Memory Flashcards
(115 cards)
1
Q
Who proposed the Multi-Store-Model?
A
Atkinson and Shiffrin
2
Q
When was the Multi-Store-Model proposed?
A
1968
3
Q
Define the Multi-Store-Model
A
Representation of how memory works in terms of three stores: sensory register, STM and LTM, including how info is stored, transferred, remembered and forgotten
4
Q
Describe how info is transferred through the MSM
A
- Info (stimuli) reach SR through receptor cells of the 5 senses.
- Most info forgotten, some passed to STM if we pay attention.
- STM is limited, but if info rehearsed, consolidated and passed to LTM.
- LTM is full of unlimited, lifetime info that can be recalled into STM by retrieval (to remember it).
- At any point, info can leave the model via forgetting.
5
Q
Give 2 positive evaluation points of MSM
A
- Research support for being diff types of stores that have diff properties, through studies (e.g. Baddeley 1966 - types of coding)
- Case study support for being diff types of stores that have diff properties (HM) and importance of moving through linearly to form memories (Clive Wearing)
6
Q
Who is patient HM and what does his case support?
A
- Amnesia patient, part of hippocampus removed to relieve epilepsy.
- Supports THEORY OF 3 SEPARATE STORES IN MSM
In 1955 had impaired LTM (thought it was ‘53) but functioning STM (could remember string of digits). - Supports THEORY OF 3 TYPES OF LTM
Impaired episodic (couldn’t remember stroking dog an hr ago), functioning semantic (what dog was) and procedural (shoelaces)
7
Q
Who is patient Clive Wearing and what does his case support?
A
- Amnesia from viral infection
- Supports THEORY OF SEQUENTIAL + SEPARATE STM AND LTM IN MSM
Couldn’t form any new LTMs, but had functioning STM so transfer was damaged, cutting off sequence between stores - Supports THEORY OF 3 TYPES OF LTM
Destroyed episodic, partially intact semantic (remembered certain people), intact procedural (play piano)
8
Q
Who was Shallice and Warrington’s patient K.F and what does his case support?
A
- Amnesia after motorbike accident
- Supports STM NOT BEING UNITARY IN THE WMM (REFUTES MSM THEORY OF UNITARY STORE)
Functioning visuo-spatial sketch pad (process and recall visual info) but damaged phonological loop (couldn’t process and recall acoustic info)
9
Q
Give 2 negative evaluation points of MSM
A
- Simplifies STM (case of Shallice and Warrington’s K.F suggests it isn’t unitary as suggested)
- Simplifies LTM (Tulving, 1985, suggested 3 types not unitary, backed up by brain scans)
10
Q
What is capacity of the SR and a study to support?
A
Very high, millions of receptors
- Sperling (1960)
11
Q
What is the coding of the SR and a study to support?
A
Sensory specific.
Main are: ICONIC (visual info stored visually), ECHOIC (auditory info stored acoustically)
- Crowder (1993)
12
Q
What is the duration of the SR and a study to support?
A
Brief, less than half a second
- Triesman (1964)
13
Q
What is the capacity of the STM and a detailed study to support?
A
Limited.
5-9 chunks of info
- Jacobs (1887) measured digit span (9.3) and letter span (7.3) of 443 female students. Concluded STM capacity was limited to <10 items. Criticised for long ago, less variable control.
- Miller (1956) did similar work to Jacobs, and observed many things in sevens. Suggested ‘magic number 7’ - 7 chunks in STM plus or minus 2. Criticised (Cowan 2001, for overestimating no. Of chunks)
14
Q
What is the coding of STM and a detailed study to support?
A
Mainly acoustic
- Baddeley (1966) Used independent groups of 4 conditions, acoustically similar/dissimilar and semantically similar/dissimilar. Struggled with acoustically similar for immediate STM recall (PHONOLOGICAL SIMILARITY EFFECT). Criticised for using artificial stimuli, hard to generalise
15
Q
What is the coding of LTM and a detailed study to support?
A
- Baddeley (1966) Used independent groups of 4 conditions, acoustically similar/dissimilar and semantically similar/dissimilar. Recall after 20 mins (LTM) struggled with semantically similar. Criticised for using artificial stimuli, not generalisable.
16
Q
What is the duration of STM and a detailed study to support?
A
Brief (18-30 secs) as spontaneous decay occurs if not rehearsed
- Peterson and Peterson (1959) 24 psych students in lab had to recall diff trigrams at diff intervals between 3 and 18 secs. Rehearsal prevented by counting back. Longer interval, less accurate recall. 3 secs=80%. 18 secs=10%. Criticised for using artificial materials - consonant syllables, so no generalisability.
17
Q
What is capacity of LTM and study to support?
A
Unlimited
-Ramscar (2014) suggested may slow with age
18
Q
What is duration of LTM and detailed study to support it?
A
Unlimited/lifetime
- Bahrick et al (1975) 392 ex students of Ohio school tested (age 17-74). Tested photo recognition (90% after 15yrs, 70% after 48 yrs). Tested free recall of names (60% after 15 yrs, 30% after 48yrs). LTM still working after long time. Criticised for no control of confounding variables.
19
Q
What did Tulving propose about LTM in 1985?
A
MSM had over-simplified it by saying its unitary. It is made up of 3 stores of memory: episodic, semantic, procedural.
20
Q
What is episodic memory?
A
A LTM store of personal events (episodes) from our lives.
Likened to a diary, e.g. memory of first day at school
21
Q
What is episodic memory made up of?
A
Time stamp and several elements regarding what happened (people, places, etc).
22
Q
Where is the episodic memory located?
A
Hippocampus
23
Q
What is semantic memory?
A
A LTM store of our knowledge of the world.
Likened to a dictionary/encyclopaedia, e.g the meaning of a word
24
Q
What is semantic memory made up of?
A
Ever-growing collection of less personal info that isn’t time stamped
25
Where is the semantic memory located?
Temporal lobe
26
What is procedural memory?
A LTM store of how to complete actions/skills
E.g. how to walk
27
What is procedural memory made up of?
Unconscious knowledge of skills that we may find hard to explain
28
Which LTM stores are consciously/unconsciously recalled?
Consciously recalled = Episodic + semantic
| Unconsciously recalled = Procedural
29
Give 3 positive evaluation points of 3-part LTM
- Research support from case studies (HM and Clive Wearing, both only had episodic memory damage)
- Neuroimaging (brain scans) by Tulving (1994), found activity of diff types of LTM in diff parts of brain
- Real life applications. Beneville et all (2006) found old people with mild cognitive impairments could be trained to improve their episodic memory
30
Give 2 negative evaluation points of 3-part LTM
- Case study support is a one-off case lacking generalisability
- Argued by Cohen + Squire (1980) that LTM is 2-type: consciously recalled DECLARATIVE (episodic + semantic), unconsciously recalled NON-DECLARATIVE (procedural)
31
Which type of LTM tends to be taught?
Semantic
32
What type of neuroimaging did Tulving do in 1994 to support his 3-part LTM theory?
PET scans
33
Where is the procedural memory located?
Cerebellum and motor cortex
34
Who proposed the Working Memory Model?
Baddeley and Hitch
35
When was the WMM proposed?
1974
36
Why did Baddeley and Hitch propose the WMM?
Alternative to MSM’s unitary STM, as thought it was too simplistic
37
Define the WMM
A representation of STM. Suggests STM is a dynamic processor of diff types of info using sub-units coordinated by a central system
38
What are the 4 components of the WMM?
- Central executive
- Phonological loop (phonological store + articulatory control process)
- Visuo-spatial sketchpad (visual cache + inner scribe)
- Episodic buffer
39
Describe the central executive and its role in the WMM
- ‘Boss’ that acts as an attentional process, monitoring incoming info and allocating it to slave sub-systems
- Also does cognitive tasks
- Limited capacity
40
Describe the phonological loop and its role in WMM
- Slave sub-system that deals with auditory info
- Phonological store: ‘inner ear’, storing words heard for 1-2 secs
- Articulatory control process: ‘inner voice’, repeating 2 secs worth of info to keep it in STM (maintenance rehearsal)
41
What is the visuo-spatial sketchpad and its role in WMM?
- Slave sub-system that deals with visual info
- Logie (1995 subdivided it)
- Visual cache: stores visual data
- Inner scribe: records spatial arrangement of objects in visual field
42
What is the episodic buffer and its role in the WMM?
- Added by Baddeley in 2000
- Temporary store
- Combines data from stores to produce time stamped episodes
- Provides bridge between STM and LTM
43
What are the three slave systems in the WMM?
- Phonological loop
- Visuo-spatial sketchpad
- Episodic buffer
44
What is articulatory suppression?
Participants vocalise irrelevant materials, to prevent the maintenance rehearsal completed by the articulatory control process (‘inner voice’). This stops words being stored in the STM.
45
Give 4 positive evaluation points for WMM
- Research support using case study patient KF (functioning visuo-spatial sketchpad but damaged phonological loop).
- Physiological evidence (PET scans). Braver et al (1997). Diff parts of brain lit up after being given diff info using STM .
- Research support using dual task studies (Baddeley and Hitch -1976). Condition 1=visual+acoustic task. Condition 2=visual+visual. Better performance when task types are diff, don’t compete for space in same sub-system.
- Research support for phonological loop using word length effect (Baddeley et al - 1975). Proved limited duration of 2 secs - harder to remember long words. Effect stops when given articulatory suppression task - articulatory process important in keeping info in WM by rehearsal.
46
What part of the brain was shown in a PET scan to hold the central executive?
Prefrontal cortex
47
Give 2 negative evaluation points for WMM
- Central executive is most important part but most unknown. Baddeley (2003) said it was ‘least understood’. Model is incomplete, as CE can’t fully be used to explain behaviour.
- Only explains STM (had to wait until 1985 for LTM explanation)
48
What are the two explanations for forgetting?
- Interference
| - Retrieval failure
49
Define interference
Two pieces of info are in conflict, resulting in forgetting or distorting one or both memories
50
How is info most commonly forgotten from LTM?
The info is there, it just cant be accessed
51
What are the two types of interference?
- Proactive interference (PI)
| - Retroactive interference (RI)
52
What is proactive interference?
An older memory interferes with a newer one
| PAST memories are disruptive
E.g. calling new boyfriend old boyfriend’s name
53
What is retroactive interference?
A newer memory interferes with an older one
RECENT memories are disruptive
E.g. learn new phone number so cant remember old one
54
How does similarity between memories affect interference?
Interference is WORSE when memories are MORE similar
55
Why does similarity increase interference?
Proactive: Existence of old info makes it harder to store new info
Retroactive: New info overwrites old info that is similar
56
Describe the study into the effect of similarity on forgetting through interference
- McGeoch and McDonald (1931)
- Ppts given list of words to learn until recall 100%
- Then given new list to learn in 6 independent groups that had diff levels of similarity (synonyms, antonyms, unrelated, consonant syllables, numbers, none)
- Worst recall of most similar (synonyms), as most interference
57
Give 2 positive evaluation points for interference as an explanation for forgetting
- Research support from many lab studies. Including McGeoch and McDonald. Results repeatedly show PI and RI as causes of forgetting, high validity.
- Real life support. Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall teams played in season. Saw recall affected by no. Of teams played since, not length of time since game
58
Give 3 negative evaluation points for interference as an explanation for forgetting
- Artificial materials used in lab experiments reduce external validity. Interference exaggerated, as not remembering relevant things.
- Limited time in lab experiments reduces external validity. Short time between learning and recall, has low generalisability to real situations.
- No recognition that interference may be overcome using cues. Tulving and Psotka (1977) gave ppts 5 lists of 24 words, in 6 implicit categories. Recall of first list 70%, recall fell when more lists learned, then raised again to 70% when cues on category given.
59
Define retrieval failure
Necessary cues to access a memory aren’t available, so memory cant be recalled
60
Define cue
A ‘trigger’ of information that allows us to access a memory, as they were encoded at the same time.
61
Define Encoding Specificity Principle (ESP)
For a cue to help retrieval, it must be present at time of encoding (learning) and retrieval.
If cue isn’t present at both, will be some forgetting
62
Who proposed the ESP? When?
Tulving (1983)
63
What are the 2 types of cues
- Cues meaningfully linked to material being remembered (e.g. mnemonics)
- Cues not meaningfully linked, just encoded at same time (can be external or internal)
64
What are the two types of meaningful cues?
- External cues (context-dependent forgetting)
| - Internal cues (state-dependent forgetting)
65
Define context dependent forgetting
Memory retrieval dependent on external/environmental cue
66
Outline study to support context-dependent forgetting
- Godden and Baddeley (1975)
- Field experiment
- Ppts (divers) learned, then recalled list of words in two contexts (land and underwater). Used repeated measures design.
- 1=l,l
- 2=l,u
- 3=u,l
- 4=u,u
- When environmental contexts didn’t match (2+3) recall 40% lower, as external cues not available, so retrieval failure
67
Define state-dependent forgetting
Memory retrieval dependent on internal cue, state of mind
68
Outline study to support state-dependent forgetting
- Carter and Cassaday (1998)
- Lab experiment
- Ppts had to learn and recall lists in diff states of mind (on anti-histamines and normal)
- 1=d,d
- 2=d,n
- 3=n,d
- 4=n,n
- When internal contexts didn’t match, recall much lower, internal cues not available, retrieval failure
69
Give 3 positive evaluation points for retrieval failure as explanation for forgetting
- Research support from many studies (e.g. Godden and Baddeley ) has caused Eysenck (2010) to say its the best explanation for forgetting, repeatable so high validity.
- Everyday applications -e.g. forgetting what you needed from upstairs until you return downstairs
- Use in cognitive interview (‘context reinstatement’)
70
Give 3 negative evaluation points for retrieval failure as explanation for forgetting
- Context effects aren’t very strong in real life, so a limited explanation. (Baddeley argues need for v diff contexts)
- Context effects only occur when required to memorise in certain ways (Godden and Baddeley replicated diving study in 1980, asking ppts to do recognition test instead. Same performance in all 4 conditions).
- ESP cant be physically proven, as cant be sure when cues are encoding (just assume if they help recall memory they were encoded at that time).
71
Define eyewitness testimony (EWT)
Ability of people to remember details of events they have observed
72
What factors affect EWT?
- Misleading info: leadings questions + post-event discussion
- Anxiety
73
Define misleading information
Incorrect info given to the eyewitness, usually after the event.
Can be split into leading questions and post-event discussion
74
Define leading questions
A question which, because of the way it’s phrased suggests a certain answer
75
How do leading questions affect EWT accuracy?
- Response bias explanation = wording of question has no enduring effect on EW’s memory, but influences answer given
- Substitution explanation = wording of a question distorts EW’s memory of event
76
Outline study that supports the affect of leading questions on EWT accuracy
- Loftus and Palmer (1974)
- Lab experiment
- 45 American students, split into 5 independent groups
- Showed film clips about accident then asked ‘How fast were cars going when they ...?’
- Each condition had diff verb: hit, contacted, bumped, collided, smashed
- Contacted produced lowest mean est: 31.8mph
- Smashed produced highest mean est: 40.5mph
- Answer was affected by verb in leading question
77
Give one strength of leading questions (misleading info) as explanation for affecting EWT
- Real life applications. Loftus (1975) said police must use leading questions carefully. Less leading questions may lead to less wrongful convictions due to faulty EWT (e.g. Ronald Cotton).
78
Give 3 negative evaluation points for leading questions (misleading info) as explanation for affecting EWT?
Loftus et al’s study may have had limitations:
- Artificial videos lacked real stress, reducing generalisability. Foster et al (1994) said ppts put less effort into recall, no conseq.
- Individual ppts differences (e.g. driving experience)
- Not representative sample (cultural and age bias - American students).
79
Define post event discussion (PED)
Witnesses may discuss what they’ve seen with other ppl and other co-witnesses
80
Define memory contamination
Info from other witnesses mixed with own memories
| Due to memory conformity after PEDs
81
Define memory conformity
Witnesses go along with each other to win social approval (NI) or because they believe others are right (II). Can cause memory contamination.
82
Outline study that supports PED as explanation for effects on EWT.
- Gabbert et al (2003)
- Lab experiment
- Watched video
- 60 students from Aberdeen Uni + 60 adults from local area
- Split into control group (no PED) and co-witness group (split into pairs, each seeing diff perspective, one guilty one not, but told they saw same, then had PED)
- Did questionnaire about what they saw + guilty/not guilty
- Co-witness group: 71% recalled things they didn’t see. 60% from not guilty view said they were guilty (memory contamination from PED)
- Control group made no recall mistakes or wrongful convictions
83
Give 2 positive evaluation points for PED (misleading info) as explanation for effects on EWT
- Real life applications, as know effects of PED, can keep EWs apart
- Used control group, can clearly establish cause and effect
84
Give 4 negative evaluation points of PED
Gabbert et al’s study may have had some limitations:
- Artificial methods using videos
- Demand characteristics. Zaragosa + McCloskey (1989) criticised many lab studies for having low ecological validity.
- Volunteer sample. Highly motivated individuals may not be representative.
- Individual ppt differences. Anastasi and Rhodes (2006) said evidence from older ppl is less accurate and ppl are better at identifying their own age (OWN AGE BIAS)
85
Define anxiety
State of emotional and physical arousal
86
Give 2 emotional characteristics of anxiety
Worried thoughts + feelings of tension
87
Give 2 physical characteristics or anxiety
Increased heart rate, sweatiness
88
Does anxiety make EWT recall better or worse?
Not sure - evidence for both
89
What is the theory regarding anxiety damaging EWT accuracy?
Anxiety creates arousal which prevents us paying attention to important cues, damaging recall
90
Outline a study used to support anxiety negatively affecting EWT
- Johnson and Scott (1976)
- Lab study
- Ppts in waiting room before study
- Overheard argument
- One independent group saw man emerge with paper knife (anxiety)
- One independent group saw man emerge with pen (control)
- Ppts later asked to identify man from choice of 50 pics
- Group 1 less accurate (33%)
- Group 2 more accurate (49%)
- Recall worse in first group as focused on source of anxiety, not whole situation (in this case called, WEAPON FOCUS EFFECT)
91
Give 1 positive evaluation point for Johnson + Scott’s anxiety is damaging to EWT study
- Produced potentially enlightening results (police should have less faith in EWT for high anxiety crimes)
92
Give 3 negative evaluation points for Johnson + Scott’s anxiety is damaging to EWT study
- Lab experiment had low demand characteristics. May have guessed purpose as already waiting for experiment. Low ecological validity and generalisability.
- Ethical issues. No informed consent, used deception (purpose of study and fake weapon), no protection from psychological harm
- May have tested surprise not anxiety. Pickel (1998) replicated study in salon using scissors, wallet, chicken, handgun. Recall worse in unusual conditions (gun and chicken), so tunnel theory result of surprise.
93
What is the theory for anxiety improving EWT accuracy?
Anxiety triggers fight or flight response, increasing alertness and awareness of cues, improving recall.
94
Outline study that supports theory that anxiety positively affects EWT
- Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
- 13/21 witnesses to real, violent crime in Canadian gun shop
- Interviewed to test recall 4-5 months after crime and compared statements to straighter after event. Also rated level of stress at time.
- Recall all very accurate
- Recall most accurate in half that reported highest stress (88% compared to 75%).
95
Give 1 positive evaluation for point for Yuille and Cutshall’s (1986) study to support anxiety positively affecting EWT
- Real life case study, with more generalisable results due to high ecological validity
96
Give 1 negative evaluation point for Yuille and Cutshall’s (1986) study to support anxiety positively affecting EWT
- Lacks variable controls reducing internal validity. E.g. witnesses may have had PEDs.
97
Who presents an explanation for the contradictory findings on anxiety affecting EWT?
Yerkes and Dodson (1908)
98
What do Yerkes and Dodson argue?
Relationship between performance and arousal from anxiety is an inverted U-shape
YERKES-DODSON LAW
99
Who applied the Yerkes-Dodson Law to EWT and what did they say?
- Deffenbacher (1983)
- Low levels of anxiety produce low recall accuracy
- As anxiety increases, recall accuracy increases, up to optimum point
- After optimum point, as anxiety increases, recall accuracy decreases
100
What is a criticism given on the Yerkes-Dodson Law as an explanation for how anxiety affects EWT?
Too simplistic, as anxiety is a complex process with complex effects
101
How can the effects of PED on EWT accuracy be reduced?
Warn Ppts about affect of PED
102
Define the weapon focus effect
Attention is focused on weapon, so other important details cannot be recalled
103
Who proposed the cognitive interview? When?
Fisher and Gieselman (1992)
104
Why was the cognitive interview proposed?
- In 1987, Fisher investigated real interviews by Florida detectives over 4 months.
- Found witnesses often given questions: not in sync with memory, close-ended
- Thought change to interviewing style would improve accuracy of EWT
105
Define cognitive interview (CI)
Method used when interviewing EWs to help them retrieve more accurate memories. Based on psychological knowledge about human memory.
106
What are the 4 techniques used in cognitive interviews?
- Report everything
- Context reinstatement
- Reverse order
- Change perspective
107
What is report everything and why is it used in CI?
Witnesses encouraged to recall every detail of event, even if they aren’t confident about it or it seems irrelevant
- May be important
- May trigger other memories
108
What is reinstating context and why is it used in CI?
Witnesses encouraged to ‘return to crime scene’ in their minds, remembering environment and emotions
- Helps reverse context-dependent forgetting, cues from context may trigger recall
109
What is reverse the order and why is it used in CI?
Witnesses should recall events in a different chronological order (e.g. middle, then end, then beginning)
- Prevents reporting expectations of events
- Makes it harder to lie
110
What is changing perspective and why is it used in CI?
Witnesses should recall event from another perspective (e.g. of another witness or perpetrator).
- Prevents schema effects
111
Define schema effects
Reporting schema in an EWT, rather than what acc happened. Schema is the mental framework of expectations or beliefs about what should have happened in that situation, developed from experience.
112
What is the enhanced cognitive interview and when was it developed?
- Additional elements of the CI, that focus on the social dynamics of interviewing.
- Use techniques e.g. knowing when to give eye contact.
- Aim to improve EWT, by reducing EW anxiety, minimising distractions, getting EW to speak slow and give detailed answers to open ended questions.
- Proposed by Fisher et al (1987)
113
Give 2 positive evaluation points for the CI
- Even using some elements of CI is useful (e.g. if short on time). Milne + Bull (2002) found all elements are helpful. Combination of report everything and context reinstatement produce best recall.
- Research support through meta-analysis. Könken et al (1999) combined data from over 50 studies and found CI produced consistently more accurate EWT than standard interviews.
114
Give 3 negative evaluation points for CI
- Time consuming. Kebbell + Wagstaff (1997) say training takes time. Actual interview also takes time (e.g. establishing rapport).
- Research support may be unreliable, due to variations in CI. Slightly different between all individuals, lack of control makes it hard to draw conclusions about its effect.
- Produced increase in inaccurate info as well as accurate. Köhnken et al (1991) found 81% increase in ACCURATE, but also 61% increase in INACCURATE. So must be used with caution.
115
What increase in useful info did police trained in the CI obtain?
42%
