Section 2: Memory Flashcards

Question

Evaluation of wmm

Answer 1

+ shallice and warrington did a case study of KF - had impaired STM: can’t immediately recall words with verbal info, unless with visual info - So had impaired auditory loop but intact visuospatial sketchpad Good as can be explained by WMM not MSM … + Gatyerole and baddeley reported on a laboratory study One group had two tasks using visuospatial sketchpad and phonological loop (better perf) Other had two tasks with only visuospatial sketchpad Hence supports … + model has less emphasis on rehearsal than msm - rehearsal is one possible process in wmm - explains why some memories enter ltm without rehearsal (other processes work) … — the wmm is simplistic/vague, not explaining central executive (how choses where to send info)

Answer 2

LH was involved in a road accident. He performed better on spatial tasks than ones involving visual imagery. This suggests separate visual and spatial systems of the VSS (Wch aren’t currently explained) However, Logie divided visuospatial sketchpad, due to wmm being oversimplified

Answer 3

•Aim To investigate evidence for a limited central executive •Procedure A repeated measures design. Ppts performed a psychomotor task (moving a lever between posts with thumb/finger) And at the same time, an intelligence test with spatial patterns •Results As problems became more difficult on intelligence test Performance on psychomotor task deteriorated • conclusion He interpreted deterioration in performance as evidence that both tasks were using same component (VSS) —> competing for same limited capacity available (of CE)

Answer 4

Experiments on memory assume that if u can’t retriev memories they’re forgotten and can’t be retrieved - forgetting from STM is cos of availability problem —> no longer available cos limited capacity or duration —> info may have faded away (decay) or displaced/pushed out

Answer 5

Forgetting caused by decay (availability problem) or - info is stored but hard to retrieve (accessibility problem) - info is confused and there’s and interference problem (too similar)

Answer 6

It’s the ability to remember a thing u learnt and can be affected by similar things learned before or after • retroactive (new info makes harder to recall old) • proactive (old interferes with ability to recall new)

Answer 7

+ supportive evidence (both high control) Baddeley and hitch Mcgeoch and mcdonald + real world application (might struggle to recall French vocab after learning German) — interference effects more greater in artificial tasks and environments — incomplete as doesn’t explain how or why interference happened

Answer 8

To investigate if interference is worse with similar memories Three conditions - list A (10 adjs) , 10 mins where they learned List B1 (synonyms of A) - B2 (nonsense syllables) - B3 (numbers) 1. 12% Chance of full recall 2. 26% 3. 37% So interference strongest the more similar the items are

Answer 9

To investigate inference in an everyday setting rugby players had to recal names of teams played against - some players missed games; some played in all - but time interval from start to end of season was same — If decay theory correct, then all players should recall a similar percentage of games played as time causes forgetting If inference theory’s correct then those playing more games should forget propertianately more due to similar things mixed up —> demonstrating interference in everyday

Answer 10

In this theory, forgetting is treated as retrieval failure (info still exists, just not accessible) —> recalling info depends on getting the right cue We have more retrieval chance of cue is appropriate — cues can be *internal* (state cues = mood, emotion) — or *external* (context cues = environment) - we remember better in same context/state as we were in - when we coded info originally (cue - dependent learning) Mental reinstatement is imagining you’re in a cued environment To enable recall of that info

Answer 11

—> to see if environment cues affect recall An independent groups, field experiment with deep sea divers Who learned word lists on land or under water Recall was tested in either same or different context 4 conditions Result.. Different contexts showed more than a 30% decrease in recall Compared to same context

Answer 12

—> investigated if recall was better in the same state Male volunteers had to remember word list either drunk (3x over driving limit) or sober Then had to recall words 24hrs later In either same or different state 4 conditions Result.. - drunk or sober both times leads to better recall - while different states in learning and recall = lowered performance

Answer 13

+ research support (golden and badeely, Goodwin et al) + everyday life application (trying mental reinstatement) — evidence studys’ tasks are artificial (lacking mundane realism) — theory isn’t applicable to all types of memory, like no cues for procedural

Answer 14

Ewt is the evidence provided by ppl who witnessed a particular event/crime It relies on recall of memory —> it includes eg criminal descriptions and crime scenes (time, date, location) —> Witnesses are often innacurate in recalling events and ppl involved Cognitive psychologists focus on working out what factors affect accuracy of eyewitness testimony and how accuracy can be improved in interviews - affected by misleading info (leading questions) - post event discussion - witness age

Answer 15

Suggests the wording of the question has no real effect On the ppts memories but just influences how the decide to answer (lotus and palmer show this in the misleading info studies)

Answer 16

The aim was to investigate whether phrasing sentences in different ways affects recall in ewt * method 45 students were shown 7 films of car crash accidents. —> After each, ppts were given questionnaire, asking to describe the accident, and then answer specific questions about it There was one critical question (how fast were cars going before they *hit*) - one group was given this - the other four groups had *smashed, collided, bumped, or contacted* This was a leading question as it suggested the answer a ppt may give . * result Smashed (40mph mean speed) Collided (39.3) Bumped (38.1) Hit (34) Contacted (31.8)

Answer 17

Has the same aim - to investigate how wording of questions cause response to differ * method The leading q may bias a ppts response / cause info to be altered before stored To test, a new set of ppts (150) were divided into three groups, shown a film Of a car crash lasting 1 minute and asked qs again abt speed - ppts returned a week later when they were asked 10 qs abt the accident - there were three conditions (week ago qs had *hit, smashed or control- no speed implied*) - were asked did u see any broken glass . *result Smashed = 16 said yes; 34 said no Hit = 7 said yes Control = 6 said yes

Answer 18

- an artificial experiment Lacks mundane realism, as watching a video of a car crash isn’t as emotionally arousing as reality, potentially affecting recall - experimental design (laboratory) leads to demand characteristics Results are biased due to ppts expectations abt experiment’s purposes As leading qs give clues (could have realised leading questions)

Answer 19

Refers to a convo between two cowitnesses or an interviewer And an eyewitness after a crime has taken place wch may contaminate a witnesses memory —> two cowitnesses may discuss events, but their EWTs may become contaminated —> combining (mis)info from other witnesses with own memories Some studies have confederates feeding witnesses misinfo Affecting recall

Answer 20

Cowitnesses may reach an agreement of what actually happened —> may go along with each other to win - social approval/believe others are right, not themselves This is memory conformity

Answer 21

To investigate whether post event discussions can affect the memory recall of ppts * method Shown a video of a girl stealing money from wallet - one condition ppts were tested individually - other condition was with a cowitness In second condition were told they saw same videos; only one ppt saw girl steal money Cowitnesses were told to discuss video then completed questionnaire *result 71% ppts in second condition recalled info they didn’t see —> 60% who didn’t see girl steal said she did

Answer 22

Each time an eyewitness is interviewed there’s a chance Interviewer’s comments will become incorporated into recall of these events Also the case that the interview uses leading questions And hence alter the individual”s memory for events —> especially the case when children are being interviewed

Answer 23

anxiety has strong emotional and physical effects, but isn’t clear if these effects make eyewitness recall better/worse — a positive effect.. stress of witnessing a crime/accident makes anxiety through Physiological arousal in body. The flight or fight response triggers, Increasing alertness and improving memory as become more aware of surrounding cues — anxiety has a negative effect on recall Creating physiological arousal in body preventing paying attention To important cues hence recall is worse. - an approach to studying anxiety and ewt has been to look at - effect of weapons (create anxiety) on accuracy of recall . Tunnel theory of memory argues a witness’ attention narrows To focus on a weapon - a source of anxiety Neglecting peripheral detail (criminal’s clothes)

Answer 24

To investigate how anxiety affects recall of peripheral details of a crime *method Led ppts to think they were participating in a lab study —> whilst sitting in a waiting room ppts heard an argument in next room — (low anxiety condition) a man then walked through waiting area carrying pen with grease on hands — (hugh anxiety) same argument heard then broken glass sound. Same man walked out with paper knife with blood on * result Ppts were asked to pick the man from a set of 50 photos 49% could identify if he carried the pen 33% could identify if carrying knife

Answer 25

*method Conducted study of a real life shooting in gun shop (Canada) The shop owner shot a thief dead —> 21 witnesses, 13 agreed to participate in the study The interviews were held 4/5 months after and were compared with original police interviews made at the time - accuracy was determined by number of details reported in each account - witnesses were also asked to rate how stressed they felt (7 point scale) - asked if they had emotional problems since event (insomnia) * result Witnesses were very accurate (little change after 5 months) Some were less accurate - colour of items, age/height/weight estimates - ppts reporting most stress were most accurate - 88% compared to less stress group)

Answer 26

deffenbacher (1983) applied to EWT the **Yerkes-Dodson inverted U hypothesis** —> lower anxiety levels produce lower levels of recall accuracy - but memory becomes more accurate as the level of anxiety felt increases However there comes a point where optimal anxiety levels are reached The point of maximum accuracy If an eyewitness experiences any more stress than this Their recall suffers a drastic decline

Answer 27

Standard interview involves interviewer asking specific/closed questions - multichoice answers. Questions are predetermined on written checklist. Witnesses are discouraged from adding extra info. Interview may ask leading questions to confirm witness’ beliefs abt crime —> they contaminate a witness’ memory so later recalls inaccurate EWT can improve (they argued) if police used better techniques - such techniques shd be based on psychological insights on how memory works - calling the techniques the CI (cognitive interview) - four main techniques used

Answer 28

1. Report everything - witnesses encouraged to say every detail, even if irrelevant/ not confident May trigger further memories as a cue and may be important Such memories could be pieced together from diff witnesses to make clearer picture 2. Context reinstatement - Witness shd return to original crime scene in mind - imagine surroundings Eg, weather, what they could see, emotions Related to context-dependent forgetting, to make memories accessible —> state and context cues are needed to access some memories 3. Reverse the order - events shd be recalled in a diff order to original sequence Eg. From final point to start, middle to start Done to prevent ppl reporting expectations of how it mustve happened Preventing dishonesty (hard to not tell truth in reverse) 4. Change pov Witnesses should recall from other ppls povs Eg. How it wdve appeared to other witnesses/criminal Done to disrupt effect of expectations and schema on recall —> schéma for a general setting (shop) generates expectations —> schemas are recalled , not what actually happened

Answer 29

*method Ppts saw film of violent crime. After 48hrs were interviewed with - CI - standard by LA police - an interview with hypnosis Facts accurately recalled and numbers of errors were recorded * result Mean number of correctly recalled facts - CI = 41.2 - hypnosis = 38 - standard = 29.4 No significant difference in number of incorrect responses found * conc CI improves memory for events A follow up study also showed ppts were less likely to be misled by false info when CI was used

Answer 30

--- weapon focus is correlation; not cause and effect - pickel (1998) said reduced accuracy of identification (due to weapon focus) - may be due to surprise, not anxiety To test, ppts watched a thief in hairsalon carrying Scissors (high threat, low surprise) Handgun (high threat and surprise) Wallet (low threat and surprise) Whole raw chicken (low threat, high surprise) —> identification was least accurate in high surprise (not threat) —- inverted U explanation is too simple Anxiety is difficult to define and measure accurately It has many elements - cognitive, behavioural, emotional and physical —> inverted U explanation assumes only one is linked to poor performance - physiological (physical) arousal

Answer 31

+ quantity vs quality CI is designed to enhance quantity of correct recall Without compromising quality - ronkhen found 81% increase in correct info, but 61% increase of incorrect compared to standard interviews + enhanced CI Fisher et al developed additional info CI To focus on social social dynamics - when to establish eye contact and how long (reduce anxiety) - minimise distractions - getting witness to talk slow - open ended qs —> Rohnken combined data from 50 studies —> CI consistently provided more correct info than standard — CI is time consuming More time needed eg to allow witness to establish rapport/relax —> CI requires specialist training so unlikely proper version used —> explaining why police don’t use as much/arent impressed + Geiselman et al

Answer 32

Some hold back info as they aren’t sure it’s important or you think I already know this info. Please don’t leave anything out

Answer 33

Try think back to the day the event happened. Think about the day - what you were doing, the weather, how you felt Try get a picture of it in your mind

Answer 34

I would like you to try something wch may help you remember more. I would like you to tell me what happened backwards What was the very last thing happening, and what happened before that?

Answer 35

Try recall the incident from the pov of another person involved. Think abt where they were and isolate all you remember about them, like in a spotlight. What would they have seen?

Answer 36

+ high ecological field study based on real life event Hence results can be generalised as nothing affecting behaviour —> like demand characteristics + more ethical Ppts volunteered to take part (ao3 volunteer sampling) Also, anxiety wasn’t induced, so took advantage of this previous event — unclear what contributed to accuracy of recall Highest levels of stress were closest to the event Hard to determine whether proximity or stress contributed to recall accuracy —> So lacks control, confounding variables make hard to find conclusion

Answer 37

— ethical issues Ppts may have felt distressed at sight if man with knife Causing psychological harm and anxiety But can be solved through debriefing + high ecological validity Ppts weren’t aware this was staged Causing reaction to be realistic —> with no demand characteristics --- weapon focus is correlation; not cause and effect - pickel (1998) said reduced accuracy of identification (due to weapon focus) - may be due to surprise, not anxiety To test, ppts watched a thief in hairsalon carrying Scissors (high threat, low surprise) Handgun (high threat and surprise) Wallet (low threat and surprise) Whole raw chicken (low threat, high surprise) —> identification was least accurate in high surprise (not threat)

Section 2: Memory Flashcards

(61 cards)