Cognitive Revision
(Classic) (1966b) Baddeley
AO1
A: -To investigate the influence of acoustic and semantic word similarity on learning and recall in S and L -TM
M: -72 ppts (male and female) from the applied psychology research unit
-Lab experiment asking ppts to recall acoustically and semantically similar and dissimilar word lists (4 groups), each contained 10 words, independent measures design
-First given a hearing test
-Each word presented for 3s
-Ppts then required to complete 6 tasks involving memory for digits, and asked to write down the words in the correct order, 4x
-After the 4th trial ppts were given a 15m distractor task involving copying numbers, before doing a surprise recall (words shown on a card and they had to put them in the correct order)
R: -Acoustically similar recalled worse than dissimilar words during the initial phase (trial 2 in particular statistically significant at p<0.05); semantically similar (approx. 60%) significantly harder to recall in the surprise than dissimilar (approx. 85%) (p<0.005)
C: -STM is acoustically encoded, LTM semantically
AO3
đ -Lab experiment- highly replicable; standardisation such as the timings of the procedure (each word presented for 3s->6 tasks x4->15m distractor task)
-High level of control- EVs (such as distractions/ hearing problems) eliminated
-Independent measures- (each person getting only one of the lists), reduced order effects (boredom, tiredness)
-Both males and females from the APRU included
đ -Lab experiment- lack of mundane realism in recalling monosyllabic words
-Independent measures design- participant variables (natural memory; intelligence)
-Sample all taken from the APRU and may share characteristics (though did use both men and women)
*However, the procedure was done 4x meaning ppts may have gotten bored or tired by the end (although giving them the words in a random order reduces order effects)
(Contemporary) (2002) Schmolck
AO1
A: -To investigate the effects of specific brain damage on semantic memory using case studies, specifically the relationship between semantic test scores, temporal lobe damage, and to look at the uniqueness of HM
M: -6 patients with amnesia compared to 8 ânormalâ control ppts, matched on age, sex, and education, the brain damaged ppts were divided into groups according to their brain damage: MTL- medial temporal lobe; MTL+- + anterolateral temporal cortex
-Lab experiment over 5 sittings
-Conducted 13 tests, 9 from a semantic test battery using line drawings of 24 animals and 24 objects which could be grouped into smaller categories, i.e. water animals, vehicles, etc.
-Asked to complete various tasks, such as naming, describing physical features, the pyramid and palms task, and filling in gaps
-The % correct or incorrect scored, except on some tests (6, 8, and 9) where their accuracy was scored 0-4 and the researchers made sure they compared
R: -Those with hippocampal damage were able to name, point out, and answer questions about objects they were given with considerable accuracy (similarly to the control group)
-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, 62% non-living
-HM 66.7% living, 90% non-living
-HM did the worst (in MTL group), MTL+ found it most difficult to identify and recall facts about living objects compared to non-living in all tasks
C: -MTL+ patients had greater difficulty than MTL suggesting that the anterolateral temporal cortex is responsible for semantic knowledge
AO3
đ -Lab- highly replicable thus reliable; high levels of standardisation (pictures of 24 animals and 24 objects- semantic test battery 9/13 tests, categorisation; tasks such as the pyramid and palms and describing physical features)
-Group design: control group matched- for age, sex and education- controlled participant variables (EVs)
-Checked for inter-rater reliability- scoring descriptions (multiple researchers)
-Finding matches up with other research about semantic dementia
đ -Sample- small; several unique individuals (6 with brain damage), semantic memory location results cannot be applied to others due to unique status
-Lab experiment- lack of mundane realism in using line drawings of animals and objects
-Ethical problems of working with vulnerable people (even if the tests themselves werenât harmful), informed consent- brain damage, may not fully comprehend the study or their role, etc.
HM
AO1
-Had epilepsy from a young age (after an accident)
-Had his hippocampus removed (bilaterally)
-He couldnât make new LTM (episodic or semantic)- hippocampus responsible
-Could access old LTM- stored in other places in the brain than the hippocampus
-Could still use STM, i.e. keeping things in mind through maintenance rehearsal- STM and LTM separate systems
-Could make procedural memories, i.e. mirror drawing task- different types of LTM
AO3
đ -Useful- able to tell us about how the brain makes new types of memory and the different types (hippocampus removed bilaterally; couldnât make new LTM, but could access old LTM, could still use STM and could make procedural memories)
-Research that could not be done ethically without the pre-existing brain damage- more ethical than manipulating first-hand
-Case studies like this over a long period of time are rich in detail and depth of information- about how memory works, good for gaining understanding
-This study used a number of different methods, i.e. memory tests, observations, etc.- triangulation, findings support one another
đ -Case study- small sample; one person
-Unique individual- very specific brain damage (epilepsy from a young age after an accident)
-Ethics can be a problem in case studies of those with brain damage- HM with his hippocampus removed and resulting memory issues, difficulties with giving fully informed consent
MSM
AO1
-Memory is a linear process whereby information is passed from one store to another, each with its own features and functions
-Information enters the sensory memory (store) via the 5 senses, held here for no longer than a second or 2 (up to 10 items)
-If paid attention to, the information will enter the STM, which can hold 7+-2 items (Miller) in capacity for 30s (Peterson & Peterson) duration, this store mainly deals with acoustic information (encoding, Baddley), held here via maintenance rehearsal
-If rehearsed enough (elaborative), the information will transfer to the LTM, can be stored for a lifetime and has an unlimited capacity, coding here is mainly semantic (Baddeley), information can also be retrieved when needed
AO3
đ -Supporting study- Baddeley- demonstrates the encoding of STM and LTM (ppts recalling less words when either acoustically similar-initial phase or semantically-surprise recall)
-Support- Wearing- two separate stores as his STM is functioning in the absence of his damaged LTM; can only hold information for 30s but cannot transfer anything new
-Useful- for explaining things such as how revision works (the need for rehearsal and focus on semantic meaning) and types of amnesia (like anterograde where people cannot make new LTM, as they cannot pass from S to LTM)
đ -Other theories- simplistic- WMM suggests STM contains different capacities for auditory and visual information; dual tasks studies
-Most of the research takes place in lab experiments (like Baddeley), findings might not really apply to real-world
-Evidence such as KC- shows LTM is more complicated than this theory suggests (reductionist); couldnât recall episodic memories but could recall semantic information
WMM
AO1
-STM is made up of multiple parts (not just one unitary store as indicated by MSM)
-Phonological loop: deals with acoustic information, limited storage, split into two subsystems: articulatory loop (inner voice), voices rehearsed information; primary acoustic store, holds on to the memory of sounds
-Visuo-spatial sketch pad: memory of imagery, also has limited capacity, has since also been split into two components
-Central executive: manages the âslave systemsâ, itself doesnât handle memories but allocates them, no storage, pays attention and switches tasks, non-specific modality- can process any of the senses
-Dual task abilities: can do two tasks without much difficulty if they use two different stores, however if they use the same one will be unable to do both
AO3
đ -Support- KF case study- brain damage from a motorcycle accident; damaged STM; impairment mainly for verbal information- visual largely unaffected
-Support- dual tasks- Robbinsâ 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 PL task (repeating the word see-saw); the tasks which used the same systems impaired function
-Other theories- develops the initial research of MSM and adds more detail to the theory, how STM works, less reductionist, more in-depth
-Useful- can help explain problems that people with dementia may have, decline in CE ability, less able to pay attention or switch tasks
đ -Conflicting- Parkin- conducted a brain scan looking for evidence of the CE; could not find any special areas of activity when conducting CE tasks
-Less depth about human memory- doesnât include LTM
-CE: most research focuses on the two slave systems, not much known about the function of the CE, difficult to scientifically test its role
-Most of the research takes place in lab experiments (like Robbins)- less ecological validity/ mundane realism thus applicability
Reconstructive
AO1
-Memories are retrieved through a constructive process where they are rebuilt
-Reconstructed each time they are recalled (and may be incorrect)
-People use previous experiences, perceptions, and beliefs to rebuild memories, colour and change what is recalled
-Schemas (mental scripts for events, people, and situations) possessed alter the content of memories which are recalled to be consistent with beliefs/ previous experiences (accommodation)
-Fill in gaps (confabulation)
-Things which donât fit with oneâs schema might be completely missed out (omission)
-Might also use rationalisation (a form of accommodation) wherein memories change as the newer alteration makes more sense
AO3
đ -Support- Bartlettâs war of the ghosts- found that ppts who recalled a story filled in the information they couldnât remember with previous experiences (schemas) e.g. âcanoeâ became âboatâ and âseal huntingâ became âfishingâ
-Support- Loftus and Palmer- show the importance of schemas- watched a video of a car crash then were asking a leading question about the speed of the car; the more âviolentâ the verb i.e. smashed vs hit caused ppts to recall a faster crash; in another version ppts were more likely to recall broken glass in the video (despite there being none)
-Explains why people misremember information rather than simply forgetting it altogether, a strength compared to the other theories which donât explain errors in memory
-Usefulness- helps understanding of eye witness testimony for crimes and why it isnât so useful anymore
đ -Other theories- doesnât consider the existence of S/ LTM, encoding or storage not talked about of memories in the first place, just retrieval
-Testability- schema recall studies (like Barlettâs war of the ghost) lack ecological validity
-Barlettâs study also had problems with standardisation
-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)
-Yullie & Cutshall- showed reconstruction of memories didnât happen much in a real life robbery case; leading questions had little impact
Tulving
AO1
-LTM is made up of multiple parts (not a unitary store as indicated by MSM)
-Episodic memory- particular events, have happened to people- personal, information such as an address (autobiographical), mental diary
-Such memories seem to be time and spatially encoded/ referenced (linked together based on when they happened and stored chronologically)
-Linked to the senses, can be âcuedâ situationally, less helpful for semantic (remember memories from school by revisiting but not facts learned there)
-Semantic- facts, figures, knowledge, mental encyclopaedia
-Not time and spatially encoded/ referenced (donât generally remember when facts are learned) and not stored chronologically (if taught something new about something one already knows it will be added to the previous knowledge not separately)
AO3
đ -Support- Ostegaard- studied the case of a boy who had oxygen deprivation; damaged both types of memory but semantic recovered whilst his episodic did not
-Other theories- develops the MSM and explains different types of LTM, more detailed, a stronger theory
-Support- evidence such as KC (motorcycle accident) couldnât recall episodic memories but could recall semantic information
-Usefulness- helps understanding of dementia, evidence for different types of LTM from case studies, patients tend to lose episodic memories in order from most recent (time referencing) and semantic remain intact for longer
đ -Squire and Zola- conducted brain scans; found episodic and semantic memory are both located in the medial temporal lobe (not separate)
-Large amounts of overlap between the two memory systems- may not be that separate, simplistic, less useful than MSM possibly
-Difficult to test LTM- measured retrospectively; difficult to test empirically
Individual differences
AO1
-MSM- capacity and duration of both S and LTM are averages, variation between people, i.e. capacity of 4-5 items in one person/ 8-9 in another
-Reconstructive- schemas differ between people, reconstruction different
-Episodic and semantic- both come from past experiences
-WMM- ability of CE to shift attention and multi-task varies
Key Q (How can psychological knowledge help us understand and help those with dementia?)
AO1
-Affects 850,000 people in the UK in 2015 (estimated rise to 1,000,000 by 2025, doubling by 2050)
-Progressive problem with processing information inc. memory, causes a decline in a personâs ability to think, understand, and remember, and affects function
-Older people usually will process information slower than younger, but dementia is an extreme medical case of this
-Varies in severity from slight to severe over time: forgetfulness, trouble multitasking, fluctuating disorientation, diminished insight, learning new things becomes difficult, severe disorientation to time and place, no STM, loss of speech
-Important as there is no cure/ treatment so have to ensure people can be helped however possible
AO2
-MSM- STM affected, a lot of the âforgettingâ seen in dementia is because the information has never been encoded into STM (cannot pay attention), can help people by giving them reminders and notes about tasks which they are supposed to complete
-WMM- declining CE meaning they have difficulty paying/ shifting attention leading to lack of functioning, should only give people one thing/ task to do at a time, donât have too many people talking to them at the same time
-Reconstructive- if a person with dementia is saying confusing and mixed up things it might be because their schemas are muddled, i.e. may confuse their adult children with own siblings as they fill the gap in their mind with someone familiar, can give them things to remind them of their correct schemas (cues) but usually one just has to go with what they have said and donât correct them
-Episodic and semantic- episodic decreases over time whereas semantic remains fairly stable (Nyberg, 2003), fading of episodic starts in the âpresentâ and then spreads throughout the past, why those with dementia can remember information from a long time ago, âvalidation therapyâ- if theyâre going to be confused as theyâre âstuck in timeâ one is to make the situations theyâre in as close to that situation as they can
AO3
-Baddeley et al (2001)- conducted a series of attentional tests; one asked ppts to look for Z amongst easily differentiated letters and ones which looked more like Zs; those with Alzheimerâs performed worse on the difficult task; problems with CE as expected with WMM
-Jahn (2013)- showed both LTM and WMM decline quickly with the onset of Alzheimers
-Mohamad (2016)- autobiographical recall in AD mainly characterised by loss of associated episodic information; leads to de-contextualisation of autobiographical memories and a shift from reliving past events to a general sense of familiarity (thus putting those with AD in a more familiar setting/ period should be good for them)
-Peterson and Peterson- rehearsal without distraction helps transfer things to LTM; thus stopping this from happening (not distracting those with dementia) may help the transfer of information
Practical (Whether using the same or different slave systems affects word recall)
AO1
A: -To investigate whether using the same or different slave systems (visual or acoustic distraction tasks) affects word recall
M: -Gathered 20 ppts via opportunity sampling from a psychology class at local Newcastle sixth form college, average age 16
-Independent measures design, students randomly assigned to either doing the visual or verbal distractor task
-Read 15 words to the ppts out loud (1m)
-Ppts then given a 2m distractor task, spot the difference or word search
-Ppts given 2m to recall as many words from the initial list as they could
-Calculated the mean for each group
AO3
đ -Quantitative data- number of words recalled (/15); can conduct statistical analysis (interference- visual or verbal- task or chance)
-Independent measures- eliminates order effects, initial experience wonât influence word recall in second condition
-Standardised- everybody got the same list of words (and tasks depending on groups), plus same timings
-Ethics- consent, nothing to cause harm, also given the right to withdraw
đ -Sample- small and opportunity; local college
-Independent measures- individual differences (natural memory ability)
-Low in ecological validity and mundane realism, task of being given ârandomâ words to recall and then doing an interference task is not how memory works in the real world