Cognitive psychology

Multi-store model

• Information enters the sensory register/sensory memory from 5 senses it is held here for no longer than a second or 2.

• If you pay attention to it; it enters the STM, which can hold 7+-2 items in capacity for 30 seconds duration. This store is encoded acoustically. It can be held here via maintenance rehearsal.

• If rehearsed enough it will transfer to the LTM (Elaborative rehearsal) where it can be stored for a life time and has an unlimited capacity. Encoding here is semantic. Information can be retrieved when needed.

Strengths of multi-store model

• Baddeley demonstrates the encoding of STM and LTM are correct (participants recalled less words when either acoustically similar or semantically similar words were used) → theory is credible/ valid in its description of human memory

• Clive Wearing shows how there are two separate stores because his STM is functioning in the absence of his damaged LTM. This is why he can only hold information for 30sec but cannot transfer anything new. → the theory is credible/valid in its description of human memory.

• Useful for explaining things like how revision works (the need for rehearsal and focusing on semantic meanings) and types of amnesia like anterograde where people cannot make new LTM → since it’s able to explain real life behaviour it means it’s a more credible explanation of memory

Weaknesses of multi-store model

• Other theories: It is also too simple with reference to the STM which Baddeley's WMM suggested contains different capacities for auditory and visual information. He found this with his dual tasks studies → MSM is too simplistic a theory to fully explain human memory because of its simplified view of STM.

• Most the research takes place in lab experiments (like Baddeley) so the findings about storage etc of the STM and LTM might not really apply to real world human memory

• Evidence like KC show that Long-term memory is more complicated than this theory suggests as he couldn't recall episodic memories from his life but could recall semantic information → this theory is too reductionist to fully explain human memory.

• One weakness is that the MSM overemphasises the process of auditory rehearsal as a mechanism. HM was able to make new procedural memory despite being unable to make new declarative LTM showing auditory rehearsal isn't the only way to get things into LTM.

Aim of baddeley

To investigate the influence of acoustic and semantic word similarity on learning and recall in short term and long term memory

Sample of baddeley

72 participating (male and female) from the applied psychology research unit

Procedure of baddeley

• Lab experiment asking them to recall acoustically and semantically similar word lists. Each contained 10 words which were either acoustically similar, acoustically dissimilar, semantically similar or semantically dissimilar. This is an independent measures design - each participant does one word list.

• They were first given an hearing test

• Each word was presented for 3 seconds

• The participants were required to complete 6 tasks involving memory for digits and then asked to write down the words in the correct order. This was repeated 4 times.

• After the fourth trial, they were given a 15 minute distraction involving copying numbers

• Lastly, they did a surprise recall

Results of baddeley

• Acoustically similar words were recalled worse than acoustically dissimilar words during the initial phase (p<0.5)

• Semantically similar were significantly harder to recall in the surprise recall than the semantically dissimilar (p<0.05)

Conclusion of baddeley

Short term memory is acoustically encoded, long term memory is semantically encoded

Strengths of baddeley

• Since it’s a lab experiment it can be seen as highly replicable because of the various things which were standardised like the timings of the procedure → we can repeat the experiment to see if we get the same results about encoding.

• This high level of control also means that extraneous variables (like distractions/hearing problems when the words were read) were eliminated which means that they were able to focus on the effects of the IV on the DV (we know it's the type of word which affected the word recall not something else like a hearing issue).

• A strength is this study used independent measures (each person getting only one of the lists to do) so reduced order effects → they wouldn't get bored or tired by doing each of the four lists of words (AS, AD, SS, SD) meaning the results from the study about encoding type would be more valid.

• Both males and females from the APRU were included which means the sample is more generalisable and their results (about how memory encodes) will represent both genders

Weaknesses of baddeley

• Lab experiment and thus different from everyday life, in real life you wouldn't have to recall monosyllabic words in a selected order and so the study lacks mundane realism/ecological validity → the results about memory encoding can't be applied to real life.

• This study used independent measures design which means that there might be participant variables between the participants e.g., natural memory, intelligence etc which could affect their scores on the memory tests used → making it less valid at measuring how word type/encoding affects memory.

• The sample were all taken from an applied psychology research unit and may share characteristics with each other → their results may not represent how others may have done because of their shared characteristics (though it did use both men and women).

Description of HM

• Had epilepsy and had his hippocampus removed bilaterally

• He couldn’t make new LTM (episodic or semantic) - hippocampus is for making new LTM

• Could access old LTM - LTM stored other places in the brain than the hippocampus

• Could still use STM - suggests that STM and LTM are separate systems

• Could make procedural memories - different types of LTM

Strengths of HM

• It is useful because it is able to tell us about how the brain makes new types of memory and the different types of memory and the different types that people have → this is useful for telling us how memory works

• This is research we couldn’t do ethically if we were trying to manipulate ourselves → so using someone with pre-existing brain damage makes it more ethical

• Case studies like this over a long period of time are rich in detail and depth of information about how memory works

• Used a number of different methods, eg different memory tests, observations etc and therefore could be said to have triangulation → raises validity as the findings back one another up

Weaknesses of HM

• Case studies have small sample, this is just on one person (HM) which means that the results gained from the study about the hippocampus are not applicable to a wider population → making the results unrepresentative about how others memory/ brains work

• Ethics can be a problem in case studies of those with brain damage like HM with his hippocampus removed and the resulting memory issues because they may have difficulties with giving fully informed consent

Working model of memory

• The short term memory is made up of multiple parts (not just one unitary store as indicated by MSM)

• The Phonological Loop deals with acoustic/sound information e.g., speech. It has limited storage and seems to be split into two sub-systems: an articulatory process (subvocalisation) which voices information you are rehearsing and a phonological store (holds sounds)

• The Visuo-Spatial Sketch pad: Your memory of imagery - Visual and spatial images e.g., reading. It too has a limited capacity. It has since also been split into two components (one visual and one spatial)

• Central Executive manages two "slave systems". The CE itself doesn't handle memories but it allocates them to the slave systems. It has no storage. It pays attention and switches tasks. It has non-specific modality - it can process sight, sound or any of the 5 senses.

• Dual task abilities: You can do two tasks without much difficulty if the two tasks use two different stores e.g. VSSP and PL. If, however, they use the same store you will be unable to do both of them

Strengths of WMM

• The KF case study supports the Working Memory Model. KF suffered brain damage from a motorcycle accident that damaged his short-term memory. KFs impairment was mainly for verbal information - his memory for visual information was largely unaffected. This shows that there are separate STM components for visual information (VSSP) and verbal information (phonological loop) → meaning the theory is more credible

• •Supporting study: dual tasks. Robbins' chess study asked people to play chess (CE and VSSP task) whilst taking part in a visual task (pressing buttons on a keypad), CE task (generating random numbers) or a phonological loop task (repeating the word See-saw). The tasks which used the same systems impaired the function of the WMM → making the theory credible as it shows the model is correct in how it describes STM's sub-systems.

• •Other theories: Develops the initial research of MSM and add more detail to the theory and how STM works (with different sub-systems etc) → this makes it less reductionist than MSM as it is a more in-depth explanation of how human memory works.

• Useful: This theory can help explain problems that people with dementia may have because they have a decline in central executive ability which means they cannot pay attention or switch tasks → this shows the theory to be a credible one as it can explain real world events/behaviour.

Weaknesses of WMM

• Conflicting evidence: Parkin conducted a brain scan looking for evidence of the CE, but could not find any special areas of activity when conducting CE tasks → model might not be credible as there is no empirical evidence that one of its core components exists

• WMM doesn't go into the depth about human memory e.g. not including the LTM → it is less of a complete explanation of human memory than MSM meaning it might be less credible.

• Central Executive: most research focuses on the two slave systems and not much is known about the function of the central executive → It is difficult to scientifically test its role in memory meaning it might be a less credible explanation of human memory

• Most the research takes place in lab experiments (like Robbins) so the findings about storage etc of the STM and LTM might not really apply to real world human memory

• The 1974 model has been added to over time, so it may have been incomplete and inaccurate in describing STM. The addition of an episodic buffer in 2000 showed that the original version of the theory could not fully explain memory, and still may do so

Reconstructive memory

• Schema - mental script/ representation for what to expect from a person, event or situation based on our past experiences of that thing

• Memories are reconstructed each time they are recalled

• Use your previous experiences, perceptions and beliefs to rebuild your memories

• The schema we possess alters the content of our memories which we recall to be consistent with our belief/previous experiences (accommodation)

• We use our schemas to fill in the gaps (via a process of confabulation)

• Things which don't fit within a schema might be completely missed out when you recall the information (omission)

• We might also use rationalisation (a form of accommodation) which is where our memories change because the newer alteration makes it make more sense

Strengths of reconstructive memory

• Supporting studies: Bartlett's war of the ghosts study found that participants who recalled a story filled in the information they couldn't remember with previous experiences (schemas). For example, "canoe" became "boat" and "seal hunting" became "fishing" → memories do get reconstructed when being recalled meaning the theory is a credible explanation of memory

• Supporting studies: Loftus and Palmer show the importance of schemas- they watched a video of a car crash and then were asking a leading question about the speed of the car, the more 'violent' verb e.g., smashed vs hit caused them to recall a faster crash. In another version they were more likely to recall broken glass in the video (despite there being none) → memories do get reconstructed when being recalled meaning the theory is a credible explanation of memory

• Explains why people misremember information rather than simply forgetting it altogether → this is a strength compared to the other theories which don't explain errors in memory

• Usefulness: Helps our understanding of Eye Witness Memories for crimes and why it can't be used anymore → it can explain real world events and is useful for having impacts on the world

Weaknesses of reconstructive memory

• Other theories: Reconstructive memory doesn't consider the existence of STM/LTM and the other theorists of memory. It doesn't talk about encoding or storage of memories in the first place, just retrieval → makes it a less credible explanation of how human memory works as it is incomplete.

• Axelrod (1973) argues that schema theory can only be used to explain changes in individuals and cannot account for how changes to memory occurs in groups

• Testability: Schema recall studies like Bartlett's War Ghost lack ecological validity making them less applicable to real world memories → it is hard to know how real world memories could be effected by processes like accommodation and schemas making the theory less credible

• Bartlett's study also had problems with standardisation which makes the results about memory less reliable.

• Brewer & Treyvens: People recalled items from an office they saw, the results fit the theory other than they recalled a skull which stood out from their schemas- sometimes unusual things are remembered well (rather than being forgotten as this theory said- making it less credible)

• Yullie & Cutshall showed reconstruction of memories didn't happen much in a real life robbery case and leading questions had little impact → in the real world reconstruction might be less apparent than in the lab experiments often used to study it.

Tulving - episodic and semantic

• The Long term memory is made up of multiple parts (not just one unitary store as indicated by MSM)

• Episodic memory is the memory of particular events. It is memories of things that have happened to you and information like a person’s address (autobiographical) - It is your mental diary

• Episodic memories seem to be time and spatially encoded/referenced (memories are linked together based on when they happened AND stored chronologically)

• They are linked to the 5 senses which is why they can be triggered (“cued”) by a sight, sound or a smell. Situational cues help people recall their episodic memories but are less helpful for semantic memories (you remember memories from school by revisiting but not facts you learned there).

• Semantic memory is the memory of facts, figures, knowledge- it is your mental encyclopaedia

• Semantic memories are not time and spatially encoded/referenced (memories are not linked together based on when they happened- you don’t generally remember when you learn facts AND not stored chronologically)

Strengths of tulving

• Supporting study: Ostergaard studied the case of a boy who had oxygen deprivation. He damaged both types of memory but then his semantic recovered whilst his episodic did not. This indicates there are two stores of Long-term memory episodic and semantic) so the theory is a credible explanation of human memory

• Other theories: This theory develops the Multi Store Memory model and explains different types of LTM (which MSM doesn't) - this means that this is a more detailed explanation of human memory than MSM making it a stronger theory.

• Supporting evidence: Evidence like KC (motorcycle accident) couldn't recall episodic memories from his life but could recall semantic information. This indicates there are two stores of Long-term memory (episodic and semantic) so the theory is a credible explanation of human memory

• Usefulness: Helps our understanding of dementia. There is evidence for different types of LTM from case studies of dementia because these patients tend to lose episodic memories in order from the most recent (evidence for time referencing) and their semantic memories remain intact for longer. This suggests these must be separate which means this theory can explain real world behaviour so this a credible theory

Weaknesses of tulving

• Squire and Zola conducted brain scans and found episodic and semantic memory are both located in the medial temporal lobe which might mean that they are not separate. This means that the theory might be incorrect and episodic and semantic are not two separate forms of memory.

• There are large amounts of overlap between the two memory systems- they may not be that separate, this might mean the theory isn’t credible because it is too simplistic

• This theory doesn’t explain how STM works as it only focuses on LTM. This means it is less useful than MSM which deals with the full human memory system

• It can be difficult to test LTM when measuring them retrospectively because it is difficult to test empirically since the events happened in the past making the difficult to study in a valid way (we’re not always sure if the memory recalled is accurate or not).

Aim of shmolck

Investigate the effect of specific brain damage on semantic memory using case studies. Specifically, the relationship between semantic test scores, temporal lobe damage.

Sample of schmolck

• 6 patients with amnesia were compared to 8 normal control patients

• Matched on age, sex and education

• Brain damaged patients were divided into MTL and MTL+ patients (MTL and anterolateral cortex damage)

Procedure of shmolck

• They conducted 13 tests, 9 were from a semantic test battery using line drawings of 24 animals and 24 objects which could be grouped into smaller categories e.g., water animals, vehicles etc.

• They were also asked to complete other various tasks such as naming, describing physical features, the pyramid and palms task and filling in gaps.

• The % correct or incorrect were scored, except on some tests (6,8,9) where their accuracy was scored 0-4 and the researchers made sure they compared (inter-rater reliability)

Results of shmolck

• Those with Hippocampus damage (HF) were able to name, point out, and answer questions about objects they were given with considerable accuracy

• Those with MTL+ performed less well. They also had difficulty thinking of examples from a category e.g. names of breeds of dog

• MTL+ 50% for living objects and 62% for non-living

• HM - 66.7% for living and 90% for non-living

• HM did the worst (in MTL group) The MTL+ found it most difficult to identify and recall facts about living objects compared to non-living objects in all tasks

Conclusion of shmolck

MTL+ patients had greater difficulty than MTL suggesting that the anterolateral temporal cortex is responsible for semantic knowledge

Strengths of shmolck

• Reliable: Since the study is a lab based it can be seen as highly replicable. There were high levels of standardisation in the study such as the pictures that were used, the exact timing of the procedures etc. and so the study could be easily repeated to check the results about semantic memory location for reliability.

• Group design: control group matched for age sex and education to control for participant variables. This makes the results about semantic memory and brain damage more valid because we know the results aren’t due to those extraneous variables.

• Checked for inter-rater reliability when scoring the descriptions (using multiple researchers) which makes this part of the experiment more reliable

• The findings (about anterolateral temporal cortex and relation to semantic knowledge) matches up with other research about semantic dementia – makes the findings about brain damage more valid.

Weaknesses of Shmolck

• This was a small sample of several unique individuals (6 people with brain damage) and as such the results about Semantic memory location cannot be applied to others because of their unique status.

• This is a Lab experiment and thus different from everyday life, in real life you wouldn’t use line drawings of animals and objects and so the study lacks mundane realism, this means the results about semantic memory can’t be applied to real life.

• Ethical problems of working with vulnerable people (even if the tests themselves weren’t harmful) which means there are problems with informed consent as they have brain damage so may not fully comprehend the study or their role etc

Individual differences in MSM

The capacity and duration of both STM and LTM are averages. This means there is a variation in these between people e.g. someone might have a capacity of just 4-5 items and someone else could have a capacity of 8-9.

Individual differences in WMM

The ability of the Central Executive to shift attention and its ability to multi-task between tasks may vary from person to person showing possible individual differences.

Individual differences in reconstructive

The schemas which we have might be different between people (as they’re built on past experiences and perceptions) which means people will reconstruct their memories differently leading to individual differences in memory.

Individual differences in episodic and semantic (tulving)

Episodic and Semantic memories both come from past experiences either from your lifetime or from the learning events which we have taken part in. This means that there will be individual differences in your long term memories.

Dementia ao1

• Effects 850,000 people in the UK in 2015 (estimated rise to 1,000,000 by 2025)

• A progressive problem with processing information including memory. Dementia causes a decline in a person’s ability to think, understand, and remember and affects a person’s function

• Varies in severity from slight to severe over time: Forgetfulness, Trouble multi-tasking, Fluctuating disorientation, Diminished insight, learning new things becomes difficult, Severe disorientation to time and place, no short term memory, loss of speech

• It is important because we have no cure/treatment so we have to ensure we can help them however possible

Dementia linked to MSM

• Short Term Memory is affected by dementia

• A lot of the ‘forgetting’ seen in dementia is because the information has never been encoded into STM (they cannot pay attention to pass it into STM)

• We can help them by giving them reminders and notes about tasks which they are supposed to complete

AO3

• Peterson and Peterson- rehearsal without distraction helps transfer things to LTM, stopping that from happening via distraction will result in information not being put into LTM

Dementia linked to WMM

• They have a declining Central Executive which means that they have difficulty paying attention/shifting attention which leads to lack of functioning

• We should only give them one thing to do at a time (one task and one task only at a time)

• Don’t have too many people talking to them at the same time

AO3

• Baddeley conducted a series of attentional test. One asked them to look for Z amongst easily differentiated letters e.g.0 and ones which looked more like Zs e.g N/2. Those with Alzheimer’s performed worse on the difficult task…this shows problems with their central executive like we would expect with WMM

Dementia linked to reconstructive

• If a person with dementia is saying confusing and mixed up things it might be because their Schemas are muddled e.g. they may confuse their adult children with their own brothers and sisters because they fill the gap in their mind with someone familiar.

• You can give them things to remind them (cue) their correct schemas but USUALLY you just have to go with what they have said and don’t correct them

Dementia linked to episodic and semantic

• Episodic Memory decreases over time whereas Semantic remains fairly stable (Nyberg, 2003)

• The fading of Episodic memory starts in the ‘present’ and then spreads throughout the past.

• This is why those with dementia can remember information from a long time ago

• ‘Validation therapy’- if they’re going to be confused because they’re ‘stuck in time’ make the situations they’re in as close to that situation as you can

AO3

• Mohamad (2016) autobiographical recall in AD is mainly characterized by loss of associated episodic information, which leads to de-contextualisation of autobiographical memories and a shift from reliving past events to a general sense of familiarity (therefore putting them in a more familiar setting/period should be good for them)

Aim of cognitive practical

To investigate whether using the same or different slave systems (using visual or acoustic distraction tasks) in the WMM affects the amount of trigrams being able to be recalled

Practical IV

Whether participants completed a visual (spot the difference) or verbal task (word search)

Practical DV

The amount of trigrams recalled/15

Practical one tailed hypothesis

People with word search distractor will recall less trigrams/15 than those with spot the difference distractor

Practical null hypothesis

There will be no difference between people with word search distractor and spot the difference distractor, any difference is due to chance

Practical sample

24 students via opportunity sample from psychology class in Newcastle sixth form college, average age 16

Practical procedure

• Shown 15 trigrams and were read out for 1 min

• Independent measures design - ½ students assigned word search distractor, ½ assigned spot the difference distractor - 90 seconds distractor

• Had 2 minutes to recall as many trigrams as possible in any order

• Calculated the mean and completed a Mann-Whitney u

Practical results

• WS mean - 4.75, SD mean - 3.92

• WS recalled more trigram

• Ua=56.5, Ub=87.5

• U=56.5

Practical conclusion

• Spot the difference (visual distractor) group achieved a lower average score of words recalled/15 compared to the word search (verbal distractor) (3.92 vs 4.75)

• There is no significant difference between those who did a word search (verbal task) spot the difference (visual task) and the amount of trigrams recalled. Mann Whitney U found a U score of 56.5 which is higher than the critical value of 42 at P<0.05 (one-tailed). This means we accept the null hypothesis that visual and verbal distractors will have no effect on trigrams recall.

Practical strengths

• Independent measures of only doing the visual or verbal task eliminates order effects. Since participants only took part in either the visual or verbal task their initial experience won't influence the amount of words that they recall in the second condition raising validity.

• Standardised- since everyone got the same list of words (and wordsearch etc), the same timings and tasks to do it means the test can be repeated to see if results about impact of visual and verbal tasks are reliable.

• This study is ethical, participants had consent to take part and there was nothing in the distractor task or the recall that will cause harm. They were also given the right to withdraw from the experiment.

Practical weaknesses

• The sample completing the lists of words being small (24) and opportunity from a local college means it will not be generalisable to a wider population and their results about visual and verbal memory will not be representative

• Independent measures (everyone only doing the visual or verbal tasks) was used which means there will be individual differences (like natural memory ability) which will impact on the results. One student might have a better memory than another and so would recall more words regardless of the distractor task, this affects the validity of the findings about visual and verbal memory.

• This study is low in ecological validity and mundane realism because the task of being given
  'random' words to recall and then doing an interference task is not how memory works in the real world and so the results from this experiment aren't valid and applicable to a real world situation of memory.