Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
132 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
MSM - who was it by? |
Atkinson and shiffrin |
|
|
MSM - list components |
Sensory register —attention—> STM , LTM |
|
|
MSM - how is Info lost from sensory register? |
Decay |
|
|
MSM - how is info lost from STM |
Displacement |
|
|
MSM - how is info lost from LTM |
Retrieval failure |
|
|
MSM - key points about the model |
Travels in a linear fashion Each store is unitary Each store can function on its own |
|
|
Sensory register : encoding, capacity, duration, forgetting |
Encoding : modality specific Capacity: unlimited Duration: limited (0.5s) Forgetting: decay |
|
|
MSM - STM encoding, capacity, duration, forgetting |
Encoding: acoustically Capacity: magic miller 7+- 2 Duration: 18-30 sec Forgetting: displacement |
|
|
MSM - LTM encoding, capacity, duration, forgetting |
Encoding: semantically Capacity: unlimited Duration: unlimited Forgetting: retrieval failure |
|
|
MSM - research: types of encoding |
Baddeley and hitch 4 groups asked to learn a list of words either sounding similar, different, similar meanings or different meanings Findings: info encoded acoustically in STM info encoded semantically in LTM |
|
|
MSM - research: duration of STM |
Peterson and Peterson Given trigrams then asked to count backwards for a certain amount of time then recall the trigrams Findings: duration of STM is approx 20 secs |
|
|
MSM - research: distinct stores in memory |
GLanzer and Cunitz List of words presented for 1-2 seconds then asked to recall Findings: words at beginning and end were remembered |
|
|
MSM evaluation : strengths |
1: Supporting experimental research, glanzer and cunitz, Peterson and Peterson. Makes valid suggestions 2: Supporting evidence from case studies, case of HM, lost large portion of brain, Lost LTM but stm was fine. Model valid in claiming unitary stores |
|
|
MSM evaluation: weakness |
1: Methodological flaws, low in ecological validity and mundane realism. Model is invalid 2: Contradictory case studies, Clive wearing lost LTM but procedural memory intact. Not separate stores so invalid |
|
|
Long term memory - types |
Episodic - personal diary, life events, emotions (EXPLICIT) Procedural - muscle memory, how to do things (IMPLICIT) Semantic - general IQ, facts shared by everyone (EXPLICIT) |
|
|
Long term memory - types |
Episodic - personal diary, life events, emotions (EXPLICIT) Procedural - muscle memory, how to do things (IMPLICIT) Semantic - general IQ, facts shared by everyone (EXPLICIT) |
|
|
Long term memory - evaluation strengths |
1: Evidence from brain scans support LTM; pet scans show diff parts of the brain are active when diff parts of the LTM are. Episodic - hippocampus, semantic - temporal lobe , procedural - cerebellum. Valid 2: case studies of amnesiacs support. Clive wearing - episodic and semantic memory ruined, procedural intact. |
|
|
Long term memory evaluation weaknesses |
Lacks core features of a science Case studies are idiographic and focus on a unique individual and can’t be generalised. Not valid |
|
|
WMM - who was it by? |
Baddeley and hitch |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - research: testing dual processing |
Baddeley Pps had to track a light whilst either completing a verbal or visual task Findings showed pps found it harder to complete the visual task showing it was using the same part of WMM |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - research: testing dual processing |
Baddeley Pps had to track a light whilst either completing a verbal or visual task Findings showed pps found it harder to complete the visual task showing it was using the same part of WMM |
|
|
WMM - research: duration of phonological loop |
Baddeley Visually shown words either short or multi syllable then asked to recall Findings showed a word length effect (shorter = easier to recall) |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - research: testing dual processing |
Baddeley Pps had to track a light whilst either completing a verbal or visual task Findings showed pps found it harder to complete the visual task showing it was using the same part of WMM |
|
|
WMM - research: duration of phonological loop |
Baddeley Visually shown words either short or multi syllable then asked to recall Findings showed a word length effect (shorter = easier to recall) |
|
|
WMM - research: dual tasks |
Bunge FMRI scans when pps were completing two tasks Findings showed increased brain activity |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - research: testing dual processing |
Baddeley Pps had to track a light whilst either completing a verbal or visual task Findings showed pps found it harder to complete the visual task showing it was using the same part of WMM |
|
|
WMM - research: duration of phonological loop |
Baddeley Visually shown words either short or multi syllable then asked to recall Findings showed a word length effect (shorter = easier to recall) |
|
|
WMM - research: dual tasks |
Bunge FMRI scans when pps were completing two tasks Findings showed increased brain activity |
|
|
WMM - evaluation strengths |
1: Supporting experimental research; baddeley dual processing, baddeley duration of PL, increases validity 2: Support from case studies of amnesiacs. KF motorbike crash accident - STM was damaged with visual info but verbal info was fine. Supports idea of separate PL and VS |
|
|
WMM - list components |
Central executive Episodic buffer Phonological loop (articulatory control, phonological store) Visuospatial sketchpad Long term memory |
|
|
WMM - central executive |
Control centre Directs attention to tasks Makes decisions Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - Phonological loop |
Auditory information Limited capacity AC: speech production, converts written material PS: holds verbal info in speech form |
|
|
WMM - visuospatial sketchpad |
Manipulation, planning and understand visual info Limited capacity Visual cache: stores visual data Inner scribe: arrangement of objects |
|
|
WMM - episodic buffer |
Extra temp storage system Limited capacity |
|
|
WMM - research: testing dual processing |
Baddeley Pps had to track a light whilst either completing a verbal or visual task Findings showed pps found it harder to complete the visual task showing it was using the same part of WMM |
|
|
WMM - research: duration of phonological loop |
Baddeley Visually shown words either short or multi syllable then asked to recall Findings showed a word length effect (shorter = easier to recall) |
|
|
WMM - research: dual tasks |
Bunge FMRI scans when pps were completing two tasks Findings showed increased brain activity |
|
|
WMM - evaluation strengths |
1: Supporting experimental research; baddeley dual processing, baddeley duration of PL, increases validity 2: Support from case studies of amnesiacs. KF motorbike crash accident - STM was damaged with visual info but verbal info was fine. Supports idea of separate PL and VS |
|
|
WMM - evaluation weakness |
1: methodologically flawed, uses lab experiments which lack ecological validity, and case studies which are idiographic. May be invalid 2: Lacking core feature of a science, case studies are idiographic and can’t be generalised. Not valid |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference theory - retroactive def |
Forgetting an old task/info due to learning a new one |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference theory - retroactive def |
Forgetting an old task/info due to learning a new one |
|
|
Interference theory research: type of material |
Mcgeogh and McDonald Had to learn a list of words, then given a new list to learn (either synonyms, antonyms, nonsense, unrelated numbers or control) Findings showed number of words recalled depended on how similar the words were |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference theory - retroactive def |
Forgetting an old task/info due to learning a new one |
|
|
Interference theory research: type of material |
Mcgeogh and McDonald Had to learn a list of words, then given a new list to learn (either synonyms, antonyms, nonsense, unrelated numbers or control) Findings showed number of words recalled depended on how similar the words were |
|
|
Interference theory - research: retro interference in real life |
Baddeley and hitch Rugby players asked to list all the games they had played Recall depended not on how long ago the games were but how many games they had played |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference theory - retroactive def |
Forgetting an old task/info due to learning a new one |
|
|
Interference theory research: type of material |
Mcgeogh and McDonald Had to learn a list of words, then given a new list to learn (either synonyms, antonyms, nonsense, unrelated numbers or control) Findings showed number of words recalled depended on how similar the words were |
|
|
Interference theory - research: retro interference in real life |
Baddeley and hitch Rugby players asked to list all the games they had played Recall depended not on how long ago the games were but how many games they had played |
|
|
Interference theory - evaluation strengths |
1: Supported by experimental research, e.g Mcgeogh and McDonald, Baddeley and hitch. Adds validity 2: Evidence is scientific, lab experiments mean high validity and control. Cause and effect can be established |
|
|
Interference forgetting - def |
When info of a similar format interrupts our ability of recalling something |
|
|
Interference theory- proactive def |
Cannot learn a new task due to a previously learnt task |
|
|
Interference theory - retroactive def |
Forgetting an old task/info due to learning a new one |
|
|
Interference theory research: type of material |
Mcgeogh and McDonald Had to learn a list of words, then given a new list to learn (either synonyms, antonyms, nonsense, unrelated numbers or control) Findings showed number of words recalled depended on how similar the words were |
|
|
Interference theory - research: retro interference in real life |
Baddeley and hitch Rugby players asked to list all the games they had played Recall depended not on how long ago the games were but how many games they had played |
|
|
Interference theory - evaluation strengths |
1: Supported by experimental research, e.g Mcgeogh and McDonald, Baddeley and hitch. Adds validity 2: Evidence is scientific, lab experiments mean high validity and control. Cause and effect can be established |
|
|
Interference theory evaluation weaknesses |
1: Lacks mundane realism, doesn’t reflect how memory is used in everyday life. Not valid 2: Incomplete, only explains some cases of forgetting. Relatively unimportant |
|
|
Retrieval failure |
Cue dependent forgetting Absence of cues |
|
|
Retrieval failure - meaningful cues |
Semantic Links to the info Forgetting likely to occur if cues at retrieval are different to cues at encoding |
|
|
Retrieval failure - meaningful cues |
Semantic Links to the info Forgetting likely to occur if cues at retrieval are different to cues at encoding |
|
|
Retrieval failure Context dependent cues |
Location weather etc Forgetting likely to occur when location is different at time of retrieval compared to time at encoding |
|
|
Retrieval failure - meaningful cues |
Semantic Links to the info Forgetting likely to occur if cues at retrieval are different to cues at encoding |
|
|
Retrieval failure Context dependent cues |
Location weather etc Forgetting likely to occur when location is different at time of retrieval compared to time at encoding |
|
|
Retrieval failure - State dependent cues |
Mental emotional state Forgetting likely to occur if mental state is different at encoding to retrieval |
|
|
Retrieval failure research : semantic cues |
Tulving and pearl stone Word list go remember, then asked to recall Group 1: free recall Group 2: had categories Group with categories remembered more |
|
|
Retrieval failure - research: state dependent cues |
Goodwin Medical students asked to learn a list of words either sober or drunk Asked to recall either sober or drunk |
|
|
Retrieval failure evaluation strengths |
1: Supported by evidence, tulving and pearl stone, goodwin adds validity 2: Evidence relies on lab experiments. High control so can establish cause and effect |
|
|
Retrieval failure evaluation weaknesses |
1: Lacks mundane realism, lists aren’t representative of how memory is used |
|
|
EWT - key points |
Misleading questions given to eye witnesses Post event discussion can distort memory |
|
|
EWT - key points |
Misleading questions given to eye witnesses Post event discussion can distort memory |
|
|
EWT - research : loftus and Palmer |
Leading Qs about car accident More violent the verb higher speed prediction |
|
|
Post event discussion research: gabbert |
Two people would watch a crime video from diff perspectives. Control group did not discuss. One group did discuss. Those who discussed reported 71% incorrect info |
|
|
EWT evaluation strengths |
1: high in reliability, research uses lab experiments eg standardised procedures so replicable 2: Practical applications, can earn justice systems and led to development of cognitive interview |
|
|
EWT - evaluation weakness |
1: Research is low in ecological validity, watching a video clip is artificial so not generalisable 2: Contradictory findings Yuille and cutshall: interviewed witnesses to real life robbery 4 months after. We’re all given misleading QS but all were accurate |
|
|
Anxiety research: christianson and hubinette |
110 real witnesses analysed. Some were onlookers some directly threatened. Those with highest anxiety had best recall |
|
|
Anxiety research : Johnson and Scott |
Waiting room; argument and bloody knife or pen Pps then shown photos and asked to identify Pen had better accuracy |
|
|
Anxiety research : Johnson and Scott |
Waiting room; argument and bloody knife or pen Pps then shown photos and asked to identify Pen had better accuracy |
|
|
Anxiety - evaluation strengths |
1: Christianson and hubinette has high ecological validity. Anxiety wasn’t artificial so can be generalised
|
|
|
Anxiety research : Johnson and Scott |
Waiting room; argument and bloody knife or pen Pps then shown photos and asked to identify Pen had better accuracy |
|
|
Anxiety - evaluation strengths |
1: Christianson and hubinette has high ecological validity. Anxiety wasn’t artificial so can be generalised
|
|
|
Anxiety Evaluation weakness |
1: christianson and hubinette was a natural experiment so no cause and effect 2: Individual differences, neuroticism means lower levels of accuracy emotional sensitivity may affect this 3: Johnson and Scott May be testing surprise rather than anxiety |
|
|
Cognitive interview |
Minimises distortion Listen to witness Open ended qs Avoid interrupting |
|
|
Cognitive interview |
Minimises distortion Listen to witness Open ended qs Avoid interrupting |
|
|
Cognitive interview : components |
Report everything Context reinstatement Change order Change perspective |
|
|
Cognitive interview evaluation strengths |
1: Supporting evidence Guiselman - pps shown a video of crime then either asked question in standard or cognitive interview or through hypnosis. Cognitive was best |
|
|
Cognitive interview evaluation strengths |
1: Supporting evidence Guiselman - pps shown a video of crime then either asked question in standard or cognitive interview or through hypnosis. Cognitive was best |
|
|
Cognitive interview evaluation weaknesses |
1: Practical problems, time consuming police need specialist training 2: Not all techniques were viewed favourably, some may be incorrect and cause confusion |
