Memory quiz 11/07/26

2 limitations of Multi Store Model (MSM)

Not representative of different types of LTM

• Does not represent that some types of LTM can be retrieved unconsciously whilst others have to be retrieved consciously

Suggests that the amount of maintenance rehearsal determines the likelihood that the information will pass into the LTM

• Craik and Watkins (1973) suggests its the type of rehearsal that is important

One explanation of forgetting

Interference:

• When the recall of one memory blocks the recall of another causing forgetting or distortion of memories

• Interference can be retroactive or proactive

• Retroactive - New memories block old memories

• Proactive - Old memories block new memories

Evaluation of interference

• (+) Supported by real-world studies Baddeley and Hitch

  • Rugby players asked weekly to recall their last game and the name of the teams they had played that season

  • Found that recall of a given match was not dependent on how long ago the match was, but instead how many more games they had played since

  • Supports the idea that forgetting is based on new information, not decaying memories

• (-) Studies like McGeoch and McDonald (1931) that support interference lack mundane realism and therefore lack generalisability

Describe a cognitive interview

• Witnesses are encouraged to recall everything including minor details that may seem unimportant

  • Minor details may act as cues and trigger other memories

• Witnesses asked to mentally return to the scene

  • Mentally reinstating the context may create context clues that trigger memories of the event

• Witness asked to report what happened starting from the end and working their way back to the start

  • More difficult to lie in reverse order

  • Disrupts the effects of schema

• Witness asked to report what happened from somebody else’s perspective (e.g. the perpetrator)

  • Disrupts the effects of schema

Evaluate Cognitive Interview accuracy on eye witness testimony

• (+)Köhnken et al. (1999)

  • Carried out meta-analysis on over 50 studies into the CI

    • Led to 34% increase in the amount of information recalled with a slight increase in accuracy (85% vs 82%)

• (-)Köhnken et al. (1999)

  • CI produced a greater amount of inaccurate information as quantity of information recalled increased but accuracy did not

• (+) Milne and Bull (2003)

  • Showed children a video of a magic show

    • CI produced more accurate details

    • CI made children less susceptible to leading questions later

    • CI may be particularly effective on children