Define memory.
the mental process involved in receiving, storing + recovering information
Define capacity.
the amount of info that can be held in the memory store
Define duration.
the length of time info can be held in memory
Define coding.
the format in which info is stored in various memory stores
what is the capacity of short term memory
limited to 7+ or - 2
what is the capacity of long term memory
unlimited
what is the duration of long term memory
up to a lifetime
what is the duration of short term memory
18-30 seconds
what is the coding of short term memory
mainly acoustic
what is the coding of long term memory
mainly semantic
what are the three types of memory
sensory register
short term memory
long term memory
what is the sensory register
it temporarily stores information from our senses + it’s constantly receiving info. Unless we pay attention to the info, spontaneous decay occurs (info stays for less than one second). Has an unlimited capacity + a very limited duration. Info is coded depending on sense that picked it up
what is the capacity of the sensory register
unlimited
what is the duration of the sensory register
very limited
who researched the sensory register
Sperling
Outline Sperling’s research into the sensory register
lab experiment
participants shown grid with 3 rows of 4 letters for 0.05 secs
had to immediately recall either whole grid or a randomly chosen row indicated by a tone played straight after grid was shown
when participants had to recall whole grid, they could recall 4-5 letters (average)
when participants had to recall a particular row, they could recall 3 letters, no matter which row
means almost whole grid was held in sensory register
who researched the capacity of short term memory
Jacobs
Miller
who researched the capacity of long term memory
Ramscar
who researched the duration of short term memory
Peterson + Peterson
who researched the duration of long term memory
Bahrick
who researched coding
Baddeley
Outline Jacobs research into the capacity of short term memory
technique to measure digit span: participants given a string of digits (e.g. 4 numbers in a row) + have to repeat list of numbers aloud in correct order. List of numbers increases until participant can’t recall them in correct order (this determines their digit span)
mean span for digits was 9.3 items
mean span for letters was 7.3
shows capacity of STM is limited to around 7-9 items
what was the procedure of Jacobs research into the capacity of short term memory
technique to measure digit span: participants given a string of digits (e.g. 4 numbers in a row) + have to repeat list of numbers aloud in correct order. List of numbers increases until participant can’t recall them in correct order (this determines their digit span)
what were the findings + conclusion of Jacobs research into the capacity of short term memory
mean span for digits was 9.3 items
mean span for letters was 7.3
shows capacity of STM is limited to around 7-9 items
outline Millers research into the capacity of short term memory
aim: to investigate capacity of STM + see whether chunking assists memory in short term
participants read strings of numbers which they had to recall immediately after in correct order. Length of list gradually increases until participants could only recall lists correctly in 50% of trials. Included trials where he chunked numbers into small groups
capacity of 7 + or -2 (magic number)
if chunks are used, capacity= 7 + or -2 chunks
it’s the chunks of data that limit memory, but it doesn’t matter how much goes into each chunk
what was the procedure of Millers research into the capacity of short term memory
participants read strings of numbers which they had to recall immediately after in correct order. Length of list gradually increases until participants could only recall lists correctly in 50% of trials. Included trials where he chunked numbers into small groups
what were the findings + conclusions of Millers research into the capacity of short term memory
capacity of 7 + or -2 (magic number 7 + or -2)
if chunks are used, capacity= 7 + or -2 chunks
it’s the chunks of data that limit memory, but it doesn’t matter how much goes into each chunk
evaluation of research into capacity of short term memory (AO3)- positives
Millers research has useful real life applications (e.g. chunking to remember phone numbers)
Jacobs research is supported by Millers (both found capacity is 7 + or -2). Consistent findings mean conclusion regarding capacity of STM is reliable
evaluation of research into capacity of short term memory (AO3)- negatives
Millers research into chunking can’t be applied to many types of memory tasks used in real life, so has limited application
Millers conclusion that it doesn’t matter how much info goes into each chunk has been criticised by Simon, who found it did matter how many items were in each chunk. In Simon’s study, participants had a shorter memory span for larger chunks
artificial lab environment: participants may have concentrated more + put more effort in than they would normally to impress researchers, so results lack ecological validity. Findings are difficult to generalise to real life memory settings
Outline Ramscars research into the capacity of long term memory
trained computers to mimic elderly peoples brains
found that as computers aged by acquiring more info they slowed down, suggesting human brains slow down because there’s more knowledge to sift through
outline Peterson + Petersons research into the duration of short term memory
aim: to find out how long items remain in STM without rehearsal
presented participants with consonant trigrams (e.g. CDX). Participants told to count backwards in 3s from a specific number. After intervals of 3-18 secs participants were asked to stop counting + recall the trigram
participants able to recall about 80% of trigrams correctly after interval of 3 secs, but less than 10% after 18 secs
info decays rapidly from STM without rehearsal
STM duration= about 18 secs
what was Peterson + Peterson’s aim in their research into the duration of short term memory
how long items would remain in STM without rehearsal
what was Peterson + Peterson’s procedure in their research into the duration of short term memory
presented participants with consonant trigrams (e.g. CDX)
participants told to count backwards in 3s from a specific number
after intervals of 3-18 secs participants were asked to stop counting + recall the trigram
what were Peterson + Peterson’s findings + conclusion in their research into the duration of short term memory
participants able to recall about 80% of trigrams correctly after interval of 3 secs, but less than 10% after 18 secs
info decays rapidly from STM without rehearsal
STM duration= about 18 secs
evaluation of research into duration of short term memory (AO3)- positives
highly controlled lab conditions: allowed them to use control procedures (e.g. counterbalancing to reduce order effects). Reduced extraneous variables increase internal validity
repeated measures design used, which eliminates individual differences in memory performance which allows cause + effect between IV (number of secs without rehearsal) + DV (ability to recall trigram) to be seen
evaluation of research into duration of short term memory (AO3)- negatives
highly artificial- trigram task isn’t a realistic task that people carry out in their day to day lives. Study lacks ecological validity, so is harder to generalise to real life situations (e.g. revising for A-levels)
trigrams from earlier trials may have caused confusion, interfering with memory in later trials. This could have led to poor recall rather than limited duration of STM
outline Bahricks research into the duration of long term memory
aim: to find duration of LTM + see whether there was a difference for duration when using recognition or recall tasks
tested memory of 392 graduates of an American high school for their former classmates from a 50 year period (used high school yearbooks)
two conditions: half were given a list of names + asked to select the photo that matched the name (recognition group), other half were asked to name people in photos without list of names (recall group)
15 years after graduation, recognition group were 90% accurate + recall group were 60% accurate
48 years after graduation, recognition group were 70% accurate + recall group were 30% accurate
people can remember certain types of info for almost a lifetime
accuracy of LTM is better when measured by recognition tests rather than recall tests
what was the aim of Bahricks research into the duration of long term memory
aim: to find duration of LTM + see whether there was a difference for duration when using recognition or recall tasks
what was the procedure of Bahricks research into the duration of long term memory
tested memory of 392 graduates of an American high school for their former classmates from a 50 year period (used high school yearbooks)
two conditions: half were given a list of names + asked to select the photo that matched the name (recognition group), other half were asked to name people in photos without list of names (recall group)
what were the findings + conclusion of Bahricks research into the duration of long term memory
15 years after graduation, recognition group were 90% accurate + recall group were 60% accurate
48 years after graduation, recognition group were 70% accurate + recall group were 30% accurate
people can remember certain types of info for almost a lifetime
accuracy of LTM is better when measured by recognition tests rather than recall tests
evaluation of research into duration of long term memory (AO3)- positives
high external validity because real life meaningful memories were studied, so results reflect our memory of real life events + can be applied to everyday human memory
evaluation of research into duration of long term memory (AO3)- negatives
confounding variables weren’t controlled- participants could’ve looked at yearbook photos + rehearsed memory over the years
sample of 392 American uni graduates lacks population validity, so can’t generalise results to other populations (e.g. UK students). So unable to conclude whether other populations would demonstrate same ability to recall names + faces after 50 years
research is unable to explain whether LTM becomes less accurate overtime because of a limited duration or whether LTM simply gets worse with age. So unable to determine if LTM has unlimited duration which is affected by factors like age, or if LTM has a limited duration
what are substitution errors
when people substitute an item on a list for a different similar item
outline Baddeley’s research into coding in the short + long term memory
aim: to investigate types of coding in STM + LTM
lab experiment- gave different lists of words to 4 groups of participants to remember:
acoustically similar (sound similar) words
acoustically dissimilar (don’t sound similar) words
semantically similar (similar meanings) words
semantically dissimilar (not similar meanings) words
participants shown original words + asked to recall them in correct order immediately after hearing them repeatedly (STM) + again after 20 minutes (LTM)
STM findings:
acoustically similar words were harder to recall in correct order (55%) than acoustically dissimilar words (75%)
similarity of meanings only had slight effect
LTM findings:
recall was worse for semantically similar words (55%) than for semantically dissimilar words (85%)
recall was the same for acoustically similar + dissimilar words
STM= acoustic coding
LTM= semantic coding
what was the aim of Baddeley’s study
to investigate types of coding in STM + LTM
what was the procedure of Baddeley’s study
lab experiment- gave different lists of words to 4 groups of participants to remember:
acoustically similar (sound similar) words
acoustically dissimilar (don’t sound similar) words
semantically similar (similar meanings) words
semantically dissimilar (not similar meanings) words
participants shown original words + asked to recall them in correct order immediately after hearing them repeatedly (STM) + again after 20 minutes (LTM)
what were the findings + conclusion of Baddeley’s study
STM findings:
acoustically similar words were harder to recall in correct order (55%) than acoustically dissimilar words (75%)
similarity of meanings only had slight effect
LTM findings:
recall was worse for semantically similar words (55%) than for semantically dissimilar words (85%)
recall was the same for acoustically similar + dissimilar words
STM= acoustic coding
LTM= semantic coding
evaluation of Baddeley’s research into coding (AO3)- positives
highly controlled lab experiment with control over variables (e.g. words used, instructions + rehearsal times). This reduces effects of extraneous variables, which increases internal validity of findings
evaluation of Baddeley’s research into coding (AO3)- negatives
independent groups design, therefore individual differences in memory mean it’s difficult to compare IV (coding) to DV (recall)
task used is artificial- material wasn’t personally meaningful to participants so caution should be taken when generalising results to how info is coded by STM + LTM in real life situations. In real world, semantic coding would be used by STM, so findings have limited application
who came up with the multi-store model of memory
Atkinson + Shiffrin
multi-store model of memory AO1
memory is a linear flow of info through 3 stores (sensory register, short term memory + long term memory)
info enters sensory register in original sensory form + stays there for less than 1 second
if you pay attention to the info it moves into STM (encoded acoustically, capacity of 7+ or -2, duration of 18-30 secs)
info in STM may be forgotten due to decay or displacement
if info is rehearsed it moves into LTM (encoded semantically, unlimited capacity, duration of up to a lifetime)
info in LTM may be forgotten due to interference or retrieval failure
for info to be remembered it must be retrieved from LTM + passed back to STM via rehearsal loop
evaluation of multi-store model of memory (AO3)- positives
evidence for distinction between STM + LTM: Peterson + Peterson’s trigram study shows duration of STM is 18-30 secs, whereas Bahrick’s yearbook study shows duration of LTM is unlimited. This suggests STM + LTM are separate store, as suggested by MSM
Bahrick’s study has high external validity- real life meaningful memories were studied, so results reflect memory for real life events + can be applied to everyday human memory. This strengthens support of MSM which Bahrick’s study provides
HM had problems in LTM after brain surgery- couldn’t remember events from last 45 years but STM remained intact. Suggests there are separate LTM + STM stores, like in MSM
evaluation of multi-store model of memory (AO3)- negatives
Peterson + Peterson’s trigram study is highly artificial- it’s not a realistic task people carry out in their day to day lives. It lacks ecological validity, so is difficult to generalise to real life. This weakens the support of MSM which Peterson + Peterson’s study provides
HM is a case study, so can’t generalise findings to rest of population (lacks population validity). This weakens support of HM for MSM
what are the two models of memory
multi-store model of memory
working memory model
who came up with the working memory model
Baddeley + Hitch
what would a diagram of the working memory model look like
central executive at the top
visuo-spatial sketch pad, episodic buffer + phonological loop below
LTM at the bottom
what is the working memory model a model of
short term memory
working model of memory AO1
model of short term memory
STM isn’t a passive temporary store for info, but rather an active store
central executive:
involved in problem solving + decision making
an attentional process that monitors incoming info
allocates slave systems to tasks
modality free
has a very limited capacity
phonological loop:
stores + processes a limited amount of verbal + written info for brief periods (independent from visuo-spatial sketch pad)
preserves order info arrives
consists of phonological store (stores words you hear) + articulatory process (allows maintenance rehearsal of items stored in phonological store)
visuo-spatial sketch pad
sets up + manipulates mental images
has a limited capacity (independent from phonological loop)
subdivided into visual cache (stores visual info) + inner scribe (records arrangement of objects in the visual field)
episodic buffer
maintains a sense of time sequencing
storage component of central executive
limited capacity of up to 4 chunks
links working memory to long term memory
what does the central executive do in the working memory model
involved in problem solving + decision making
an attentional process that monitors incoming info
allocates slave systems to tasks
modality free
has a very limited capacity
what does the phonological loop do in the working memory model
stores + processes a limited amount of verbal + written info for brief periods (independent from visuo-spatial sketch pad)
preserves order info arrives
consists of phonological store (stores words you hear) + articulatory process (allows maintenance rehearsal of items stored in phonological store)
what does the visuo-spatial sketch pad do in the working memory model
sets up + manipulates mental images
has a limited capacity (independent from phonological loop)
subdivided into visual cache (stores visual info) + inner scribe (records arrangement of objects in the visual field)
what does the episodic buffer do in the working memory model
maintains a sense of time sequencing
storage component of central executive
limited capacity of up to 4 chunks
links working memory to long term memory
evaluation of the working memory model (AO3)- positives
supported by Baddeley + Hitch research: dual task shows 2 tasks can be performed simultaneously in STM, suggesting there’s a supervisory component dividing our attention in STM, as suggested in WMM
supported by Baddeley’s study where participants found it hard to perform 2 tasks simultaneously, showing VSS has a limited capacity. But participants could perform a visual + verbal task at the same time, showing the capacity of the VSS + phonological loop are separate
KF was injured in a motorbike accident + was able to recall info from LTM but had issues with STM. He struggled to recall words presented verbally, suggesting his phonological loop was damaged, but his visuo-spatial sketch pad wasn’t. This suggests there are at least 2 components in STM (1 for visual info, 1 for acoustic info), which supports the idea of 2 separate slave systems in WMM
evidence from brain scans shows different parts of the brain are active during verbal + visual tasks, showing VSS + PL are 2 separate components
better explanation of memory than MSM: it’s more complex + sophisticated + is more likely to reflect complexities of human memory. It’s accepted as the most accurate model of STM
evaluation of the working memory model (AO3)- negatives
role of the central executive is unclear because it’s difficult to design tasks to test the central executive
some argue that the central executive is made up of several components. Eslinger + Damasio studied EVR (who had a cerebral brain tumour removed). EVR could perform reasoning tasks well, but had poor decision making abilities, suggesting there are separate components within the central executive for dealing with reasoning + decision making
most research used to support the WMM lacks ecological validity because it was a lab experiment, therefore might not be representative of how memory works in the real world
define eye witness testimony
evidence provided by a person who witnesses a crime with a view to identifying a perpetrator of the crime. Accuracy may be affected during encoding, storage + retrieval
what 2 factors affect the accuracy of eye witness testimony
misleading information (leading questions + post event discussion)
anxiety
anxiety affecting eye witness testimony (AO1)
Loftus:
aim: to find out if anxiety during a witnessed incident affects accuracy of later identification
procedure:
lab experiment
half of participants overheard a low-key discussion in a lab about equipment failure, person emerged from lab holding a pen with grease on his hands
half of participants overheard a heated + hostile exchange in a lab. Heard glass breaking + chairs crashing + a man emerged holding a bloodstained paper knife
participants given 50 photos + asked to identify person who came out of lab
findings: those who witnessed man holding pen accurately identified him 49% of the time + those who witnessed man holding knife accurately identified him 33% of the time
conclusions: weapon focus- witness concentrates on weapon + this distracts attention from appearance of perpetrator. Anxiety decreases accuracy
what is weapon focus
witness concentrates on weapon + this distracts attention from appearance of perpetrator
outline Loftus’ study
Loftus:
aim: to find out if anxiety during a witnessed incident affects accuracy of later identification
procedure:
lab experiment
half of participants overheard a low-key discussion in a lab about equipment failure, person emerged from lab holding a pen with grease on his hands
half of participants overheard a heated + hostile exchange in a lab. Heard glass breaking + chairs crashing + a man emerged holding a bloodstained paper knife
participants given 50 photos + asked to identify person who came out of lab
findings: those who witnessed man holding pen accurately identified him 49% of the time + those who witnessed man holding knife accurately identified him 33% of the time
conclusions: weapon focus- witness concentrates on weapon + this distracts attention from appearance of perpetrator. Anxiety decreases accuracy
evaluation of Loftus (AO3)- positives
lab experiment so high level of control over extraneous variables (e.g. same 50 photos, same time between incident + recall, same man), so confident that anxiety did affect accuracy of EWT
support from Deffenbacher: meta-analysis of 18 studies looking at effects of anxiety on EWT. Showed high levels of anxiety decreased accuracy of EWT
evaluation of Loftus (AO3)- negatives
lab experiment is an artificial setting so it lacks ecological validity + is difficult to generalise to real life situations. So can’t be sure that anxiety lowers accuracy of EWT in real world
contradicting evidence from Yuille + Cutshall: found anxiety increases accuracy of EWT in real life situations
what’s the Yerkes-Dodson law
states that performance improves with increases in arousal/ anxiety up to an optimal point + then decline with further increases in arousal/ anxiety
what effect do lab experiments say that anxiety has on the accuracy of eye witness testimonies
anxiety decreases the accuracy of eye witness testimonies
what effect do field experiments say that anxiety has on the accuracy of eye witness testimonies
anxiety increases the accuracy of eye witness testimonies
Discuss the effect of anxiety on the accuracy of eye witness testimony (16 marks)
AO1 (6 marks):
Loftus:
aim: to find out if anxiety during a witnessed incident affects accuracy of later identification
procedure:
lab experiment
half of participants overheard a low-key discussion in a lab about equipment failure, person emerged from lab holding a pen with grease on his hands
half of participants overheard a heated + hostile exchange in a lab. Heard glass breaking + chairs crashing + a man emerged holding a bloodstained paper knife
participants given 50 photos + asked to identify person who came out of lab
findings: those who witnessed man holding pen accurately identified him 49% of the time + those who witnessed man holding knife accurately identified him 33% of the time
conclusions: weapon focus- witness concentrates on weapon + this distracts attention from appearance of perpetrator. Anxiety decreases accuracy
AO3 (10 marks):
positive: Deffenbacher meta-analysis supports that anxiety decreases accuracy
negative: lab experiment so has low ecological validity- artificial so difficult to generalise to anxiety affecting accuracy in real world
negative: Yuille + Cutshall found anxiety increases accuracy of EWT in real world situations
contradictions can be explained by Yerkes-Dodson law: performance improves with increases in arousal (which explains anxiety increasing accuracy in real world) up to an optimal point + then declines with further increase in arousal (which explains anxiety decreasing accuracy in lab experiments)
how many different long term memory stores are there
three
what are the three different types of long term memory
episodic
semantic
procedural
who found out that there are different types of long term memory
Tulving
what did Tulving use to find out that there are different types of long term memory
PET scans (cognitive neuroscience research)
describe episodic memory
ability to recall events (episodes) from our lives
like a diary
e.g. what you had for breakfast
memory of a single episode includes several elements (e.g. people + places)
declarative (easy to put into words)
coded with time + place
time-stamped (remember when they happened)
requires conscious effort to recall
less resistant to forgetting
right prefrontal cortex is associated with episodic memory
describe semantic memory
knowledge of the world (facts)
like an encyclopaedia + dictionary
e.g. taste of an orange + meanings of words
declarative (easy to put into words)
not coded with time + place
not time-stamped (don’t remember when we learnt fact)
requires conscious effort to recall
less resistant to forgetting
left prefrontal cortex is associated with semantic memory
describe procedural memory
memory for actions + skills (how we do things)
e.g. riding a bike
non-declarative (not easy to put into words)
not coded with time + place
not time-stamped (don’t remember when we learnt how to do)
doesn’t require conscious effort to recall
resistant to forgetting
different brain regions are associated with procedural memory
which brain region is associated with episodic memory
right prefrontal cortex
which brain region is associated with semantic memory
left prefrontal cortex
which brain region is associated with procedural memory
different brain regions
is episodic memory declarative or non-declarative
declarative
is semantic memory declarative or non-declarative
declarative
is procedural memory declarative or non-declarative
non-declarative
is episodic memory coded with a time (time-stamped) + a place
yes
is semantic memory coded with a time (time-stamped) + a place
no
is procedural memory coded with a time (time-stamped) + a place
no
is episodic memory resistant to forgetting
no
is semantic memory resistant to forgetting
no
is procedural memory resistant to forgetting
yes
does episodic memory require conscious effort to recall
yes
does semantic memory require conscious effort to recall
yes
does procedural memory require conscious effort to recall
no
what does evidence from PET scans suggest about long term memory
different types of long term memory are stored in different parts of the brain
positive evaluation of types of long term memory (AO3)
evidence from HM case study: HM’s episodic memory was damaged (he couldn’t recall events from his past e.g. death of his parents + Vietnam war). Semantic memory was intact (he knew what words meant). Procedural memory was intact (he could tie his shoe laces, speak + walk).
neuroimaging evidence: evidence from Tulving’s PET scans suggest left prefrontal cortex was involved in recalling semantic memories, whereas right prefrontal cortex was involved in recalling episodic memories, which supports idea of separate LTM stores.
real life application: it’s useful to be able to pinpoint exactly which type of LTM is impaired as this helps provide targeted treatments. Older people with mild cognitive impairment often have impairments in episodic memory, so researchers have developed training techniques to help them improve their episodic memory+ avoid negative consequences of age related decline.
negative evaluation of types of long term memory (AO3)
problems with HM + CW case studies: small sample size so lacks population validity
contradictory evidence: Cohen + Squire disagreed with Tulving + suggested only 2 types of LTM (non-declarative + declarative)