lecture 15: encoding and retrieval

In this lecture, we will explore the fundamental processes of how information is encoded in memory systems and the mechanisms involved in retrieving that information when needed.

Logical and Pragmatic Inferences

• Logical inference:

  • Definition: We remember inferred information as if we actually experienced it.

  • Example: When hearing information, we make logical connections that allow us to extract meaning.

• Pragmatic inferences:

  • Definition: Inferences that are plausible but not guaranteed to be true.

  • Occurrence: Happens across all phases of memory processing (encoding, storage, retrieval).

Advertising Claims and Memory

• Assertion claims:

  • Example: “Taking headache pills will ensure you never have another headache again!”

  • Note: These types of claims are rarely seen in advertisements.

• Implication claims:

  • Example: “Get through life without a headache. Take headache pills today!”

• Hedges:

  • Example: “Headache pills may help relieve headaches.”

  • Note: Hedges often overlooked; people tend to remember implication ads as assertion claims.

Misleading Information in Memory Processing

• Hit vs. Smashed Experiment:

  • Conducted by Loftus and Palmer (1974).

  • Study design: Participants witnessed a car crash and were queried about the speed of the vehicles with different phrasing (“hit” or “smashed”).

  • Findings:

    • Those who heard “smashed” provided higher speed estimates.

    • Later, these participants falsely recalled seeing broken glass.

  • Conclusion: Episodic memory is reconstructive; it can be influenced by wording and suggestions, rather than being a perfect recording of events.

The Hammer Experiment

• Conducted by Loftus, Miller, and Burns (1978).

• Study design: Participants viewed slides depicting a man stealing a hammer and later received misleading information that the man used a screwdriver instead.

• Findings: Many participants recalled the wrong tool due to the misleading information.

• Conclusion: This demonstrated that episodic memory can be altered by new information, confirming that it is not only reconstructive but also vulnerable to distortion.

Inference: Proactive vs. Retroactive

• Proactive Inference:

  • Definition: Older information interferes with the learning or recall of new information.

  • Examples:

    • Difficulty remembering a new phone number due to the interference of the old number.

    • Writing the previous year’s date during the early weeks of a new year.

    • Challenges in recalling new passwords due to interference from old passwords.

• Retroactive Inhibition:

  • Definition: New information interferes with retrieval of older information.

  • Examples:

    • Difficulty recalling an old address due to interference from a new address.

    • Problems with remembering names of people not seen for an extended period.

    • Issues with recognizing songs by bands playing older music.

    • Losing proficiency in a native language after learning a new language.

Lineup Procedures in Eyewitness Identification

• Simultaneous lineups:

  • Description: All suspects are displayed at the same time.

  • Outcome: Encourages relative judgment; people select the individual who resembles the perpetrator the most. This method leads to increased false identifications.

• Sequential lineups:

  • Description: Suspects are presented one at a time.

  • Outcome: Encourages absolute judgment; participants self-query “Is this the one?”

  • Findings: Sequential lineups result in fewer false identifications compared to simultaneous lineups.

Cognitive Interview Techniques for Eyewitness Testimony

• Recommended strategies for enhancing eyewitness testimony:

  • Multiple interviews should be conducted rather than a single, lengthy interview.

  • Participants should be encouraged to report everything without interruptions.

  • Events should be recalled in reverse order to improve retrieval accuracy.