Knowt
Note
Studied by 7 peopleNoteStudied by 31 peopleNoteStudied by 22 peopleNoteStudied by 6 peopleNoteStudied by 142 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people
Untitled Flashcards Set
False Memories
Term | Definition |
Recovered memory | Reappearance of memories in consciousness after these not being available for a period e.g. professor Cheit’s (Freud, 1996) |
Schooler et al (1997) requirements | Reality – event, forgetting, recovering |
False memory syndrome | Systematic creation of memories for events which never occurred |
Paul Ingram Loftus and Ketcham (1994) | False memories of sexually abusing his children from suggestions by Richard Ofshe Careless use of memory work during psychotherapy |
Roediger and McDermott (1995) Experiment 1 | Yes – hit – false alarm No – miss – correct rejection Mean hit rate– 86% Mean false alarm rate – 85% |
Critical lures | Close associates of items on list presented |
Roediger and McDermott (1995) Experiment 2 | Longer lists – recall for half, recognition for all 16 55% - critical lure recalled Correct recall – serial position curve |
Remember / know judgements for recognition experiments Tulving (1985) | Remember – vivid memory for actual presentation Know – ppts sure they were on the list, no actual memory No recall, recognition – Studied: 41% remember, 24% know; CL: 38% remember, 34% know Recognition after recall – Studied: 57% remember, 22% know; CL: 58% remember, 23% know When critical lure incorrectly recalled, incorrect recognition rise to 93% (73% remember) Participants cannot distinguish between false and true memories |
Deese (1959) |
|
Dechterenko et al (2021) | Picture stimuli used in DRM paradigm |
Fred and Gleaves (1996) | Are words in a list events? If false memories for CSA not close associates to actual events, how is DRM relevant? Can we generalise artificial lab studies to the real world? |
Loftus and Pickrell (1995) | Questionnaire booklet describing what they can remember about each event Interviewed by psychologist 1-2 weeks later, interviewed 1-2 weeks later again 7 accepted false memory, 6 maintained at interview 19/24 correctly identified false event when debriefed Clarity ratings higher for true, do not clearly mark out false ones Clarity of false may increase over time and retelling |
Support for Loftus and Pickrell (1995) | Direct replication (Murphy et al, 2022) Other childhood events (Ceci et al, 1994) UK Home Office approved interview guidelines (Ost et al, 2005) False recall rates higher with real / false photograph cues (Garry & Gerrie, 2005) |
Encoding Failures
Term | Definition |
Simon and Emmons (1956) | Sleep – hear questions and answers every 5 minutes (EEG recording) Performance above chance – learning occurred 80% - awake but relaxed 50% - drowsy 5% - drowsy, light sleep transition 0% - asleep |
Bruce et al (1970) | Presented material to sleeping subjects, then awakened them immediately Found no evidence for memory |
Pace-Schott et al (2003) | Just because we don’t learn about external events whilst asleep doesn’t imply we can’t remember internal events e.g. dreams |
Hahn et al (2006) Paller and Voss (2004) | Sleep may play important role in memory consolidation |
Levinson (1965) | 10 ppts – mock crisis during surgery and hypnotised one month later 4 – verbatim reports of anaesthesists comments 4 – partial 2 – no recall Ethical? Control? No blind experimenter? Degree of anaesthesia? Is anaesthesia total? Not and all or none phenomenon |
Graf and Schachter (1985) | Explicit memory reuires conscious recollection of prior experiences Implicit memory is researched by tasks which do not require reference to a specific episode |
Methods of testing explicit memory | Free recall Cued recall Recognition |
Methods of testing implicit memory | Word stem completion Word fragment completion Degraded picture naming |
Iselin-Chaves et al (2005) | Anaesthesia level monitored – EEG bispectral index 20 words, 25 times 6 letters long, shared a stem with at least four other words Word Stem Completion Higher than chance of recalling word presented in list even though not consciously aware |
Jacoby (1991) Process Dissociation Procedure |
|
Effective Encoding
Term | Definition |
Types of Memory research Searleman and Herrman (1994) | Pragmatic Experimental Atheoretical Theoretical |
Pragmatic | Seek ways to improve abilities to learn and remember Mnemonic techniques e.g. Cicero’s Method of Loci Rhyme as a mnemonic device in the dark ages |
Experimental | Documenting the existence and nature of memory phenomena with systematically collected observation |
Atheoretical | Characterising memory in an intuitive and informal manner Focused on phenomena rather than explanations e.g. Aristotle’s laws of association – that things encoded together are remembered together |
Theoretical | Explaining the mechanisms of memory with theories / models / metaphors which capture part of a phenomenon e.g. Plato and Aristotle’s memory metaphors – wax tablet, aviary, scribe Interest rekindled in 16th and 17th e.g. Bacon, Locke, Kant, Mill |
Ebbinghaus | Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology (1885) Experimental, atheoretical Nonsense syllables as the fundamental unit of memory |
Method od complete mastery | Measuring how long it took Ebbinghaus to learn a list to repeat it perfectly twice |
Method of savings | Measure of retention – how much less time to relearn a list |
Classic Forgetting Function | Based on serial spaced learning of 1200 lists of 13 nonsense syllables L shape – is forgetting never complete? |
Encoding difficulty | Increases disproportionately with list length Up to 7 items almost instant, after this doubling the list length more than quadruples the time it takes to learn the list After this, rate of increase of difficulty may reduce There is no evidence for any maximum list length we are able to learn |
Chase and Ericsson (1981) | SF spent 250+ hours training and testing for a simple digit span task Memorisation was based on chunking His digit span increased to about 90 items, but his letter span was still at 6 items Chunks about 7 numbers long, just remembered more chunks |
Keppel (1964) | 8 blocks massed on one day / 2 a day for 4 days Massed conditions (MPs (d4) and MPd (d1)) - steady improvements over tie Distributed DP – cross-day forgetting Tests 0/1/8 days later Massed practice achieves goal soonest but is less efficient |
Baddeley and Longman (1978) | Trained postmen to type postcodes 1 1hour session more efficient than 2 2hour sessions LTR poorer in 2x2, 1x1 less satisfied |
Why distributed encoding works | Encoding variability Deficient processing hypothesis Study-phase retrieval |
Encoding variability Estes (1959) | Multiple learning in slightly different contexts -> more available cues |
Deficient processing hypothesis Cuddy and Jacoby (1982) | We pay less attention to recently encountered things |
Study-phase retrieval Xue et al (2010) | We tend to retrieve the previous episode of learning each time you relearn Retrieval itself benefits memory |
Bower et al (1969) | Words are learned 4 times faster if they are given an appropriate network of meaning |
Context Bransford and Johnson (1972) | Context is vital for efficient encoding and if it isn’t available at encoding, it can’t be added later
|
Schemata Brewer and Treyens (1981) | Schema expectancy and saliency (schema inconsistency) predict recall even though they are negatively correlated Recall from a study |
Scripts Smith and Graesser (1981) | Memory for stories follow general scripts Although recall seems to demonstrate better memory for typical information particularly with delayed recall, the effect disappears when guessing is controlled for (recognition) and atypical items are remembered particularly well After 30 mins – recall T29% A29% - recognition TH78% AH73% TF65% AF15% After 3 weeks - recall T17% A1% - recognition TH66% AH46% TF63% AF26% |
Storage Failures
Term | Definition |
Loftus and Loftus (1980) | 84% of psychologists believe we never forget anything vs 69% of non-psychologists |
Psychoanalysis | Patients may recover memories for traumatic or unpleasant events which seem to have been lost But this could be false memories / repression / only some specific events? |
Hypnosis | People have been age regressed to recall details of their lives or from crime scenes But this could be influenced by suggestibility, and there are questions if it adds anything to interviewing |
Brain stimulation Wilder Penfield (1940s) Loftus and Loftus (1980) | Stimulated the temporal lobes of epileptics, which often results in the spontaneous reporting of memory-like events But 11132 patients examined and only 40 experimental reports taken, and many of these were only vague sounds Only 12 (<3%) reported things which could be identified as past experiences, which may be closer to dreams than memories |
Mechanisms for forgetting | Failure to encode Decay Interference (e.g. trace destruction) Retrieval failure |
Brown-Peterson Paradigm Brown (1958) Peterson and Peterson (1959) | Ppts encoded a consonant trigram, then immediately counted down in threes from the following number Ppts then asked to recall the letters It was found performance depended on the delay |
Proactive interference in BPD | Keppel and Underwood (1962) – BP forgetting at least partly caused by proactive interference Wickens (1970) – the release from PI phenomenon shows a change of category brings performance close to the levels of trial 1 again |
Loftus and Palmer (1974) | Car accident experiment |
Trace destruction Loftus and Loftus (1980) | Eyewitness testimony results e.g. Loftus et al (1978) demonstrates memory trace can be irrevocably altered by subsequent information |
Loftus, Miller, and Burns (1978) | 195 students shown 30 slides of a car accident, with the critical slides showing either a give way of yield sign They were asked if another car passed the red car when it was stopped at the stop/yield sign 75% performance for a consistent question, 51% for a misleading question The effect increased with delay between learning and testing, but reduced by forewarning or blatency Loftus (1979) added a 25 dollar incentive but this did not affect it But misinfo never seems to work on all ppts – could it just be response bias for ppts with no encoded initial memory – thus no trace destruction? |
McCloskey and Zarazoza (1985) | Thought - Considered hypothetically if 60/100 ppts never actually encoded the sign - 70% correct in control - 55% correct in misled - 45% with bias added Experimental - Modified test – not misinformation but new thing - Performance is fine (72% correct in misled vs 37% traditional) - No trace destruction, you are just made more likely to choose the other option in the traditional test |
Nelson (1978) | Standard paired associate learning (number with a word) 24 ppts had 20 pairs to learn each Four week delay, the tested by recall, recognition, and learning Cued recall. – 232 forgotten 120 not recognised When the 120 items which can’t be recalled / recognised are relearned, there is a substantial advantage for learning old associates (20% new vs 50% old) Forgotten memories can still influence behaviour Is forgetting just a progressive reduction in availability through interference / partial decay rather than memory deletion? |
Luria (1968) | S – unlimited memory for numbers and equations Equations memorised after few minutes, perfect surprise recall 15 years later Number of grids of almost unlimited size given about 3 to 4 seconds to memorise No specific training, relying on imagery, synaesthesia, and some strategies e.g. method of loci Poor memory for faces Inability to forget began to create problems |
Paradox of the expert Smith et al (1978) | Why doesn’t it become harder to learn new things as more items are already in memory? Aren’t there capacity limits, or proactive interference creating problems for experts? |
Active Forgetting
Term | Definition |
Wilkinson and Cargill (1955) | Male and female ppts told they are doing a personality study They listened to a story containing a dream description, with neutral or obvious sexual imagery with oedipal content Men worse memory than women for oedipal material Freud would suggest they find it more stressful and repress it McCullough et al (1976) found if ppts were not told the experiment is about personality, there is no effect. There is no unconscious repression therefore – is the effect due to self-presentational bias? |
Levinger and Clark (1961) | Free association with neural or potentially emotional stimulus words Galvanic skin responses were recorded to assess physiological arousal Free associates to neutral words were recalled better than those to arousing words However, memory for stimulus words is generally better if they are arousing (Rubin, 1986) This was an immediate memory test – if Freudian repression did exist to emotional events, effects should show at long delays |
Parkinson et al (1982) | Repeated L&C in a delayed condition Immediate testing – memory for associates to arousing words poorer, but after 7 days is better than for neutral ones |
Action-Decrement Theory Walker (1958) | Memory traces take time to consolidate Physiological arousal increases consolidation time but may improve longer-term encoding |
Anderson et al (2006) | Neutral Picture -> 4/9s interval -> Arousing picture -> Distractor Recognition memory tests for neutral and arousing pictures after one week Retrograde arousal enhancement observed – Rubin (1986) found Memory for neutral pictures shortly before arousing ones is enhanced Arousal enhanced remembering rather than knowing (Tulving’s distinction) Interpretation in terms of Perseveration-Consolidation theory (McGaugh, 2006) |
Perseveration-Consolidation theory (McGaugh, 2006) | Perseveration – after learning, memory trace undergoes continued activity / repetition in the brain, stabilising and strengthening the memory trace Consolidation – memory becomes more permanent as the perseveration process continues Interruption can weaken / prevent consolidating |
Finn and Roediger (2011) | Swahili-English vocab paris learned and tested with cued recall twice First test – successful retrieval is followed by an arousing picture The vocab learning was enhanced by negative arousing pictures immediately after or two seconds after successful retrieval Arousal does not enhance performance while restudying items |
Weapon focus e.g. Christianson and Loftus (1987) | Causes selective attention towards the threat, and central/peripheral tradeoffs |
McGaugh (2006) | Evidence for arousal-related consolidation of LTM |
Slamecka (1968) | Ppts encoded 3 word lists – 30 rare, 30 common, 30 butterfly associated Then recalled with context (15 words provided) or control (none) Part list context impairs memory Shows context may be critical for encoding, but not all context is helpful at retrieval Interpretation in terms of Retrieval Strategy Disruption and Active Inhibition in Storage of non-list items (e.g. Bauml & Aslan, 2006, 2011) |
Anderson et al (1994) | Ppts encoded category-exemplar pairs, then practiced retrieval of half the pairs At the final test, cued recall is baseline for unpractised categories, enhanced for practiced examples of practiced categories, and impaired for unpractised exemplars of practice categories |
Bjork (1970) List-method directed forgetting | Control group told to learn list one, then list 2, then recall both lists Experimental group told to learn list one, forget list one, learn list two, then recall both lists The experimental group was worse at list 1, then better at list 2 |
Johnson (1994) Item-method directed forgetting | Remember items were enhanced relative to forget items |
Anderson (2005) item-method directed forgetting | Yields substantial remember-forget differences which can be observed in recall and recognition This is generally interpreted in terms of selective rehearsal of TBR remember items (encoding effect rather than inhibition of items in storage) |
Anderson (2005) list-method directed forgetting | Large recall deficits for TBF forgetting list vs TBR remember / control lists Results are clear in recall, but often not observed in recognition tests This is generally interpreted in terms of retrieval inhibition The item may remain in memory (thus intact recognition), but are actively inhibited from being recalled |
Types of Retrieval
Term | Definition |
Types of retrieval | Free recall Cued recall Recognition Confidence Relearning |
Free vs Cued Recall Tulving and Potska (1971) | Learn 24 words, 4 members of each 6 categories Tested with and without category cues Cues reduced retroactive interference Cues are vital in understanding all retrieval from memory – strategies with cues are some of the most efficient for mnemonists e.g. MoL |
Generate-Recognise Theory of Free Recall Anderson and Bower (1972) | Generation – generate potential memory candidates based on cues / associations Recognition – individual evaluates / recognises whether items are correct / relevant to original memory context |
Recognition failure Tulving and Thomson (1973) | Recognition is generally easier than recall, but there may be situations we recall items from memory we don’t recognise |
Tulving and Thomson (1973) | First phase of paired associate learning Second phase the recognition condition Ppts asked to generate 4 associated words Cues are strong associates of the test items Then asked if they recognise any of the words from the original list Phase three the recall condition where ppts were given one associate Recall was better than recognition, because cued recall tasks are easy, as low semantic associates form good cues Recognition is difficult as all close semantic associates seem familiar |
Slamecka and Graf (1978) | Self-generation effect can enhance familiarity |
Conclusions | Recall can produce better memory than recognition if provides better retrieval cues Sometimes the item isn't the best cue for identifying the context in which it was previously encountered Generate-recognise approach may be used in free recall tasks but is not a complete model of all recall - such as cued recall
|
Encoding Specificity Principle Tulving (1983) | Memory performance is best when the cues at test matched those encoded with the memory at study |
Source Monitoring Problems Johnson et al (1977) | Paired associate learning – pairs studied then tested 2,5, or 8 times Ppts have to judge how often each item is studied, and how often it is tested The two judgements are highly interdependent, so ppts can’t keep study and test contexts separate (whether they generated the word themselves or perceived it from an external source) |
Goff and Roediger (1998) | Day 1 encoding session – 72 words heard: hear / hear and imagine / hear and perform Day 2 imagining performing action statements – ones from encoding and new ones – imagine 0,1,3,5 times? Day 15 test session – recognition and source monitoring tests for encoding session – did you hear? If yes, what type of hear? The more times they imagined performing the action, the more likely they were to say they performed the action |
Schooler et al (1986) | Attempted to use Johnson’s Reality Monitoring framework to spot false memories, using the same stimuli as Loftus et al’s (1978) road accident Misinfo – did you see the yield sign? Description condition added 76% real remembered, 25% suggested 2.84 mean confidence real, 2.57 mean confidence suggested (/3) Longer description for suggested Supports the suggestion from Johnson, Foley, Suengas and Raye (1988) that real memories have more perceptual information than imagine ones Does not support prediction of more context - false context (cognitive and function) may be added for suggested memories |
Suggested memories | 16 psych students give 21 real then 21 misinformed descriptions Classification - 59% correct for real memories, 60% for suggested memories (just better than chance) Confidence - main reason given for classifications, but often unreliable Sensory / geographic information supported real classification Function and rationalisation supported suggested classifications |
Improving Retrieval
Term | Definition |
Hypermnesia Erdelyi and Becker (1974) | In some cases typically involving repeated recall attempts and using visual stimuli, net gains in memory can be observed over time This can be helped by additional thinking, and in most cases requires consistent increases in retrieval effort (Mulligan, 2006) Normal memory may be the result of forgetting and reminiscence. In cases where forgetting is low and reminiscence is high, a net gain in memory can be observed |
Practical uses of hypermnesia Scrivener and Safer (1988) | Watch a two minute video of a burglar breaking into a house and shooting three innocent people. Recall immediately, questionnaire, recall again, second questionnaire, recall for a third trial. Return 48 hours later for trial 4 Recall seems to improve over time, though this may partly be down to limited recall time of 7 minutes, and 46 box detail procedures |
Kern et al (2002) | Hypermnesia may be stronger in negative arousing conditions (using emotional items) |
Lane et al (2001) | Repeated focus on details can make false suggested memories more likely with repeated testing |
Groninger and Murray (2004) | Theoretical interpretation of hypermnesia remains controversial though it has been shown in recognition tests, so can’t just be down to retrieval effort |
Godden and Baddeley (1975) | Diver memories No effect in recognition – Godden and Baddeley (1980) |
Goodwin et al (1969) | State dependent memory – drunk |
Pen task Kraft and Pressman (2012) | Participants in the smile condition reported more positive emotions and exhibited lower physiological stress responses compared to those in the neutral condition. |
Teasdale and Russell (1983) | We tend to recall info congruent with our current mood Mood induction typically using Velten procedure Robust result, worlds with normal (everyday ambulatory monitoring - Loeffler et al, 2013) and extreme (autobiographical memories in depression and dysphoria - Williams) mood states |
Mood Congruency vs Dependency | To demonstrate mood dependency, need fully crossed design with neutral words as stimuli |
Cognitive Interview Geiselman et al (1986) |
Watch violent films, standard / cognitive interview Standard - 29.4 correct items, Cognitive Interview - 41.2 correct items, No difference in number of errors |
Support for CI | Subsequent support for effectiveness in shortened form (Davis et al, 2005), and variety of contexts (Holliday, 2003; Holliday and Albon, 2004; Stein and Memon, 2006) |
Ross (1989) | Remembered attitudes - After attitude change manipulation, people change previous attitude to current attitude when asked (hindsight bias) - attitude towards exercise after dangers of jogging film Remembered behaviour - After attitude change manipulation, memories of previous behaviour can become distorted (cognitive dissonance) - frequency of toothbrushing after dangers of frequent toothbrushing film
|
Conway and Ross (1984) | Groups of students rated study skills before training program. Such programs are rarely successful, and no improvements were observed. Students attempted to remember pre-course ratings, and systematically remembered pre-course ratings as worse than they really were. Retrieval is socially motivated to be state incongruent. |
Autobiographical Memory
Term | Definition |
Cue Word Technique Galton (1879) | Recall one memory associated with each word, and describe and date the memories. When done on normal student populations, you get a traditional forgetting function (Rubin, 1982) |
Problems with autobiographical memory | Whether to believe people’s results – increased by asking people to date memories |
Wagenaar (1986) | Approx.. on event per day for over four years, and record details of the event. Each even contains four cues, and one critical detail, nd is rated on three additional dimensions. Each event is recalled only once, and testing takes a year. Cued recall testing is with 24 different cuing orders. Results show a standard forgetting function, but items are still always recognised. Best memory for recent, salient, emotional, pleasant events. Other analyses of the original data suggest good memory for unpleasant self-critical events (Wagenaar, 1994) which is not consistent with repression Others find intensity of emotion more important than valence for producing good memory e.g. Cognleton and Berntsen (2019), Talarico et al (2004) |
Barclay and Wellman (1986) | People are good at recognising their own diary entries as belonging, but over time we become more likely to falsely accept altered foil events as their own.. Fantasy-prone individuals may be better at this sought of recognition task (Horselenberg et al, 2004) |
Misra et al (2018) | AM studies use events ppt decide are interesting and relevant. To choose random events, can do precise 2AFC recognition tests for everyday events. People are almost unable to distinguish videos of their own walks from others’ if weather is similar. Most of our lives never make it to AM. |
Waldfogel, 1948 | Studies using cue word technique reveal few memories from first few years of life |
Usher and Neisser (1993) | Use parents to verify specific events that happened in childhood. Negative events are generally well remembered, only when they happened after age 3. Problems with sudy: 61% of memories confirmed by a parent, and 22% of time parents conflicted with child's memory. Real autobiographical memories? Based on family narratives / informed guesswork? |
Eacott and Crawley (1998) | Replicated U&N with control condition and larger number of participants in key cells. False memory between 2 y/o to 2y3mo |
Burt, Kemp, and Conway (2003) |
|
Conway and Pleydell-Pearce (2000) | Autobiographical memories are nor simple single episodic memories Can involve specific episodic memories (Event Specific Knowledge) but are retrieved with respect to themes and periods within an individual's life story Specific episodes can play multiple different roles in different AMs at different times Autobiographical memories are transitory mental constructions within a Self-Memory |
| Retrieval can be direct or generative, but all involve constructive processes (Harris & Berntsen, 2019). Retrieval is done with reference to a Working Self. A concept derived from Markus & Nurius’s (1986) theory of “possible selves”. The working self maintains our current self-concept and goals. Thus one good predictor of accuracy in dating memories is degree of self-reference (Skowronski et al., 1991) But reliance on Working Self produces the possibility of inference and bias errors (Hyman, 1999; Schacter, 2001). Autobiographical memories can change because they are generated differently when social or personal needs change.
|
Self-Memory System Conway et al (2019) | Involved in understanding our present selves, and in our understanding of our future selves |
NoteStudied by 7 peopleNoteStudied by 31 peopleNoteStudied by 22 peopleNoteStudied by 6 peopleNoteStudied by 142 peopleNoteStudied by 17 people