Memory. Flashcards
(103 cards)
1
Q
Memory.
A
The maximum amount of information that memory can hold.
2
Q
Central executive.
A
An important feature of the working memory model that is poorly understood, but is said to direct information to the appropriate slave systems in the model.
3
Q
Coding.
A
The way different memory systems store information, by converting that information into a suitable format for our brain.
4
Q
Capacity:
A
The amount of information that can be held in a memory store.
5
Q
Duration.
A
The length of time memory stays stored.
6
Q
Episodic buffer.
A
A component from the working memory model that puts information from all the other components to make a combined, sensible memory.
7
Q
Episodic memory.
A
A type of conscious long-term memory which consists of multiple senses integrated together to form ‘everyday’ memories.
8
Q
Leading questions.
A
A type of question which when asked, encourages a certain answer.
9
Q
Long-term memory.
A
A type of memory storage that has potentially unlimited storage, in which we hold different kinds of memories for a potentially unlimited time.
10
Q
Phonological loop.
A
A component of the working memory model that holds information regarding words, composed of words we repeat to ourselves in a loop and perceiving words we hear for a short duration of time.
11
Q
Proactive interference.
A
An explanation for forgetting which suggests information we have learned previously interferes with new information we are trying to store.
12
Q
Retroactive interference.
A
An explanation for forgetting which suggests new information we learn interferes with information we already know.
13
Q
Procedural memory.
A
A type of unconscious long-term memory that stores information regarding the way we carry out actions without conscious involvement.
14
Q
Semantic memory.
A
A type of conscious long-term memory that contains information regarding ‘facts’ we have learnt. This type of memory is uncomplicated and does not include contextual information as an episodic memory does.
15
Q
Sensory register.
A
A place that holds information gathered through your senses for a very short amount of time, perceiving information before it is stored or processed by any other memory store
16
Q
Short-term memory.
A
A type of memory store lasting about 30 seconds that can hold 5-9 pieces of information. Information here can be moved to long-term memory via rehearsal.
17
Q
Visuo-spatial sketchpad.
A
A component of the working memory model in which visual and spatial information is stored for a short amount of time.
18
Q
Sperling 1960- Sensory Register.
A
Lab exp.
P/pants were shown a grid with 3 rows of 4 letters for 50 milliseconds then had to recall either the whole grid or a particular row.
Whole grid- they only recalled 4/5 letters on avg.
Row- avg of 3.
Conclusion- almost the whole grid was held in their sensory register- faded before they could recall all.
19
Q
Sperling 1960- evaluation.
A
Lab exp- highly scientific.
Variables easily controlled- easy to replicate.
Artificial setting- lacks ecological validity.
20
Q
Peterson & Peterson (1959)- Duration of STM.
A
P/pants shown nonsense trigrams, and asked to recall them after either 3,6,9,12,15 or 18 seconds. The interference task before the recall was to count down in 3s from a specific number.
After 3 seconds, p/pants could recall 80% correctly.
After 18 seconds, 10% were recalled correctly.
Very little can stay in STM for longer than 18 seconds.
21
Q
Peterson & Peterson (1959)- evaluations.
A
Lab exp- variables tightly controlled.
Trigrams are artificial- lacks ecological validity.
Only one stimulus was used- could depend on the type of stimulus.
Each p/pant saw many different trigrams- could be confusing, only the first one is valid?
22
Q
Bahrick et al (1975)- Very long-term memories (VLTMs).
A
392 people were asked to list the names of their ex-classmates (free-recall test).
Shown photos and asked to recall their names or match them to a photo of a classmate.
After 15 yrs- 90% of names & faces. 60% accurate on free recall.
After 30 yrs- free-recall declined to 30%.
After 48 yrs- name recognition was 80%, photo-recognition was 40%.
23
Q
Jacobs (1887)- The capacity of STM.
A
P/pants were presented with a string of letters or digits. They had to repeat them back in the same order.
The majority of the time they recalled 9 digits and 7 letters.
Capacity increases with age in childhood.
Concluded STM had a limited storage range of 7+- 2.
Chunking helped p/pants remember.
24
Q
Jacobs (1887)- evaluation.
A
Artificial- lacks ecological validity.
25
Miller (1956)- Capacity of STM.
STM is seven plus or minus two- Miller's Magic number.
Chunking.
26
Baddeley (1966)- Coding in STM or LTM.
P/pants were given four sets of words either acoustically similar or dissimilar, semantically similar or dissimilar. Independent group design- recall either immediately or following a 20-minute task.
Struggles to recall acoustically similar words immediately and struggles after an interval with semantically similar words.
LTM is more likely to rely on semantic coding and STM on acoustic coding.
27
Baddeley (1966)- evaluation.
Lacks ecological validity.
Other types of LTM- episodic/procedural memory and other methods of coding- visual, which this study doesn't consider.
Independent groups design- no variables control.
28
Atkinson and Shiffron (1968)- Multi-Store Memory.
Proposes memory consists of three stores- a sensory register, a short-term store and a long-term store.
Info from our environment (e.g. visual or auditory) goes into the sensory register. If you pay attention to it, it goes into your short-term memory.
STM has finite capacity and duration, but if info is further rehearsed then it can transfer to LTM.
29
Supports for the MSM.
Primacy effect- recall the first few on the list better than the middle, MSM explains it as earlier items will have been rehearsed more and moved to LTM.
Recency effect- recalled the last few items better than those in the middle. if they are not rehearsed they are replaced from STM
30
Limitations for the MSM.
1. In the model info is transferred from the STM to LTM through rehearsal, in real life people don't always spend time rehearsing but the info still goes into LTM.
2. The model is oversimplified, it assumes there is only one long-term store and one short-term store. This has been disproved by brain-damaged patients.
31
Baddeley & Hitch (1974) WMM.
Aim-
They proposed that the STM is not a single store but an active processor which contains several stores.
32
Baddeley & Hitch (1974) WMM.
Findings-
-Central executive is a key component and can be described as attention: limited capacity and controls the 'slave' systems.
-Phonological loop holds speech-based information: made up of a phonological store and an articulatory process (inner ear, and inside head voice).
-The visuo-spatial sketchpad deals with the temporary storage of visual and spatial info.
-The episodic buffer briefly stores info from the other subsystems and integrates it with info from the LTM to make complete scenes or 'episodes'.
33
WMM came from what evidence? What studies did they use to model their results?
Experimental evidence.
Studies that used the interference task.
34
What did Baddley and Hitch find?
If p/pants perform 2 tasks simultaneously that use the same system their performance will be affected.
Speaking while reading is an example as they both use the phonological loop, which has limited capacity.
2 tasks involving different systems show that performance isn't affected on either task.
35
Strengths of WMM.
1) Shallice and Warrington (1974)- Case study of KF
KF was a brain-damaged patient who had an impaired STM. His problem was with immediate recall of words presented verbally but not with visual info.
This suggested he had an impaired articulatory loop but an intact visuospatial sketchpad- providing evidence for the WMM as it shows STM as multiple systems.
36
Strengths on WMM.
Less emphasis on rehearsal.
Rather than being a key process, rehearsal is one possible process in the WMM. This therefore explains why some things end up in our LTM in real life without rehearsal- other processes.
37
Strengths of WMM.
2) Gathercole and Baddley (1993)- Lab study.
P/pants were split into 2 groups.
All were asked to carry out a task following a moving spot of light- visuo-spatial sketchpad.
1 group of p/pants also had to describe the angles on a letter- visuo-spatial sketchpad. The other group were given a 2nd task using the phonological loop-verbal task.
G&B found performance was better when p/pants used separate systems.
38
Weakness of WMM.
( there's 3)
-Simplistic and vague- exactly what is the central executive?
-Only explains STM, not how is info transferred to LTM.
-Lab studies- reduce ecological validity.
39
STM in forgetting:
Limited capacity/duration- Can be displaced or decyaed.
40
LTM in forgetting:
Decaying, hard to retrieve, or confused because of interference.
41
Who came up with retroactive interference?
Underwood and Postman
42
Who came up with proactive interference?
Underwood.
43
Evaluation of proactive and retroactive interference:
+ Lots of studies
+ Controlled lab experiment.
+ IRL application.
- Artificial
- Tells us why, but not the process.
44
Tulving and Pstoka (1971)- forgetting.
Categorised word lists.
Free recall and free cued recall (they would be told the category).
Free recall- experienced retroactive interference.
Free cued recall- no interference- 70%.
45
Tulving and Pstoka (1971)- forgetting.
Evaluations.
+ Lab experiment.
+ Controlled variables.
- Ecological validity
- Artificial
- Not generalisable to all memory.
46
Loftus and Palmer- Leading questions.
Exp 1- Smashed, collided, bumped, contacted.
Smashed 41mph.
Contacted 32mph.
Exp 2- Smashed/hit: 'Did you see broken glass?'
Smashed were more likely to say yes.
47
Loftus and Zanni (1975)- Leading questions effect on EWT.
"Did you see a/the broken light?'
The- 17% said yes.
A- 7% said yes.
48
Shaw et al- Post-event discussion.
Paired p/pants with confederates in a staged robbery.
-They got questioned after, in their pairs, when the p/pant answered first accuracy was 58%.
-When the confederate went first and answered accurately, recall was 67%.
-When the confederate went first and answered inaccurately, recall fell to 42%.
49
Loftus (1979)- Weapon focus.
-Pen + grease or knife + blood.
-asked to identify him out of 50 pictures.
-Pen and grease people- 49% accurate.
-Knife and blood- 33% accurate.
50
Loftus (1979)- Weapon focus.
Evaluation.
-High ecological validity.
-P/pant protection?
-Informed consent.
51
Cognitive interview- Geiselman et al.
-Relaxation.
-Use environmental context.
-Use internal context.
-Say everything even if you think it is irrelevant.
-Try recalling in different orders.
-Different perspectives.
-Interviewer avoids personal comments.
52
Cognitive interview- Geiselman et al.
Evaluations:
+ Reduces the effect of leading questions.
+ High ecological validity
53
Jacobs (1887) Digit span:
Developed a technique to measure digit span. The researcher gives 4 digits and then the p/pant is asked to recall these in the correct order. If it is correct the number of digits increases. Jacobs found the mean was 9.3 digits and letters it was 7.3.
54
Miller (1956) span of memory and chuncking:
Made observations of everyday practice and noted things come in 7s. This suggests the span (capacity) for STM is 7 items +/- 2. Miller also noted people recall 5 words as well as 5 letters, they do this by chunking.
55
Baddeley (1966)'s research on coding:
Gave p/pants different words to remember, group1; sound similar, group 2; sound different, group 3; similar meanings, group 4; different meanings. P/pants were shown the original words and asked to recall them in the correct order. When they had to do this recall task immediately after hearing it, they did worse with acoustically similar words but after 20 mins they did worse with semantically similar words. Suggests information is coded semantically in LTM.
56
Sensory register:
A stimulus from the environment will pass into the sensory registers along with lots of other sights, sounds, smells, etc. The 2 main stores are called iconic memory (visual) and echoic memory (acoustic). Material in sensory registers only lasts briefly but they have high capacity.
57
How to pass information into LTM from STM:
Maintenance rehearsal occurs when we repeat material to ourselves over and over again. This transfers information from STM to LTM.
58
Transferring information from the LTM to STM:
Process called retrieval.
59
Types of long term memory evaluations:
Clinical evidence-
HM and Clive Wearing. Their episodic memory was severely damaged by their semantic memory was relatively unaffected. Their procedural memories were also intact. This supports Tulving's view that there is different memory stores in LTM.
60
Types of long term memory evaluations:
Neuroimaging evidence-
Brain scan studies show different types of memory are stored in different parts of the brain. Tulving et al (1994) got their p/pants to perform various memory tasks while using a PET scanner. Episodic and semantic memories were both in the prefrontal cortex, semantic on the left and episodic the right.
61
Types of long term memory evaluations:
Real-life application-
Belleville et al (2006) demonstrated that episodic memories could be improved in older people with mild cognitive impairment. Trained p/pants performed better than the control group.
62
Visuo-spatial sketchpad:
The component of the WMM that processes visual and spatial information in a mental space often called the 'inner eye'.
63
Four main components of the WMM:
Central executive (co-ordinator)
Phonological loop (sound)
Visuo-spatial sketchpad (sight)
Episodic buffer (bridge)
64
Retrieval failure:
A form of forgetting. It occurs when we don't have the necessary cues to access memory. The memory is available but not accessible unless a suitable cue is provided.
65
Cue:
A 'trigger' of information that allows us to access a memory. Such cues may be meaningful or may be indirectly linked by being encoded at the time of learning. May be external (environmental) or internal (mood).
66
Encoding specificity principle (ESP):
Tulving (1983)
Reviewed research into retrieval failure and discovered a consistent pattern to the findings. He summarised this pattern in what he called the ESP. This states that if a cue is to help recall, it must be present at encoding and retrieval. If the cues are different, this may lead to forgetting. Other cues are encoded at the time of learning but not in a meaningful way: context-dependent forgetting- external cues. state-dependent forgetting- internal cues.
67
Context-dependent forgetting:
Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Divers learned a list of words either under water or on land and then recall them either underwater or on land. This therefore created 4 conditions.
In 2 of these conditions the environmental contexts of learning and recall matched, whereas the other two did not. Accurate recall was 40% lower in the non-matching conditions. When external cues were different from learning, there was retrieval failure.
68
State-dependent forgetting:
Carter and Cassaday (1998)
Gave anti-histamine drugs to p/pants. The drug had mild sedative effects making the p/pants slightly drowsy. This creates an internal physiological state different from normal. The p/pants had to learn lists of words and passages and then recall the information- 4 conditions.
Mismatch conditions performance on memory was slightly worse so when the cues are absent there is more forgetting.
69
Retrieval failure evaluation:
Supporting research:
Studies by Godden and Baddeley and Careter and Cassaday are 2 examples. Michael Eyesnk (2010), goes so far as to argue retrieval failure is the main reason for forgetting in LTM.
Increases validity of an explanation.
70
Retrieval failure evaluation:
Questioning context effects:
Baddeley (1997) argues that context effects are actually not very strong, especially in real life. Different contexts have to be very different for an effect is seen. Learning something in one roo and recalling it in another is unlikely to result in much forgetting becuase these environments are generally not different enough!
71
Retrieval failure evaluation:
Recall versus recognition:
Context effect may be related to the type of memory being tested. Godden and Baddeley (1980) replicated their underwater experiment but used a recognition test instead of recall. When recognition was tested there was no context-dependent effect; performance was the same in all four conditions on the facing page.
72
Eyewitness testimony (EWT):
The ability of people to remember the details of events, such as accidents and crimes, which they themselves have observed. Accuracy of eyewitness testimony can be affected by factors such as misleading information, leading questions and anxiety.
73
Misleading information:
Incorrect information given to the eyewitness usually after the event. It can take many forms, such as leading questions and post-event discussion between co-witnesses ad/or other people.
74
Leading question:
A question which, because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer.
75
Post-event discussion:
Occurs when there is more than one witness to an event. Witnesses may discuss what they have seen with co-witnesses or with other people. This may influence the accuracy of each witness's recall of the event.
76
Loftus and Palmer (1974), leading questions procedure:
Arranged for p/pants to watch film clips of car accidents and then gave them questions about the accident. In the critical question (leading) p/pants were asked to describe how fast the cars were going. The words used were; hit, contacted, bumped, collided and smashed, for the five different groups.
77
Loftus and Palmer (1974), leading questions findings:
The mean estimated speed was calculated for each p/pant group. Contacted- 31.8 mph
Smashed- 40.5 mph
78
Why leading questions affect EWT:
Response-bias explanation-
Suggests that the wording of the question has no real effect on the p/pants memory but just influences how they decide to answer.
79
Why leading questions affect EWT:
Loftus and Palmer, substitution explanation-
The wording changes the p/pants memory of the film clip. This was demonstrated because p/pants who heard smashed were more likely to report seeing broken glass (there was none) than those who heard hit.
80
Gabbert et al (2003), post-event discussion procedure:
Studied p/pants in pairs. Each p/pant watched a video of the same crime but filmed from different angles, meaning each p/pant could see elements in the video others could not. Both p/pants then discussed what they had seen before individually completing a test of recall.
81
Gabbert et al (2003), post-event discussion findings:
Researchers found that 71% of the p/pants mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they did not see in the video but had picked up in the discussion. The corresponding figure in a control group was 0% with no discussion.
82
Gabbert et al (2003), post-event discussion conclusion:
Gabbert concluded witnesses often go along with each other, either to win social approval or because they believe the other witnesses are right and they are wrong.
Called this memory conformity.
83
Factors effecting EWT- Misleading information, evaluations:
Real life application-
Loftus believes that leading questions can have such a distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their questions. Psychologists believe they can make important positive difference in real lives by improving how the legal system works.
84
Factors effecting EWT- Misleading information, evaluations:
Artificial tasks-
P/pants watched film clips of car accidents in Loftus and Palmer's study. This is a very different experience from witnessing a real accident. There is some evidence that emotions can have an influence on memory. Studies with artificial tasks tell us little.
85
Factors effecting EWT- Misleading information, evaluations:
Individual differences:
Evidence shows that older people are less accurate than younger people when giving eyewitness reports. Anastasi and Rhodes (2006) found that people aged 18-25 and 35-45 were more accurate than 55-78. All ages were better identifying people of their own age groups (own age bias).
86
Anxiety:
A state of emotional and physical arousal. The emotions include having worried thoughts and feelings of tension. Physical changes include an increased heart rate and sweatiness. Anxiety can affect the accuracy and detail of EWT.
87
Johnson and Scott (1976) anxiety on recall- procedure:
They led p/pants to believe they were going to take part in a lab study. While seated in a waiting room op/pants heard an argument in the next room. In the low-anxiety condition a man walked through carrying a pen with grease on his hands. The other group heard the same argument but this time with the sound of glass breaking. A man walked out holding a paper knife covered in blood- high-anxiety condition.
88
Johnson and Scott (1976) anxiety on recall- Findings:
The p/pants later picked out the man from a set of 50 photos, 49% of the p/pants who had seen the man carrying the pen were able to identify him, but with the blood-covered knife it was 33%. Tunnel theory of memory argues that the witness's attention narrows to focus on a weapon, because it is the source of anxiety.
89
Yuille and Cutshall (1986) anxiety positively effecting recall- procedure:
Real-life shooting in a gun shop in Vancouver, Canada. The shop owner shot the thief dead. 21 witnesses, 13 took part in the study. Interviews 4-5 months after the incident were compared to police reports from the time of the shooting. Accuracy was determined by the number of details reported in each account. Also asked to rate stress levels from the incident on a 7 point scale and if they had any emotional problems since.
90
Yuille and Cutshall (1986) anxiety positively effecting recall- Findings:
Witnesses were very accurate in their accounts and there was little change in the amount of accuracy after 5 months. Those p/pants who reported highest levels of stress were most accurate (88% compared to less stressed group: 75%)
91
Deffenbacher (1983) explaining contradictory findings of anxiety on EWT:
Applied Yerkes-Dodson law to EWT (The relationship between emotional arousal and performance is an inverted U). Lower anxiety levels produce lower recall accuracy. But memory becomes more accurate as the level of anxiety experienced increases. There is a point where the optimal level of anxiety is reached- maximum accuracy. If there is more stress after this, their recall will decline.
92
Factors effecting EWT- Anxiety-evaluations:
Weapon focus may not be relevant-
Johnson and Scott's study may be surprise not anxiety. Pickel (1998) conducted an experiment using scissors, a handgun, a wallet or a raw chicken as the hand-held items in a hair dressing video. EWT was poorer in the unusual conditions.
93
Factors effecting EWT- Anxiety-evaluations:
Field studies sometimes lack control-
Researchers usually interview IRL eye-witnesses sometime after the event. There are many factors that could have happened in that time- discussing with others, accounts they read in the media, effects of police interview, etc. This is a limitation due to extraneous variables.
94
Factors effecting EWT- Anxiety-evaluations:
Ethical issues-
Creating anxiety in p/pants is risky as it may subject people to psychological harm purely for the purposes of research.
95
Cognitive interview (CI)
A method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate memories. It uses four main techniques, all based on well-established psychological knowledge of human memory- report everything, reinstate context, reverse the order, and change the perspective.
96
Fisher and Geiselman (1992) cognitive interview on eye-witnesses:
1. Report everything-
Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail of the event, even though it may seem irrelevant or the witness doesn't feel confident about it. Trivial details may trigger important memoriesz.
97
Fisher and Geiselman (1992) cognitive interview on eye-witnesses:
2. Reinstate the context-
Witnesses should return to the crime scene in their mind and imagine the environment and their feelings. Related to context dependent forgetting.
98
Fisher and Geiselman (1992) cognitive interview on eye-witnesses:
3. Reverse the order-
This is done to prevent people reporting their expectations of how the event must have happened rather than the actual events- also prevents dishonesty (harder to lie in reverse).
99
Fisher and Geiselman (1992) cognitive interview on eye-witnesses:
4. Change perspective-
Witnesses should recall the incident from others perspectives. This is done to disrupt the effect of expectations and schema on recall. The schema you have for a particular setting generates expectations of what happened and it is the schema recalled not the truth.
100
Fisher et al (1987) enhanced cognitive interview (ECI):
The interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to relinquish it. The enhanced CI also includes ideas such as reducing anxiety, minimising distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly and asking open-ended question.
101
Improving EWT- Cognitive interview- evaluations:
CI is time-consuming:
Police may be reluctant to use it because it takes more time than the standard police interview. It also requires special training and many forces have not been able to provide more than a few hours.
102
Improving EWT- Cognitive interview- evaluations:
Some elements more valuable than others-
Milne and Bull (2002) found that each individual element was equally valuable and each singly produced more info than standard police technique. Milne and Bull found using a combo of report everything and context reinstatement produced better recall than any of the other conditions.
Strength.
103
Improving EWT- Cognitive interview- evaluations:
Support- Kohnken et al (1999)
Meta-analysis by Kohnken combined data of 50 studies. The enhanced CI consistently provided more correct information than the standard police interview.
