SAQs 1

Question 1

Peterson and Peterson (1959) Method

Answer 1

True Lab Experiment

Question 2

Peterson and Peterson (1959) Design

Answer 2

Repeated Measures

Question 3

Peterson and Peterson (1959) Sampling Stratergy

Answer 3

Convenience (24)

Question 4

Peterson and Peterson (1959) Independent Variable

Answer 4

Time delay before recall

Question 5

Peterson and Peterson (1959) Dependent Variable

Answer 5

Recall Accuracy of Trigrams

Question 6

Peterson and Peterson (1959) procedure

Answer 6

24 participants had to recall trigrams (meaningless three-consonant syllables), such as TGH, CLS.
The trigrams were presented one at a time and had to be recalled after intervals of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 seconds respectively for each trial.
No two successive trigrams contained any of the same letters.
After hearing a trigram, participants were asked to count backward in threes or fours from a specified random digit number until they saw a red light appear (then they recalled the trigram). This was to prevent rehearsal

Question 7

Peterson and Peterson (1959) aim

Answer 7

To investigate the duration of short-term memory.

Question 8

Peterson and Peterson (1959) findings

Answer 8

After 3 seconds 80% of the trigrams were recalled correctly.
After 6 seconds this fell to 50%.
After 18 seconds less than 10% of the trigrams were recalled correctly.

Question 9

Peterson and Peterson (1959) conclusion

Answer 9

Short-term memory has a limited duration (of about 18 seconds) when rehearsal is prevented.

Question 10

Baddeley et al. (1975) Aim

Answer 10

To see if people could remember more short words than long words in a serial recall test

Question 11

Baddeley et al. (1975) method

Answer 11

True Lab Experiment

Question 12

Baddeley et al. (1975) design

Answer 12

Repeated Measures

Question 13

Baddeley et al. (1975) sampling stratergy

Answer 13

Convenience (12)

Question 14

Baddeley et al. (1975) independent variable

Answer 14

Whether they engaged articulatory suppression or were silent

Question 15

Baddeley et al. (1975) dependent variable

Answer 15

Serial Recall Accuracy of one- and five-syllable words

Question 16

Baddeley et al. (1975) procedure

Answer 16

Participants were introduced to two sets of words: One-syllable words (short words, Five-syllable words (long words)
From each pool, 16 five-word lists were made by sampling words at random without replacement.
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: Silent recall (normal memory recall). Articulatory suppression (repeating an irrelevant sound while trying to remember words).
Participants had to recall the words in order (serial recall task).

Question 17

Baddeley et al. (1975) Findings

Answer 17

Word Length Effect Observed
Participants remembered more short words (one-syllable) compared to long words (five-syllable).
This supports the idea that short-term memory is limited by time, not just capacity—you can rehearse short words faster
Articulatory Suppression Eliminated the Word Length Effect
When participants were asked to repeat an irrelevant sound (articulatory suppression condition), the word length effect disappeared.
This means they struggled to rehearse the words mentally, leading to similar recall levels for short and long words.

Question 18

Baddeley et al. (1975) Conclusion

Answer 18

Short-term memory relies on phonological (speech-based) coding.
The word length effect happens because people rehearse words subvocal (in their heads), but this is disrupted when articulatory suppression is used.
Supports the Phonological Loop in Baddeley & Hitch’s Working Memory Model (WMM), where:
Phonological Store → Holds verbal info temporarily.
Articulatory Control Process → Rehearses the info to keep it active.

Question 19

Bartlett (1932) Aim

Answer 19

To investigate how the memory of a story is affected by previous knowledge.

Question 20

Bartlett (1932) method

Answer 20

“Experiment”

Question 21

Bartlett (1932) Design

Answer 21

Independent Measures

Question 22

Bartlett (1932) sampling stratergy

Answer 22

Convenience and purposive (British students from cambridge)

Question 23

Bartlett (1932) independent variable

Answer 23

The participants’ cultural background / schema

Question 24

Bartlett (1932) dependent variable

Answer 24

Recall Accuracy of The War of the Ghosts

Question 25

Bartlett (1932) procedure

Answer 25

Bartlett told participants a Native American legend called The War of the Ghosts. Bartlett allocated the participants to one of two conditions: one group was asked to use repeated reproduction, where participants heard the story and were told to reproduce it after a short time and then to do so again repeatedly over a period of days, weeks, months or years. The second group was told to use serial reproduction, in which they had to recall the story and repeat it to another person.

Question 26

Bartlett (1932) findings

Answer 26

Bartlett found that there was no significant difference between the way that the groups recalled the story. Bartlett found that participants in both conditions changed the story as they tried to remember it - a process called distortion. Bartlett found that there were three patterns of distortion that took place. Assimilation: The story became more consistent with the participants’ own cultural expectations - that is, details were unconsciously changed to fit the norms of British culture. Levelling: The story also became shorter with each retelling as participants omitted information which was seen as not important. Sharpening: Participants also tended to change the order of the story in order to make sense of it using terms more familiar to the culture of the participants. They also added detail and/or emotions. The participants overall remembered the main themes in the story but changed the unfamiliar elements to match their own cultural expectations so that the story remained a coherent whole although changed.

Question 27

Bartlett (1932) conclusion

Answer 27

Bartlett's study indicates that remembering is not a passive but rather an active process, where information is retrieved and changed to fit into existing schemas. This is done in order to create meaning in the incoming information.

Question 28

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) aim

Answer 28

To test if the sentence length requested by a prosecutor would unduly influence the decision made by a judge

Question 29

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) method

Answer 29

True Lab Experiment

Question 30

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) design

Answer 30

Independent Measures

Question 31

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) sampling stratergy

Answer 31

Purposive (24 law students in pilot study. 19 trial judges (15 male, 4 female) with an average age of 29.37 and with an average of 9.34 months of experience.)

Question 32

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) independent variable

Answer 32

Whether the recommended sentence was a High or Low Anchor

Question 33

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) dependent variable

Answer 33

Recommended Sentence for the guilty defendant

Question 34

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) procedure

Answer 34

Pilot study: the rape case materials were tested on a group of 24 senior law students. The average recommended prison term suggested by the law students was 17.21 months. This was then used as a basis for determining the anchors. Participants (judges) were given the case materials along with copies of the penal code. They were asked to read through the materials and form an opinion about the case. After they had formed an opinion about the case (about 15 minutes), they were given a questionnaire. Half of the participants were told that the prosecutor demanded a 34-month sentence; while the other half were told that he demanded a 2-month sentence. They were then asked the following questions: Do you think that the sentence was too low, adequate or too high? What sentence would you recommend? How certain are you about your sentencing decision? (a scale of 1 – 9) How realistic do you think this case is? (a scale of 1 – 9)

Question 35

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) findings

Answer 35

The average rating for the realistic nature of the case was 7.17, with a standard deviation of 1.3. The judges' certainty about their responses, however, were not as strong, with an average rating of 4.53 and a standard deviation of 2.29. When presented with a low anchor of two months, the average sentence was 18.78 months, with a standard deviation of 9.11. in the high anchor condition of 34 months, the average sentence was 28.70 months, with a standard deviation of 6.53.

Question 36

Englich and Mussweiler (2001) conclusion

Answer 36

The smaller anchor leads to a shorter, and closer to recommended, sentence. A larger anchor leads to a longer sentence.

Question 37

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 1. aim

Answer 37

To investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect the estimation of speed.

Question 38

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 2. aim

Answer 38

To investigate if participants who had a high-speed estimate in the first part of an experiment would say that they had seen broken glass in the second part of the experiment.

Question 39

Loftus and Palmer (1974) method

Answer 39

True Lab Experiment

Question 40

Loftus and Palmer (1974) design

Answer 40

Independent Measures

Question 41

Loftus and Palmer (1974) sampling stratergy

Answer 41

Convenience (students. 1. 45 2. 150)

Question 42

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 1. independent variable

Answer 42

Emotional intensity of the verb in the critical question

Question 43

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 2. independent variable

Answer 43

Leading glass question or not

Question 44

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 1. dependent variable

Answer 44

Estimated Speed

Question 45

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 2. dependent variable

Answer 45

Whether they remember seeing broken glass

Question 46

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 1. procedure

Answer 46

The participants were divided into five groups of nine students. Seven films of traffic accidents were shown and the length of the films ranged from 5 to 30 seconds. The films were taken from driver's education films. Each participants watched all 7 films. When the participants had watched a film they were asked to give an account of the accident they had seen and then they answered a questionnaire with different questions on the accident with one question being the critical question where they were asked to estimate the speed of the cars involved in the accident. They were asked the same question but the critical question included different words. One group of participants were asked, "About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?" The critical word "hit’" was replaced by ‘collided’, ‘bumped’ or ‘smashed’ or’ contacted’ in the other conditions.

Question 47

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 2. procedure

Answer 47

Followed the same steps as experiment 1, but with another question: "Did you see any broken glass?" (Binary question)

Question 48

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 1. findings

Answer 48

The mean estimates of speed were highest in the ‘smashed’ condition (40.8 mph) and lowest in the ‘contacted’ group (31.8 mph). Smashed - 40.8 Collided - 39.3 Bumped - 38.1 Hit - 34.0 Contacted 31.8

Question 49

Loftus and Palmer (1974) 2. findings

Answer 49

In the ‘smashed’ condition 16 participants said yes to having seen broken glass compared to 7 in the ‘hit’ condition. 6 participants in the control condition answered ‘yes’ to the question. 34 participants in the ‘smashed’ condition answered ‘no’ to the question compared to 43 in the ‘hit’ condition. Although most of the participants accurately reported no broken glass, more of the participants in the ‘smashed’ condition said they saw broken glass.

Question 50

Loftus and Palmer (1974) conclusion

Answer 50

Participants' memory of an accident could be changed by using suggestive questions.

Question 51

Sharot et al. (2007) aim

Answer 51

Determine the potential role of biological factors on flashbulb memories.

Question 52

Sharot et al. (2007) method

Answer 52

Quasi Experiment

Question 53

Sharot et al. (2007) design

Answer 53

Independent Measures

Question 54

Sharot et al. (2007) sampling stratergy

Answer 54

Purposive (24)

Question 55

Sharot et al. (2007) independent variable

Answer 55

Whether they were in Downtown, Midtown or Uptown Manhattan

Question 56

Sharot et al. (2007) depdendent variable

Answer 56

Activation of the Amygdala

Question 57

Sharot et al. (2007) procedure

Answer 57

Participants were put in a fMRI. Participants were shown different words at the same time as the word "summer" or "September." After fMRI, participants were asked to write a description of their personal memories. And rate their memories for vividness, detail, confidence in accuracy and arousal.

Question 58

Sharot et al. (2007) findings

Answer 58

The activation of the amygdala for the participants who were downtown was the higher when they recalled memories of the terrorist attack than when they recalled events from the proceeding summer.

Question 59

Sharot et al. (2007) conclusion

Answer 59

Close personal experience nay be critical in engaging the neural mechanisms that produce the vivid memories characteristic of flashbulb memory.