Memory Flashcards

(38 cards)

1
Q

Sensory Store Capacity, Duration and Encoding:

A

Capacity: 9-18 items
Duration: 250ms
Encoding: Modality Specific

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

STM Capacity, Duration and Encoding:

A

Capacity: 5-9 items
Duration: 18-30s
Encoding: Acoustic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

LTM Capacity, Duration and Encoding:

A

Capacity: unlimited
Duration: unlimited
Encoding: Semantic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Sperling

A

Tones
- 3/4 letters to 9/12 recalled with tones
- 250ms flash

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Jacobs

A

Digit Span
- 5-9 items without chunking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Peterson

A

Trigrams
- count backwards in 3s from 300 = no maintenance rehearsal
- 5% remembered after 18s

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Baddeley

A

Lists
- acoustically similar were confused immediately
- semantically similar lists were confused after 30 mins

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Bahrick

A

Photo album
- match or free recall
- 15yrs = 90% and 60%
- 48yrs = 60% and 30%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

MSM AO3 1

A

P1: Research Support for stm
- P&P trigrams
- separate duration = separate stores
- low eco validity and mundane realism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

MSM AO3 2

A

P2: research for high eco validity
- clive wearing 10s stm
- maintenance rehearsal needed for ltm
- case study, disproves trigrams

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

MSM AO3 3

A

P3: MSM is reductionist
- oversimplified ignores dual processing
- computational maintenance instead of emotion
- not all info is semantic, good basic model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Episodic

A
  • autobiographical
  • strengthened by emotion
  • explicit memory
  • Right PFC
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Semantic

A
  • general knowledge
  • explicit
  • left PFC
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Procedural

A
  • autonomic processes
  • motor movements
  • implicit
  • motor cortex
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

LTM A03 1

A

P1: research support from brain scans
- Tulving gold to anterior for episodic and posterior for semantic
- different areas for different LTMs (no demand characteristics)
- 1 pp case study cannot generalise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

LTM A03 2

A

P2: lack of EV in Tulving
- Clive Wearing lost episodic and kept procedural
- proves different areas of LTM
- reading music is semantic, may have concert memories (episodic)

17
Q

LTM A03 3

A

P3: good real life application
- Episodic memory can be improved in people with cognitive impairments
- aid revision, link semantics with episodes (flashbulb memories)
- LTM is used holistically in everyday life, separation is detrimental

18
Q

Central Executive

A
  • limited capacity
  • allocates resources to slave systems
19
Q

Episodic Buffer

A
  • added in 2000
  • limited capacity
  • time stamped
20
Q

Phonological Loop

A
  • articulatory loop (inner voice)
  • phonological store (2s capacity)
21
Q

Visuo-spatial Sketchpad

A
  • inner scribe (location)
  • visual cache (form and colour)
22
Q

Baddeley WMM

A

C1: track light + imagine letter
C2: track light + answer verbal Qs
R: C1 is harder uses the same slave system (limited capacity)

23
Q

WMM A03 1

A

P1: research for dual processing rather than serial
- Baddeley tracking letters
- dual task with no decrease in performance therefore separate systems
- lack of EV

24
Q

WMM A03 2

A

P2: high EV in case studies
- KF: STM forgot auditory info unless meaningful (phone ring)
- issues with phono loop while VSS unaffected
- case study

25
WMM A03 3
P3: too vague - CE not explained, when tumour removed reasoning is unaffected but decision making is worsened - oversimplifies CE may actually be a number of cognitive functions - doesn't explain storage in CE or how info is passed to LTM
26
WMM A03 4
P4: lacks detail - added episodic buffer in 2000 since a store was required - vague when explaining capacity, duration and encoding of buffer or interaction with LTM - conclude.
27
Proactive Interference
- past information affects new information - eg revising Spanish then French and speaking Spanish in your French exam
28
Retroactive Interference
- recent information affects new information - eg getting a new phone number and not recalling your old one when required for a login
29
Interference A03 1
P1: research support for retroactive - McGeoch: learned list A had 10 min break then list B, when B was very dissimilar recall was highest - proves list B had effect on memory of list A (retroactive) - lacks EV (no consequences)
30
Interference A03 2
P2: research with high EV - rugby study found forgetting was more related to number of games played than time between games - interference is issue rather than retrieval delay in real life situation - may only apply to retroactive
31
Interference A03 3
P3: research for proactive - meta-analysis found 10+ lists had 20% recall after 24hrs compared to 70% when only one list - evidence of both retroactive and proactive interference and real-life setting - real life application for revising/studying eg. don't revise similar subjects on the same day
32
Context-dependent forgetting
- external retrieval cues are different than time of encoding - eg. learning in classroom and recalling in exam hall
33
State-dependent forgetting
-internal retrieval cues are different than time of encoding - eg. sober when learning and recalling while drunk
34
Encoding Specificity Principle
- if same info is present at time of recall and encoding then memory recall will be higher
35
Retrieval Failure A03 1
P1: research for retrieval cues - categories of words eg. fruit = apple. free recall is 40% while cued was 60% - more retrieval failure without cues (proves encoding specificity) - lacks mundane realism (no semantic meaning)
36
Retrieval Failure A03 2
P2: real life application - BOOB study, higher recall in matching conditions - shows importance of learning in exam conditions (same context) - everything cannot be in same context eg. eye witnesses cannot be taken back to scene of crime (reinstate context in CI)
37
Retrieval Failure A03 3
P3: impractical to use strategies in EWT - drunk student study, higher recall in matching state - unethical to put people in same state during EWT eg. PTSD/Intoxication - reinstatement of context is effective
38