memories Flashcards
(45 cards)
multi story model - the process
1) sensory story
2) attention ->
3) short term memory
4) transfer ->
5) long term store
6) retrieval <-
multi story model - sensory store
duration - 0.5s
encoding - processed from senses: sight (iconic memory), sounds (echoic), touch (haptic)
capacity - unlimited
multi story model - short term store
duration - 18-30s
encoding - acoustically
capacity - 7+/-2
multi store model - long term memory
duration - lifetime
encoding - semantically (meaning)
capacity - unlimited
2 key words to revive the multi store model
sequential and linear (in a sequence and a particular order)
multi store model - duration evidence
WALSH & THOMPSON (1978)
- flashed images of “O” twice with v brief intervals between watch presentation.
- researchers recorded that Pts thought they could see continuous stimulus
- iconic sensory story has a duration of 500ms
- duration limited and dependant on age
Multi store model - encoding evidence
BADDELEY (1966)
gave pts 4 sets of words
set 1= similar sounding
set 2= different sounding
set 3= similar meaning
set 4= different meaning
when asked to recall immediately, pts made more mistakes on words that sounded alike
multi store model - capacity evidence
JACOBS (1887)
tested STM capacity with serial digit span method where pts are presented with increasingly long lists of numbers or letters and have to immediate recall them in the right order
capacity for numbers= 9.3 items
capacity for letters = 7.3 items
one strength + one weakness of the multi store model
❌there’s case study research that disputes its validity
- patient KFs visual short term memory functioned but his verbal short term memory was very limited after an accident
- suggests that STM is not one single unitary component but has more than one section
✅the practical applications
- helps people with dementia or brain damage
- if they struggle to rehearse new info, we now know that writing things down and putting things on labels will help, as well as colour coding buttons on phones or remotes as it brings in elaborative rehearsal
working memory model - 3 components
- CENTRAL EXECUTIVE
- phonological loop
- episodic buffer
- visuo-spatial sketchbad
WMM - central executive (what is it + capacity + encoding)
- supervises + controls subcomponents
- decides which component is needed for a particular task
- co-ordinates the retrieval of info from our LTM
- switches our attention between tasks
capacity = limited
encoding = modality free
central executive - strength and weakness
strength: practical application - many have issues with working memory as CE is slowed to coordinate all info is receives. this was resolved with extra time in exams etc
weakness: very vague in explanations and processes. also suggests it only has one CE which is unlikely.
visuo-spatial sketchpad (what is it + one person suggestion (L) + capacity)
- deals with and holds visual and spatial info - “the inner eye”
- displays and manipulates info in STM
LOGIE 1995 suggested subdivision - visuo cache = store
capacity = limited (approx 3-4 objects)
visuo-spatial sketchpad evidence
BROOKES 1968
Pts made to mentally visualise a letter and were asked questions about it. Had to respond in one of three different ways - 1. speaking, 2. tapping, 3. pointing at yes and no signs.
pts faster and more accurate when speaking and tapping.
when using same limited capacity component for same task they interfere with eachother - showing vss is limited processory
visuo-spatial sketchpad - strengths and weaknesses
strength - plays important role in helping us keep track of where we are in relation to other objects as we move through our environment
weakness - model implies that all info starts visual then turns spatial - this is unlikely to be case all the time as (Lieberman) blind people have excellent spatial awareness but have never received any visual info. Lieberman suggests visual and spatial should be 2 separate component.
phonological loop (what is it + capacity)
- holds words you hear (like inner ear), holds words for 1.5 - 2s
- articulatory process - used to rehearse verbal info from phonological store (memory traces in this decay in 1-2s but can be maintained by articulatory control process)
capacity = limited (approx 2s)
phonological loop evidence
BADDELEY 1975
pts recorded more short words in serial order than longer words - supports idea that capacity of PL is set by how long it takes to say words, this means aspects of WMM appear correct + credible.
phonological loop Baddeley weakness
lacks ecological validity
Episodic buffer (what is it? + capacity)
- designed to fill gap in model bc non of 3 components can be regarded as general storage that can combine several kinds of info
- weaves visual memories and phonological memories into single episodes which then gets stored in episodic STM
capacity: limited - approx 4 chunks of info
episodic buffer evidence
ALKHAKIFA 2009
patient with severely impaired LTM demonstrated STM of up to 25 items. suggests existence of episodic buffer that seems to hold items in WMM until they’re recalled.
episodic buffer strength and weakness
strength: scientific ev from brain scans - episodic buffer seems to be in both hemispheres but particularly in hippocampus (memory part of brain)
weakness: has little info and is not understood fully - was added to WMM at later date, this lack of understanding impacts the credibility of this slave system.
WMM 3 strengths
strengths
1) research from kf (suffered brain damage, impacted STM. however only impaired verbal info, visual was unaffected)
2) Brookes 1968, pts made to mentally visualise a letter, were then asked questions ab it and had to answer in one of 3 ways: 1) speaking 2) tapping 3) pointing. pts were faster + more accurate when speaking + tapping. (vss=limited processory)
3) practical application - park et al 1999, patients with schizophrenia tend to have problems with working memory that can be identified on dual tasks, as used in WMM. can therefore be diagnosed by testing individuals working memory.
WMM 3 weaknesses
1) a lot of research comes from artificial lab experiments - lacks ecological validity (like brooke’s study, visualising letter and asking questions ab it=not realistic)
2) theoretical flaws, eg nature of CE unclear, might not be single entity - EVR case, patient had tumour removed, resulted in poor decision making skills but good reasoning skills.
3) contradictory evidence - LIEBERMAN 1980, criticises bc it implies info is visual and then spatial. but blind people have good spatial awareness yet have never received any visual info - thinks VSS should be split into 2 components (spatial and visual)
types of LTM (who discovered this? name all 3, explain + examples + where are they located?)
TULVING 1972 proposed distinction between 3 diff types
1) procedural: responsible for knowing how to do things, takes no conscious thought. located in cerebellum. EG swimming, cycling.
2) semantic: responsible for story info ab the world, factual and takes conscious thought. located in hippocampus. EG general knowledge (capital of england) and meanings of words
3) episodic: responsible for storing info ab events. EG first day of school, wedding.