Flashcards in Memory Deck (69):
Coding of sensory register
Iconic or echoic
Capacity of sensory register
Very large / unspecified
Duration of SR
Sound - Baddeley 1966
7 +/- 2 chunks of info - Miller 1956
Without, rehearsal, less than 18 secs. Peterson x2 1959
E.g. Stephen Wiltshire
Up to a lifetime
Bahrick et al 1975
Strengths of Multi store model by Atkinson and shiffrin
Baddeley 1996 : immediate recall- STM worse with acoustically similar words, and after 20 mins LTM worse with semantically similar words. Shows how they’re separate stores and they code differently.
HM case study of amnesia - brain damage caused by operation to remove hippocampus from both sides of brain. Personality and intellect remained same, but couldn’t form new LTMs. Shows LTM and STM are differeng stores.
Multiple store model weakness reductionist
KF’s study - STM for digits were poor when read out to him, but better when he read to himself - shows visual and auditory info requires separate stores but MSM suggests there is only 1. So it’s reductionist and over simplified.
MSM weakness elaborative processing to creat LTM is key
Craig and Lockhart suggested enduring memories are created by processing that you do, rather than maintenance rehearsal. Processed more deeply- doing more complicated things with items=more memorable.
MSM weakness LTM actually has 3 types
Tulvings research shows 3 types of LTM. Maintenance rehearsal only explains LTM semantic memory like knowledge of the world but not episodic memories. So doesn’t support how MSM suggests both STM and LTM are single unitary stores.
Requires conscious effort to recall
Shared memories, everyone knows the event, facts and knowledge
Less time stamped
Can be concrete or abstract
Concerned with skills
Acquired through Repeated practise
Doesn’t require conscious effort to recall
Strength case study of LTM types
Clive wearing - suffered servers virus leading to memory loss. Still remembered how to play piano - procedural memory intact. Couldn’t recall past events and little knowledge of world - episodic and semantic damaged.
LTM types X case studies not reliable
In clinical case studies there’s lack of control of different variables e.g, precise location of brain damage or personality. So other factors might be affecting their memory damage. So difficult to generalise.
LTM types strength brain scans evidence
Different areas of brain are active when different type of LTM is beinf used - episodic:hippocampus
Semantic : temporal lobe
Procedural : cerebellum
Real life applications to improve people’s lives LTM types
Belleville et al. Episodic memories can be improved in elderly with mild cognitive impairments by training which improves memory performance.
Working memory model
Visuo-spatial sketchpad : for spatial tasks - inner scribe and visual cache
Central executive : coordinates sub systems, focuses and switches attention
Phonological loop : phonological store, inner ear- auditory memory for few secs
and articulatory loop- sub vocal speech , inner voice
Later added in 2000: episodic buffer;temporary store for info and links STM to LTM
Word length effect research for WMM
Baddeley et al 1975
Asked to write down as many words they can remember from short word list - harm, and long word list - association. Remembered more shorter words. Phonological loop holds amount of info u can say in 1.5-2 secs so makes it harder to remember longer words, inhibiting rehearsal. Limited capacity in phon. Store.
Limitation of WMM central executive vague
CE lacks clarity and cognitive psyche suggest its unsatisfactory cuz it should be more clearly specified . Not just ‘attention’. WMM not fully explained
CE may have more than one component WMM X
Eslinger and Damasio: Studied EVR-cerebral rumour removed - reasoning tests good, decision making bad. CE was intact but not wholly.
Existence of CE from brains scans
Braver et al. Activity in prefrontal cortex increased as tasks became harder. = Demands On CE increase, has to work harder to fulfil its function. So supports WMM
Explanations of forgetting intereference theory
Interference theory: forgetting occurs cuz memories interfere with and disrupt one another. This conflict makes it harder to locate them. More likely to happen with similar info.
Earlier disrupts new.
New intereferes with old.
Research for interference theory
McGeoch and McDonald- list 1 words, list 2 unrelated digits or related synonyms. Ps who learnt digits after had les impairment when recalling list 1. Similar info makes interefenfed happen
Interference theory research lacks ecological val.
Take place in labs, word lists which u don’t do everyday and artificial env. So can’t gwnreelaise
I THEORY only affects accessibility so it’s not actually forgetting
Ceraso found if memory was tested after 24 hrs, recognition (accessibility) showed considerable spontaneous recovery, where as recall (availability) stayed the same.
Interference not universal cuz its individual differences
Kane and Eagle found individuals with greater WM span was less sucsceptible to proactive interference. Shows individual difference s can make people less affected by intereference. So not generalisable
Real world application in advertising I THWORY
danaher et al - recall and recog of ad’s message impaired when ps exposed to 2 adverts within a week. Gives advertiser knowledge to come up with new strategies- do more ads
Explanations of forgetting retrieval failure
Forgetting due to lack of accessibility
If there are no retrieval cues memories can’t be recalled.
Tip of the tongue phenomenon
Encoding specificity principle
Cues will help recall info if it’s present at learning and retrieval
If cues are not present for retrieval forgetting will happen
Linked to material-to be remembered in a meaningful way li,e mnemonics
Something in env. During learning
Objects in room, smell
The way we felt durin learning
Calm during revision
Context dependent forgetting research
Golden and Baddeley 1975 : deep sea divers learnt list of words in either land or water and recalled in either land or water
Recalled in different contests performed more than 30% worse than those who recalled In same context.
State dependent forgetting
Goodwin et al 1969- makes asked remember list of words either drunk or sober. 24 hrs later recalle drunk or sober. Those who learned and recalled on the same state performed better despite being drunk
RFT. empirical evidence uses extreme conditions.
Underwater, real life we rarely have to recall in extreme conditions so it’s difficult to generalise and lacks ecological validity
Policie C.I RFT
Introducing state and contextual cues remind eye witness about crimes has helped delveip CI methods. Using contextual reinstatement.
RFT. not effective in real situations
Word lists in research but in real life we learn about complex associations that are less easily triggered by cues. Smith and be,a also found context effects largely eliminated when learning meaningful material so it’s reductionist
RFT explainers interference theory :)
Tulving and Psotka. Interference actually due to absence of cues. In cued recall despite how many lists learnt, ps remembered about 70% or words. This shows info is always there and available but can’t be retrieved without cues.
Eye witness testimony - misleading info 2 things
Leading questions and repeat interviewing
Leading questions 2 explanations
Wording of question affects EWT. Substitution explanation says wording changes ps memory of event. Response bias exp. says wording doesn’t have effect on memory, just influence persons decision to answer
Post event discussion 2 ways
Repeat interviewing- every time an EW is interviewed, Bigger chance that comments from interviewed can be incorporated into recollections of events
Conformity effect - happens when EW reach consensus about what happened
Research into misleading info affecting memory
After watching a film of car crash, Asked question about the speed of the car, changing the verb - smashed or hit. 1 week later were asked if there was broken glass in the crash (there wasn’t). Significantly more people said glass broke when verb was smashed. SHOWS MEMORY CHANGE cuz most people remembered correctly even. 1 week after.
Lotus and Palmer lacks ecological validity
Ps watched videos of crash, some of which were staged so it is artificial. This means they didn’t feel shock anxiety or stress which u would in real life. So findings can’t be generalised .
Misleading info subject to individual differences and have bigger impact on children
Children and others who lack mental capacity might think if they agree to the question they will please the interviewer and other people around them. This is not accurate
Research into misleading info has had massive impact on justice system
Criminal justice system relies heavily on EWT. Psych research helped warn the system of problems with EWT e.g. misleading qs.
Recent DNA exoneration cases has showed mistaken EW identification is largest factor to conviction of innocent peps.
Ethical implications stating EW’S are unreliable
Education juries on inaccuracies of EWT may lead to distrust towards victims of crimes who r actually truth. So may not only have neg. impact on victims but also lead to guilty people going free. So info must be used within caution cuz it’s socially sensitive.
Case study evidence on impact of misleading info JESS DESKOVIC
Detectives interrogated him and because he failed the polygraph exam, one detective accused him of failing the test and said certain he was the criminal of the rape of his classmate. This is when Jess said he realised he was responsible 3 weeks ago. This is how leading Qs and repeat interviewing can change memories or have response bias. He was released 16 years after thanks to dna twsting
Anxiety has negative effect on EWT
weapon focus effect - weapon in criminals hand distracts attention from the features cuz of anxiety created so decreases accuracy.
Anxiety has positive effect on EWT
fight or flight - evolutionary response to threat to prepare body for defending or atacking or run away. Release of adrenaline makes pupils dilate to get more light in and lay more attention. So it increases our alertness. So improves memories.
Research for WFA Johnson and Scott
told ps they were going to take part in lab study while in waiting room they hear argument in next room.
1. Low anxiety - man walked out with greasy hands and pen
2. High anxiety - man rushes out with bloody hands and knife
Asked to pick out man from 50 photos. Low anxiety was 49% accuracy, high was 33%.
Fight or flight resrear h
Yuille and cutshall. Real life gun shooting in gun shop. 13 participated out of 21 witnesses. Rated how stressed they were at the time. Most stressed = 88% accuracy, less stressed=75% accuracy
Evaluation of anxiety HEYEPV
High ecological validity J+S
Yuille and cutshall case study
Emotional sensory Anxiety :(
Bothwell et al. Ps assessed for neuroticism - emotionally sensitive - and either labelled neurotic or stable. Stable ps showed rising levels of accuracy as stress increased but opposite for neurotic ps.
EWT actually affected by violent nature of crime
Halford and Milne found victims of violent crimes were more accurate in recall of crime scene than non violent crimes. Shows there is no simple rule about effect of anisety on accuracy of EWT.
Retrieve more accurate memories
Every single detail even if it appears irrelevant or if it’s only a partial memory. Improves accuracy cuz there’s no leading Qs so memory not interfered with, avoids substitution exp. doesn’t make them anxious. Can use words used by witness later so no false memories implanted
Related to context and state dependent forgetting.
Witness imagine the env and emotions.
These cues can overcome context and state forgetting and trigger memories, in vivo.
Reverse the order
Events should be recalled in different chronological order to original sequence. Like backwards.
This prevents schemas from interrupting memories, focuses on other things not just tell a story
Ask witnes to recall incident from others perspective
Can Get extra details they hadn’t thought of before and breaks up schemas.
:) CI support plus counrer
Köhnken et al. Meta analysis from 50 studies showed CI provides an 81% increase in correct info. Shows there are real practical benefits to Police using CI. HOWEVER increase in 61% were incorrect compared to standard interview.
Some elements of CI are more valuable :(
Milne and bull found effectiveness of CI may be due to individual elements not whole things. Report everything and reinstate context were most useful. Therefore were over complicated it.
Time consuming CI :(
Cuz its thorough and technical. Police no time to do prophet which could lead to entirely different EWT. Also requires specialist training which is costly and tike consuming. So CI Often inconvenient exp if there r pressures to come up iwht conclusion quickly.