Memory Flashcards

(61 cards)

1
Q

KF Case Study

A
  • memory impairment after a motor accident
  • he could transfer STM to LTM
  • found it easier to remember digits if he read them (as oppose to someone reading it to him- auditory)
  • criticises MSM as it suggests STM cannot be a unitary store
  • KF’s verbal information is impaired but not visual information
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

who developed cognitive interviews

A

fisher and geiselman

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

stages within CI

A
  • change narrative order
  • change perspective
  • mental reinstatement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

features within CI

A
  • no distractions or unnecessary interruptions/ questions from interviewer
  • flow of information is controlled by the witness
  • open ended questions
  • interviewer reduces anxiety
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

weakness of CI

A

time consuming- when completing and training

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

CI conclusions

A

Geiselman

  • produces more detail
  • the longer the delay between CI and event, the less effective it is
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Impact of HIGH anxiety (study)

weapon focus

A

2 conditions participants witness

  • a man leaving the room with a pen
  • a man leaving the room with a bloody knife
  • unaware of what they were going to witness
  • pen: 49% could identify the correct man
  • knife: 33% could identify the correct man
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

impact of HIGH anxiety

A

too stressed, poor recollection

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

Impact of LOW anxiety

A

not alert, poor recollection

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

leading questions study

A

Loftus and Palmer

  • ppts shown a car crash were asked questions
  • ‘hit’ was substituted with other words
  • ppts thought car was driving faster if the word ‘smashed’ was used
  • ppts thought car was driving slower if the word ‘contacted’ was used

PPts brought back a week later and were asked about broken glass.
ppts- ‘smashed’- were more likely to say the glass was broken (when there was no broken glass)

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

Loftus and Palmer-

which verb made participants think the car was driving FASTER?

A

smashed

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

Loftus and Palmer-

which verb made participants think the car was driving SLOWER?

A

contacted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

cue-dependent forgetting

A

accessing information by recalling retrieval cues

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

tulving and pearlstone

A

ppts had to remember a list of words, some contained headings whilst others didn’t

ppts without headings with their lists recalled fewer words

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

cue-dependent forgetting

heading list study

A

tulving and pearlstone

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

context dependent

A

external retrieval cues from the environment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

state dependent

A

internal retrieval cues

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

diver study

A

Godden and Baddeley

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Godden and Baddeley

A

divers learnt material underwater

they performed better when taking the test underwater than on land

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

drunk or sober study

A

Overton

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

overton

A

ppts learnt material either drunk or sober

they performed better in the same state they learnt in

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

weakness of cue dependent

A

procedural memory is not impacted by cues

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

explanations for forgetting

A
  • accessibility
  • availability
  • interference

(doesn’t explain how it occurs)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

STM decay or displacement of memories

A

limited duration and capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
proactive interference
old hinders new
26
retroactive interference
new hinders old
27
old memories hindering new
proactive interference
28
new memories hindering old
retroactive interference
29
baddeley and hitch
1970s | working memory model
30
features of working memory model
- central executive - visuo-spatial sketchpad - phonological loop (inner ear/accoustic store and articulatory process/inner voice) - episodic buffer added in 2000
31
central executive
- filters general information - limited capacity - only effectively cope with one strand of information at a time
32
baddeley dual task
ppts struggled to perform actions simultaneously if they required the same slave store (e.g. generating random lists of numbers whilst switching between letters and numbers in the keyboard) both tasks competing for CE
33
weakness of CE
very vague explanation, therefore hard to test
34
phonological loop
deals with auditory info and order inner ear/phonological store (stores recently heard words) inner voice/ articulatory process (keeps info in PL via vocalised repetition of information
35
word length effect
baddeley ppts recall more short words than long words in serial order PL is set by duration of words instead of number of words
36
PET scans | phonological loop
brain activity during verbal and visual tasks suggest they use different areas of the brain
37
visuo spatial sketchpad
visual and special information | helps us navigate and interact with physical environment
38
episodic buffer
added in 2000 temporary general store attempts to correct problems of limited capacity
39
atkinson and shiffrin 1960s
multistore memory model like a computer processing information
40
coding Sensory Register
dependent on the five senses
41
capacity Sensory Register
large
42
duration Sensory Register
0.5 seconds
43
coding STM
primarily accoustic (baddeley)
44
capacity STM
7 letters 9 numbers (Jacobs) 7+/-2, chunking (Miller)
45
duration STM
18-30 seconds | peterson and peterson 1959
46
coding LTM
primarily semantic | baddeley
47
capacity LTM
unlimited
48
duration LTM
unlimited- requires memory cues | Bahrick
49
explicit LTM
declarative episodic semantic requires conscious memory
50
implicit LTM
non declarative procedural unconcious memory
51
procedural
how we do something
52
episodic
personal memories of events, dates etc
53
semantic
knowledge of words and concepts
54
peterson and peterson 1959
random trigrams 3 seconds= 80% accuracy 18 seconds= 10% accuracy STM has a limited duration
55
Bahrick 1975 | FREE RECALL
no prompts 15 years = 60% accuracy 30 years = 30% accuracy
56
Bahrick 1975 | PHOTO RECOGNITION
recall names from photo prompts | 48 years = 40% accuracy
57
Bahrick 1975 | NAME RECOGNITION
match names with faces 15 years = 90% accuracy 48 years = 80% accuracy
58
Bahrick 1975 | conclusion
recognition better than recall | info can be difficult to retrieve
59
Jacobs
- ppts recall a sequence of letters and digits - gradually grows length until ppts is incorrect - remembered more digits9 than letters7 - digits were probably easier to recall due to only having 10 (instead of 26) possibilities
60
miller
7+/-2 chunking items together makes it easier to remember
61
baddeley coding study
four sets of words independent groups design - acoustically similar/dissimilar - semantically similar/dissimilar difficulty recalling... STM- acoustically similar LTM- semantically similar