Short Term Memory Pt 1

Question 1

Atkinson & Shiffrin’s Stage Model of Memory

Answer 1

Environmental Input –> Sensory Registers –> STM –> LTM –> Control Processes in STM –> Response Output

Question 2

STM Capacity

Answer 2

Limited Duration –> 20-30 seconds (only extended if the info is actively rehearsed)

Question 3

Peterson & Peterson (1959)

Answer 3

• Test participants on their ability to remember three consonants over a short period of time
• Required them to count backwards by 3s, starting with a number that occurred after the consonants (this prevented rehearsal)

Question 4

Findings of Peterson & Peterson (1959)

Answer 4

Three letters are easy to shadow, but as time passes it no longer is in “STM” but not deemed important to transfer to LTM

Question 5

What were the 2 theories for why STM was so short?

Answer 5

Decay and Interference Theories

Question 6

What is the Decay Theory?

Answer 6

States that info is spontaneously lost over time, even without interference from other material.

Question 7

What does the Decay Theory say about the amount of recall?

Answer 7

The amount of recall should be determined by the length of the retention interval

Question 8

What is the Interference Theory?

Answer 8

Proposal that forgetting occurs bc other material interferes with the info in STM

Question 9

What does the Interference Theory say about the amount of recall?

Answer 9

The amount of recall should be determined by the number of interfering items
- We can eliminate/reduce factors that may potentially result in interference

Question 10

Waugh & Norman (1965)

Answer 10

Tested which was the better explanation for why STM is so short; is it decay or intereference?
- Presented lists of 16 single digits. The last digit in every list (a probe digit) occurred exactly once earlier in the list
- The goal of the participant was to report the first digit after the probe

Question 11

What Theory did Waugh & Norman (1965) prove?

Answer 11

Interference! As the number of interfering items increase, STM performance should decrease

Question 12

Results of Waugh & Norman (1965)

Answer 12

1. The rate of presentation had very little effect on the probability of recalling the test digit
2. The number of interfering items has a dramatic effect on retention
3. Supports that interference is the PRIMARY cause of forgetting

Question 13

Implications of Waugh & Norman (1965)

Answer 13

• The finding that interference is the chief cause of forgetting
• If information is lost through interference, we can improve our learning strategies to favor retention

Question 14

What are the Types of Interference?

Answer 14

Retroactive Interference & Proactive Interference

Question 15

Retroactive Interference

Answer 15

Forgetting of OLD information due to material learned after.
- Remember R for Retroactive & Recency Effect!

Question 16

Proactive Interference

Answer 16

Forgetting of NEW information due to material learned before.
- Remember P for Proactive & Primacy Effect

Question 17

Which type of interference was Waugh & Norman (1965) testing?

Answer 17

Retroactive Interference

Question 18

Keppel & Underwood (1962)

Answer 18

• Used the same design as Peterson & Peterson
• Found that people initially performed very well in recalling 3 consonants after a short retention interval, but their performance deteriorated over subsequent trials

Question 19

Explanation of Keppel & Underwood (1962)

Answer 19

• The consonants they had tried to remember during the first trials began to interfere with their memory for consonants during the later trials

Question 20

What kind of interference did Keppel & Underwood’s study prove?

Answer 20

Proactive Interference (they started to put answers from earlier trials)

Question 21

Gunter et al (1980)

Answer 21

• Participants heard 3 items of television news events during each trial and attempted to recall them after a minute delay
• Two groups:
  One group received items of the same type of material over a series of four trials
  The other group received items of the same type over the first three trials but a different type on the fourth trial

Question 22

Results of Gunter et al (1980)

Answer 22

• Those who received the same items throughout had a decline in the memory performance
• The recall of the other group had a similar decline but IMPROVED dramatically on the 4th trial after hearing something different

Question 23

Explanation of Gunter et al (1980)

Answer 23

Demonstration of release from proactive interference
- You’re building up proactive interference throughout the trials but on the last trial with different words, it wipes your previous knowledge, making it easier to remember the last trial’s words

Question 24

How do we reduce proactive interference?

Answer 24

We have information be dissimilar from earlier material (ie switch between topics)
- Reduction of interference through appropriate sequencing can partly compensate for the rapid forgetting from STM