed between studying and testing.

• Instead, the similar information from other study sessions competes with the information you are trying to remember.

Example: You studied Chapter 1 on Monday and Chapter 2 on Tuesday. On the test, information from Chapter 2 may interfere with your memory of Chapter 1 because they were learned in similar contexts.

Key idea: Interference comes from competing similar information, not just the passage of time.

What is the standard model of short-term memory described by Nairne (2002)?

The standard model says that:

• Information is temporarily stored by being activated.

• Decay causes this activation to fade over time.

• Rehearsal refreshes the activation and prevents information from being lost.

So, short-term memory depends mainly on a trade-off between rehearsal and decay.

What is Nairne’s (2002) main argument against the standard model of short-term memory?

Nairne argues that short-term memory cannot be adequately explained by activation, rehearsal, and decay because:

• Memory performance can vary independently of rehearsal.

• The passage of time alone does not reliably cause forgetting.

• Remembering depends heavily on retrieval cues and interference.

He argues that short-term remembering is better understood as a cue-driven retrieval process.

What is Nairne’s main problem with the role of rehearsal in the standard model?

The standard model assumes that better rehearsal should lead to better short-term memory.

However, studies show that memory span can change even when articulation/rehearsal rate stays the same.

→ This means rehearsal cannot explain all the differences in short-term memory performance.

What evidence shows that short-term memory performance can vary independently of rehearsal rate?

Researchers found better memory for:

• Words > nonwords

• High-frequency > low-frequency words

• Concrete > abstract words

These memory differences occurred even when articulation rates were matched.

→ Therefore, faster rehearsal cannot be the only reason some information is remembered better.

Why does Nairne argue that the word-length effect does not provide strong evidence for rehearsal + decay?

Some evidence suggests that the word-length effect comes partly from what happens during recall, rather than simply because long words take longer to rehearse and therefore decay.

For example, memory performance depended on whether short or long words were recalled first.

→ This suggests retrieval/output processes contribute to the word-length effect.

What is Nairne’s main problem with decay as an explanation for short-term forgetting?

Time passing does not necessarily cause forgetting.

Memory can decrease, stay the same, or even improve over time, depending on factors such as:

• Retrieval cues

• Interference

• What happens during the retention interval

→ Therefore, time itself is not enough to explain forgetting.

What did Turvey et al. (1970) show about decay in short-term memory?

On the critical trial, everyone had the same 15-second delay, meaning the amount of time available for decay was identical.

Yet memory:

• Decreased for one group

• Stayed about the same for another

• Improved for another

→ If forgetting were caused simply by time-based decay, the groups should have performed similarly.

Instead, performance depended on the timing of previous trials and how distinctive the current memory was.

According to Nairne (2002), what role does interference play in short-term forgetting?

Forgetting depends partly on what happens during the retention interval, not simply how much time passes.

More forgetting occurs when distracting information is similar to the information being remembered, such as when:

• The target and distractor are both auditory.

• They are semantically similar.

• They are phonologically similar.

→ This supports interference rather than simple time-based decay as an explanation for forgetting.

What does Nairne (2002) propose instead of the standard model?

Nairne argues for a cue-driven account of short-term remembering.

Instead of remembering something simply because it is still activated, we remember by using retrieval cues to reconstruct/recover information from the recent past.

→ What you remember depends on how well the available cues help you retrieve the information.

Why does Nairne prefer a cue-driven account of short-term memory?

Because it explains short-term memory better by focusing on retrieval cues and interference.

• Retrieval cues matter: Good cues make memories easier to access.

• Interference matters: Other information can make memories harder to access.

• Time alone doesn’t cause forgetting: Memory can get worse, stay the same, or even improve over time.

• Short- and long-term memory work similarly: Many of the same factors affect both.

Main idea: Nairne thinks forgetting is more about difficulty retrieving a memory than the memory simply fading away with time.

According to Nairne (2002), what ultimately determines short-term memory performance: activation or retrieval?

Retrieval.

Nairne does not necessarily deny that activation exists in the brain. Instead, he argues that activation itself does not predict what we will remember.

What matters is how that activation is interpreted through cue-driven retrieval processes.

• Think of it like: Your memory is a toy box. It doesn’t matter that the toy is inside the box (activated)—what matters is whether you can find and pull out the right toy (retrieval).

What is the main takeaway from Nairne (2002), Remembering over the Short Term: The Case Against the Standard Model?

The traditional standard model says short-term memory depends on keeping information activated through rehearsal before it decays over time.

Nairne argues this is misleading because:

1. Rehearsal: Memory performance can vary even when rehearsal rate is the same.

2. Decay: Time passing does not automatically cause forgetting; memory can decrease, stay the same, or improve.

3. Retrieval: Short-term remembering depends heavily on retrieval cues and interference.

→ Therefore, short-term memory is better understood as a cue-driven retrieval process, rather than information simply sitting in an activated state waiting to be recalled.

What is the difference between structure and process in determining the memorability of a stimulus?

• Structure = where the information ends up in memory → short-term or long-term memory.

• Process = the level of analysis used when the information is encoded.

Which memory terms refer to memory tasks?

Recall and recognition.

• Recall → you are asked to produce information you previously learned.

• Recognition → you are shown information and asked whether you saw it before.

Which memory terms refer to memory processes?

Retrieval and recollection.

• Retrieval → activating a memory representation; can be conscious or automatic.

• Recollection → consciously remembering a particular event or previous experience.

What is the difference between a recall task and a recognition task?

• Recall: Produce the information yourself.

  • Example: “What words were on the list?”

• Recognition: Decide whether presented information was previously encountered.

  • Example: “Was ‘apple’ on the list?”

What is the difference between retrieval and recollection?

• Retrieval: Activating a memory representation → can be conscious OR automatic.

• Recollection: Consciously remembering a specific event or past experience.

What is the Levels of Processing Framework (Craik & Lockhart, 1972)?

Memory depends on how deeply information is processed during encoding.

Processing can go from shallow → deep:

• Structural → what it looks like

• Phonetic → what it sounds like

• Semantic → what it means

Main idea: Deeper, meaning-based (semantic) processing creates stronger memories than processing superficial features.

What was the main hypothesis of the Levels of Processing Framework?

Processing the meaning of information should create a stronger memory representation than processing only superficial features like its appearance or sound.

• Basically: How you process something affects how well you remember it.

What is a between-subjects design?

An experiment where each participant is assigned to only ONE condition/group.

Example: A participant would be in Group 1 OR Group 2, not both.

What did participants do in Hyde & Jenkins (1969)?

Different groups processed words in different ways:

• Group 1: Does the word contain “e”?

• Group 2: How many letters?

• Group 3: How pleasant is the word?

• Group 4: Memorize the words for a later test.

Afterward, everyone completed a free-recall test.

What is the difference between incidental and intentional learning in Hyde & Jenkins (1969)?

Incidental learning: Participants didn't know their memory would be tested.
→ Groups 1–3

Intentional learning: Participants knew they needed to memorize the words for a test.
→ Group 4

What were the results of Hyde & Jenkins (1969)?

• Letter “e” task: 8 words recalled

• Number of letters: 10 words

• Pleasantness: 16 words

• Intentional memorization: 17 words

The semantic pleasantness task produced almost the same recall as intentionally trying to memorize the words.

What was the main conclusion of Hyde & Jenkins (1969)?

What you do with information during encoding matters more than your intention to memorize it.

Participants who incidentally processed meaning remembered almost as much as participants who intentionally tried to memorize the words.

→ Deeper processing → better memory.

What is a within-subjects design?

An experiment where every participant experiences every condition in the study.

Example: In Craik & Tulving (1975), each participant completed all three processing tasks.

What three levels of processing were tested in Craik & Tulving (1975)?

Participants answered three types of questions about words:

• Structural (shallow): Is the word UPPERCASE or lowercase?

• Phonetic (middle): Does the word rhyme with a target word?

• Semantic (deep): Would the word fit in a sentence, such as “She met a ___ in the street”?

→ Each task required a deeper level of analysis than the one before it.

How was memory tested in Craik & Tulving (1975)?

Participants completed a recognition memory test.

They were shown 120 words:

• 60 previously studied

• 60 new

For each word, they decided whether it was “old” or “new.”

What did Craik & Tulving (1975) find about depth of processing and memory?

As the depth of processing increased, memory performance improved.

Structural → worst memory
Phonetic → better memory
Semantic → best memory

→ Deeper levels of analysis during encoding lead to better memory.

What other factors affected performance in Craik & Tulving (1975)?

Two other patterns were found:

• Deeper processing took longer than shallow/superficial processing.

• Words that received a “yes” response were generally remembered better than words that received a “no” response.

Main takeaway: The deeper the level of analysis during encoding, the better the later memory performance.

What predicts memory retention according to the Levels of Processing Framework?

The degree of stimulus elaboration, NOT simply the amount of time spent processing it.

• More elaboration = processing the stimulus more deeply/meaningfully → better retention

• Less elaboration = processing only superficial features → worse retention

Key point: It’s what you do with the information, not just how long you spend on it.

What are the main problems with the Levels of Processing (LOP) framework?

There are two major problems:

1. Measuring depth involves circular reasoning

   • LOP predicts that deeper processing → better memory.

   • But researchers then use better memory as evidence that deeper processing occurred.

   • There is no independent measure of processing depth.

2. LOP ignores the importance of retrieval

   • Memory does not depend only on how information was encoded.

   • The context and cues available when you try to remember can affect whether the memory is successfully retrieved.

Key point: Good memory cannot be explained only by depth of processing during encoding; retrieval conditions matter too.

How does retrieval context challenge the Levels of Processing framework?

A memory that seems unavailable in one situation can suddenly become accessible when the right retrieval cues or context are present.

Key point: How well you remember something depends not only on how it was encoded, but also on the cues available when you try to retrieve it.

Example 1 — Grandparents:
You struggle to remember childhood memories while writing your grandparents a card. When you arrive at their house and see everything again, the memories suddenly come back in detail.

Example 2 — Karaoke:
You think you've forgotten the lyrics to an old song. Once the music starts playing, you suddenly remember all the words.

→ In both cases, the information wasn't necessarily gone—the right retrieval cues helped bring it back.

What is Transfer Appropriate Processing (TAP)? — Morris, Bransford, & Franks (1977)

says that memory is better when the type of processing used during encoding matches the type of processing needed at retrieval.

Key point: Deeper processing is not always automatically better. What matters is whether the way you processed the information during study is useful for the way your memory is tested.

Example:

• Semantic encoding + standard recognition test → better match → better memory

• Rhyme encoding + rhyme recognition test → better match → better memory

→ Best memory = match between encoding and retrieval processes.

What did Morris, Bransford, & Franks (1977) do to test Transfer Appropriate Processing?

During the study phase, participants processed words in different ways:

• Semantic processing: Decide whether a word fits the meaning of a sentence.

• Rhyme processing: Decide whether a word rhymes with another word.

Then memory was tested in two ways:

• Standard recognition: Was this an old or new word?

• Rhyme recognition: Does this word sound like a studied word?

Key point: Memory depended on the match between the processing done during study and the processing required by the test.

example: During studying

Participants processed words in one of two ways:

• Meaning: Think about what TRAIN means.

• Rhyme: Think about whether TRAIN rhymes with RAIN.

Then they took a memory test

The test also focused on either:

• Meaning/standard recognition: “Did you see TRAIN earlier?”

• Rhyming: “Does this word rhyme with a word you studied?”

What did they find?

The important thing wasn't simply “deeper processing = better memory.”

It depended on whether study and test matched:

Studied meaning → meaning-based test = better memory
Studied rhyming → rhyme-based test = better memory

🧠 Main idea:
Memory is better when HOW you study matches HOW you are tested.

That's Transfer Appropriate Processing (TAP).

How does Transfer Appropriate Processing challenge the Levels of Processing framework?

LOP suggests that deeper, semantic processing should produce better memory than shallower processing.

TAP shows that this isn't always true. A “shallower” type of processing, such as rhyming, can produce better memory when the memory test also requires rhyme/sound processing.

Key point: It isn't simply “deeper = better.”
→ Memory is best when encoding matches retrieval.

What is the Encoding Specificity Principle (Tulving & Thomson, 1973)?

says retrieval is better when there is overlap between the cues available during encoding and the cues available during retrieval.

Key point: A cue is most useful when it matches information/processes that were present when the memory was originally encoded.

Example: If you encoded a word based on how it sounds, a sound-related cue at retrieval can make that memory easier to access.

→ TAP: match between processes at encoding and retrieval.
→ Encoding specificity: match/overlap between cues at encoding and retrieval.

What is Craik’s (2020) process view of memory?

Memory should be understood as dynamic mental processes, rather than information being stored as permanent “things” or records in separate memory structures.

• Encoding = the normal processes of perception and comprehension while experiencing something.

• Retrieval = attempting to recreate (recapitulate) the same pattern of mental processes that occurred during the original experience.

Key point: Memory isn't like saving a file to a hard drive and later opening it. Remembering involves reactivating the processes involved in the original experience.

According to Craik (2020), are encoding processes separate, special memory processes?

No. There isn't a special encoding system whose job is to take experiences and “save” them into memory.

Encoding consists of the normal perceptual and comprehension processes happening as you experience the world.

Example: If you're listening to your professor, seeing the slides, and understanding what they're saying, those normal processes of perceiving and understanding are what constitute encoding.

Key point: Experiencing and processing information IS encoding.

According to Craik (2020), what happens during retrieval?

Retrieval is an attempt to recapitulate (recreate) at least part of the same configuration of mental processes that occurred during the original experience.

Example: When remembering a song, hearing part of the song may cause you to reactivate some of the same perceptual and conceptual processes that occurred when you originally heard it.

Key point: Remembering = spinning up/recreating processes from the original experience.

What is a memory trace according to the pure processing view of memory?

NOT a stored “thing” or record that you search for and find later.

Instead, consistss of perceptual and conceptual operations/processes.

Key point: Don't think:

Experience → stored memory file → find file later

Think:

Experience → pattern of processing → similar processes are reactivated during remembering

According to Craik (2020), how do retrieval cues help us remember?

they bring back the way your brain processed an experience before, which helps you remember it.

The memory isn’t just a file stored in your brain that you go find. Remembering happens when a current cue connects with your past mental processes.

Example: A song you heard on vacation can bring back memories of that vacation because the song reactivates parts of the original experience.

Basically: Retrieval cue + past processing = remembering.

What question does the “pure processing” view raise about memory traces?

It asks:

Do memory traces actually exist separately from the processes that occur when we remember?

• A pure processing view suggests that remembering may consist entirely of active processing operations, rather than retrieving a self-contained structural record of the past.

Key point: There may not be a separate “memory object” sitting in the brain waiting to be retrieved; remembering may arise from the process itself.

According to Craik (2020), what was the major legacy of Craik & Lockhart’s (1972) Levels of Processing theory?

was not necessarily the hierarchy of processing levels, but the idea that memory involves processing operations.

Key idea: Memory should be understood as dynamic activities of the mind and brain, rather than information being placed into and later retrieved from fixed memory stores.

How does Craik (2020) describe encoding and retrieval?

as dynamic mental activities, rather than processes that simply create and reactivate stored memory records.

Key idea: Memory is something the mind does, not simply something the brain stores.

According to Craik (2020), how is encoding related to perception?

Encoding is essentially part of our normal processes of perception and comprehension.

Example: When you see a dog, you don't first perceive the dog and then separately "encode" it. The processes involved in seeing and understanding the dog are part of encoding it.

According to Craik (2020), how is retrieval related to the original experience?

Retrieval involves trying to recreate or recapitulate the mental processes that occurred during the original experience.

Example: Remembering your birthday party involves partially recreating the thoughts, perceptions, and mental processes you experienced at the party.

Does Craik (2020) believe a memory trace is a complete stored record of a past experience?

No. A memory trace is better understood as a modification to the system that interprets new information, rather than a complete stored copy of an experience.

According to Craik (2020), what happens when we remember something?

Remembering comes from a dynamic interaction between:

1. Present information and retrieval cues
2. The cognitive system that was modified by past experiences

Key idea: A cue doesn't simply "open" a stored memory file. The present situation interacts with changes left by the past experience to reconstruct the memory.

Example: Imagine you went to a birthday party last week. Today, someone says:

“Remember when Sarah dropped the cake?”

That question is a retrieval cue.

Your brain combines:

What is happening NOW
(the question about Sarah dropping the cake)

+

How your brain was changed by the PAST experience
(what you saw, heard, thought, and felt at the party)

= the memory you experience

So you are not literally pulling out a stored recording of the party. Your brain is reconstructing the memory using present cues and the effects that the past experience left on your brain.

What is environmental support in Craik’s (2020) account of memory?

Memory is more likely to successfully recreate an experience when the current context is similar to the original encoding context.

Example: Returning to the classroom where you learned something may provide cues that make the information easier to remember. Pasted markdown

What hierarchy of processing did Craik & Lockhart (1972) propose?

1. Sensory analysis = very shallow

   • You notice what something looks or sounds like.

   • Example: You see the word DOG and notice it is written in capital letters.

2. Intermediate analysis = a little deeper

   • You pay attention to things like how the word sounds or its pattern.

   • Example: You notice that dog rhymes with fog.

3. Semantic analysis = deepest

   • You actually think about the meaning of the information.

   • Example: You think, “A dog is an animal that people keep as a pet.”

The more you think about the meaning of something → the deeper you process it → the more likely you are to remember it later.

According to Levels of Processing, does intending to memorize something determine whether you remember it?

No. Memory depends more on the depth and elaboration of processing than on whether you intentionally tried to memorize something.

Key idea: You can remember something well without trying to memorize it if you processed its meaning deeply.

What were two major problems missing from the original Craik & Lockhart (1972) Levels of Processing theory?

• There was no independent way to measure depth of processing.

• The theory said very little about retrieval processes and focused mostly on encoding.

Why is having no independent measure of “depth” a problem for Levels of Processing?

It creates circular reasoning:

Why was something remembered well? → Because it was processed deeply.
How do we know it was processed deeply? → Because it was remembered well.

Researchers therefore need a way to measure depth independently of memory performance. Pasted markdown

Can processing time be used as a perfect measure of depth of processing?

No. Although deeper processing can take longer, a difficult shallow task can take longer than an easy deep task, while the deeply processed information is still remembered better.

Key idea: More time ≠ automatically deeper processing.

Can the amount of attention required perfectly measure depth of processing?

No. Highly familiar and meaningful information can sometimes reach deep levels of processing with very little attention.

Example: Hearing your own name across a noisy room can grab your attention even when you weren't listening to that conversation. Pasted markdown

What did Craik’s early Levels of Processing experiments find?

Words processed at deeper semantic levels were remembered substantially better than words processed at shallow or intermediate levels.

Key idea: Deeper processing → better later memory.

What problem did amnesic patients create for Levels of Processing theory?

Amnesic patients could perceive and understand information deeply, yet still fail to remember it later.

Key idea: Deep processing alone may not be enough for successful memory.

What additional process does Craik (2020) suggest may be necessary beyond depth and elaboration?

Consolidation — a process that occurs after encoding and may be necessary for successful memory.

Key idea: Deep/elaborate processing helps memory, but something else must help stabilize the memory afterward. Pasted markdown

What types of memory are most strongly affected by Levels of Processing?

Explicit/conscious memory, such as:

• Recall

• Recognition

• Conscious recollection

Deep processing has strong effects when someone is consciously trying to remember a previous event. Pasted markdown

Does deeper processing strongly improve all forms of implicit memory?

No. Depth of processing has little effect on many implicit tasks, such as word-fragment completion, perceptual identification, and some forms of priming.

When CAN deep semantic processing improve implicit memory?

When the implicit retrieval task itself requires semantic or conceptual processing.

Example: Previously processing the meaning of "piano" could later help when asked to name musical instruments, even without consciously remembering studying "piano."

According to Craik (2020), what must a complete explanation of memory consider?

It must consider:

• Encoding → What information was processed?

• Retrieval → What information does the test require?

• Compatibility → Do encoding and retrieval processes match?

• Instructions → What was the person told to do at encoding and retrieval?

Key idea: Memory isn't determined by encoding alone; successful remembering also depends on what happens at retrieval.

What did Dennis & Schmidt (2003) study?

They studied why repetition priming makes us respond faster.

They wanted to know whether we get faster because:

• We have seen the same words before, OR

• We remember how the words were paired and processed together.

Participants saw pairs of words and decided if they had similar meanings.

Example:
rich + wealthy → similar
impersonal + heroic → not similar

Key idea: They tested whether repetition priming comes from the words themselves or the associations formed between them.

What was the control condition in Dennis & Schmidt (2003)?

In the control condition, the word pairs had not been presented before.

• This gave researchers a baseline response time.

• They compared the other conditions to this baseline to see how much faster participants responded because of priming.