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;
43 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Memory |
..... |
|
What is the sensory memory, STM and LTM? |
-Sensory memory is the info taken in through our senses from the environment -STM is the part that holds all the info and individually thinks about it unconsciously -LTM is the part that stores life memories from the distant past |
|
Describe the 3 types of memories in terms of capacity, encoding and duration as part of the Memory Store Model |
Sensory: CAPACITY: very large DURATION: less that 5 seconds ENCODING: iconic - see, echoic- hear, haptic- touch STM: CAPACITY: 7+/- 2 items 5-9 items DURATION: less than 30 secs ENCODING: acoustically LTM: CAPACITY: unlimited DUARION: potentially a life time ENCODING: semantically |
|
What is meant by the term coding, capacity and duration for memory |
Duration = how long a memory lasts before it is no longer available Capacity= measure of how much can be held in memory Encoding= way info is changed so it can be stored and retrieved when needed |
|
How is info passed along from sensory to LTM? |
Sensory ---> STM, you must pay attention to rememberinfo for it to be transferred to STM STM---> LTM, you must carry out maintenance rehearsal (repetitive) for it to be transferred to LTM LTM--- stay, you must carry out prolonged rehearsal (going over info) If memory is decayed and displaced but is needed from LTM it will be sent back to STM andretrieved |
|
What are the 4 main features of the Multi-Store-Model? |
-Unitary stores meaning there’s only 1 STMand LTM store -Rehearsal is necessary forthe formation of LTM memories -Separate stores so each store is separate and has its own characteristics e.g encoding, duration -Linear meaning info moves from one store to another and the STM must process infobefore LTM |
|
What is the Evidence for coding |
Coding Baddeley - gave 4 groups 4 different world lists 1) acoustically similar 2) acoustically dissimilar 3) semantically similar 4) semantically dissimilar - when asked to recall straight away in the right order they struggled w acoustic lists- STM ENCODES ACOUSTICALLY - when asked to recall 20mins after in the right order they struggled w semantic lists- LTM- Semantic |
|
What is the evidence for capacity |
Capacity Jacobs - Ask to recall as many numbers in order a they could - Given digits and asked to recall them. Digit mean=9.3/letter mean=7.3 (Digit span)
Miller's - No=7+or-2. Chunking=easily recall 5 words/letters |
|
What is the evidence for duration |
Duration STM Peterson & Peterson - STUDY: 24 undergraduates: 3 letters to remember. Distraction : count backwards from 3 digit number to prevent rehearsal - FINDING: Retention interval up, accuracy down= STM duration short- 18 seconds LTM Bahrick - STUDY: 392 participants (17-74) - 2 conditions 1) tested recall of yearbook - 50 people 2) free recall of names they could remember 1) After 15 yrs 90% recognition- 48 yrs 70% 2) Worse- 15 yrs 60% - 48yrs 30% - FINDING: LTM can last a lifetime |
|
Evaluate coding, capacity and duration |
Strengths High External Validity- Duration Bahrick studied real memories=external validity - However confounding variables not controlled for Weaknesses OverEstimated- Capacity Miller overestimated STM capacity (7 items). Cowan (2001)=STM capacity=4 chunks of info. Artificial Stimuli- Coding The stimuli (words) were artificial and had no meaning. Meaningful information may be encoded semantically in the STM (Baddeley). Findings=limited application. No meaning in Stimuli - Duration Peterson and Peterson study stimuli artificial=didn't reflect everyday life=no external validity |
|
Evaluate the strengths of the MSM |
Strengths: - A lot of scientific research supporting MSM- research from Glanzer and Cunitz proves LTM and STM are separate stores. Ppts were asked to recallwords in order from the list. They only remembered the first and last words this is called the primary and recency effect
- Brain scanning techniques such as PET scans and MRI. Beardsley found that this shows separatestores as STM and LTM in dif parts of brain ---STM= prefrontal and LTM=hiccocampus |
|
Evaluate the weaknesses of the MSM |
- KF suggested that there is more than 1 store of the STM and its not unitary. KF has a bike accident and suffered damage to STM. KF was good visually but bad acoustically demonstrating there are 2 separate stores in STM questioning the validity of the model -Evidence that not unitarystores-WMM suggests STM has 4 dif stores (central exec, phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad & episodic buffer) -research of amnesiac patients shown 4 types LTM(semantic, episodic, procedural, and perceptual)-show not unitary stores |
|
What is the WMM? |
Working Memory Model: -A representation of the STM which describes it as a tempstore for the manipulation of information -detailed description of the STM, sees it as manipulative instead of passive -seen as active processor of dif types of info -uses 4 components to process info |
|
What are the 4 different components of the WMM? |
Central executive- controls the slave systems Phonological loop- phonological state & articulatory process Visuo-spatial sketchpad (inner eye) - visual cache and inner scribe Episodic buffer |
|
Explain the purpose, capacity and encoding of the central executive ? |
The Central Executive: >has a supervisoryfunction & controls slave systems - tells other components what to do >monitors incoming data and makes decisionson how to allocate slave systems >sifts through information to reach decisions>balances attention given to tasks Capacity -One strand of info at a time- very limited Encoding -isn’t limited to sight orsound, modality free |
|
Explain the purpose, capacity and encoding of the phonological loop ? |
Phonological loop: >active during a verbal task by processing info from sound (written and spoken) >preserves order of info >divided into 2 states;phonological state (inner ear & stores words you hear) + articulatory process(inner voice, rehearsal of any words being considered) Capacity - 2 seconds worth of info Encoding - Acoustic |
|
Explain the purpose, capacity and encoding of the visuo-spatial sketchpad ? |
The Visio SpatialSketchpad: >inner eye, active during visual task to process images ina way that allows us to manipulate them >further divided into; visualcache (stores visual data) + inner scribe (records arrangement of objects) Capacity - 3-4 objects Encoding - Visual |
|
Explain the purpose, capacity and encoding of the episodic buffer ? |
Episodic buffer: >temporary storage component of central executive >integrates visual, verbal and spatial info into single memory >links working memory to LTM Capacity - 4 chunks Encoding - Modality free |
|
What is the evidence for the 4 components of the WMM? |
Central Executive Procedure: Using dual task technique, Task 1 see if A or B is true or false task 2 Saying the word 'THE THE THE' which occupies the articulatory loop. Task 3 say random digits and task 4 was a control group Findings: When task 1 was combined with task 2 and 3 results dropped dramatically in comparison to task 4 Conclusion - Using 2 tasks that use the same component of memory causes difficulty to the CE and as CE was used it shows it is in WMM Phonological loop Procedure: - Ppts asked to recall a list of monosyllabic words ( 1 syllable) and a list of polysyllabic words (more than syllable) Findings: -Ppts could recall more words on monosyllabic words as could reverse shorter words better and quicker provides evidence theres limited capacity in PL Articulatory process: Procedure: - Ppts asked to recall a list of monosyllabic words ( 1 syllable) and a list of polysyllabic words (more than syllable) whilst saying THE THE THE Findings: - Recall was not better but worse as the recall of the word THE displaces the words trying to be rehearsed evidence using the articulatory process Visuo-spatial sketchpad Procedure: - Ppts asked to complete two tasks, Task 1 track a moving light with a pointer , Task 2 describe the angles on the letter F or perform a verbal task Findings: - Ppts could track a light and do a verbal task but not describe angles and track light as verbal actions and visual actions are separate components of WMM. Shows VSSP is a separate component of WMM Episodic buffer Procedure: - Immediately recall a random list of words and then asked to crawl another list of words related to them Findings: - Performance better for related words shows the idea of an immediate memory isn't visual or phonological and hence provides evidence towards episodic buffer |
|
Evaluate the WMM |
STRENGTHS CLINICAL EVIDENCE: -KF suffered brain damage to STM, impaired forlearning verbally but not visually (difficulty with sound but could recall digits) -suggested phonological loop damaged so supports sep stores BRAIN SCANNING SUPPORTSWMM: -PET scan showed when ppts asked to do dif activities, dif parts of brain used-when tasks became harder, CE worked harder in left prefrontal cortex WEAKNESSES: Central Executive lacksclarity: -psychologists says it doesn’t explain anything, Baddeley said least explainedcomponent - This means WMM isn't explained properly STM - The WMM only considers STM not LTM or sensory memory unlike the MSM and therefore it is not a comprehensive model of memory |
|
What are the 4 types of LTM? |
1) Procedural- ' knowing how' -knowing how to do things -implicit memories and difficult to explain eg how to ride bike -most occur in early life -associated with cerebellum involved in controlof motor skills 2) Declarative- 'knowing that' - explicit memories - memory of facts and events and refers to those memories that can be recalled consciously e.g What is the capital of France 3) Episodic memories- PERSONAL -falls under declarative (THAT) -memories recalled consciously -autobiographical events -strength of memory influenced by emotions at time and coding -associated with hippocampus 4) Semantic memories-KNOWLEDGE -falls under declarative (THAT) -memories recalled consciously -don’t remember when we first learned -strength associated with degree of processing in encoding -coding mainly fontal and temporal lobes |
|
Evaluate the LTM |
Strengths: CLINICAL EVIDENCE: -Studies of HM and Clive Wearing, amnesiac patients, episodic memory impaired but procedural and semantic intact -HM could form new procedural but not episodic memories LIFE APPLICATION: -identifying dif stores means psychologists can try &improve lives -Belleville showed episodic memory could be improved ofppl w cog impairment Weaknesses: BAD CASE STUDY: -Case studies cannot be replicated andfindings influenced by individual so cannot generalise -show detail of personal cases - Lack external validity THREE OR TWO TYPES OF LTM: - Psychologists argue there are two types of LTM, procedural and declarative and semantic and episodic come under one store which is unclear |
|
What are the explanations of forgetting for STM? |
-Trace decay--- forgettingoccurs as result of automatic decay or fading ofa memory due to physical or chemical change in nervoussystem - DURATION -Displacement--- when STM isfull new info displaces old info and takes its place- CAPACITY |
|
What are the 2 explanations of forgetting for LTM? |
1) Interference theory: 2) Retrieval failure |
|
Explain the interference theory |
Proactive interference: -occurs when OLDER MEMORIES disrupt recall of NEWER MEMORIES -degree of forgetting is greater when memories similar Retroactive interference: -occurs when NEWER MEMORIES disrupt recall of OLDER MEMORIES -degree of forgetting is greater when memories similar |
|
Evaluate the interference theory |
Strengths: Lab studies evidence: -Mc Geoch & McDonald show retroactive -6 dif groups of ppts had to learn 2 word lists. The 1st was learned100% accurately -recall of 1st list depended on nature of 2nd(synonyms list worst) -showed new word list interfered w old & more similar memories, theworse recall -lab experiment so high control and is valid explanation Real life application: -Baddeley & Hitch wanted to see if interference or time period had more impact -asked rugby players names of teams they’d played in season & players hadmissed games -they could recall teams from a while ago if no teamin-between -showed it can apply to real life Weaknesses: Lack mundane realism -artificialstimuli so not valid measure of LTM forgetting -time period between learning word and recalling is unrealistically short soecological validity is low & so lab studies may overestimate interference Cognitive process: - Theory does clearly not identify the cognitives working process |
|
What is a cue and what do cues consist of ? |
A trigger that allows us to access a memory Include: Meaningful cues- cues deliberately linked to info in order for the info to be remembered e.g ROYGBIV Internal cues- internal psychological or physiological state indirectly linked External cues- from the context or environment you are in indirectly linked |
|
What is retrieval failure? |
A form of forgetting wheninfo is available in LTM but not accessible aswe don’t have the necessary cues |
|
Explain the retrieval failure theory |
1) Context dependent forgetting (external cues): -forgetting occurs when external environment is different at recall than it was at codingeg sitting in same room you learn as where you do exam will help you do better 2) State dependent forgetting (internal cues): -forgetting occurs when individual’s internal environment is different to what it wasat coding e.g better recall if you were happy at coding and happy at recall |
|
What is the evidence for context dependent forgetting and state dependent forgetting? |
CONTEXT DEPENDENT FORGETTING -Godden and Baddeley carried studyfor divers underwater -gave word list to learn underwater or on land and created 4 conditions(land+land, land+sea, sea+sea, sea+land) -findings accuracy 40% lower in non-matching conditions due to retrievalfailure STATE DEPENDENT FORGETTING -Carter and Cassaday gaveantihistamines to ppts so they were slightly drowsy -created 4 conditions to learn and recall (normal+ normal, normal+ drowsy,drowsy +drowsy, drowsy+ normal) -mismatched state recall was worse BOTH STRENGTHS |
|
Evaluate the retrieval failure theory |
Strengths: EVIDENCE FROM: carter and Cassaday and Baddeley and Godden REAL LIFE APPLICATION: -used in cognitive interview getting eyewitnesses to recall info, they recall all aspects of environment -research that smell acts as contextrelated cue and can help dementia or Alzheimer’ssufferers as exposed to smell ofchildhood Weaknesses: RECALL VS RECOGNITION -Godden and Baddeley replicated underwater experiment butused recognition instead of recall (ppts say ifrecognise word from list) so only affect memory in certain way QUESTIONING CONTEXT EFFECTS -Baddeley argues contexts have to be very dif to make animpact and in real world they’re not; in experiment easyto create different -environments but not in real world |
|
What is misleading information? |
incorrectinfo given to eyewitness after event. |
|
What is a leading question and describe Loftus and Palmers experiment |
A question whichsuggests an answer through its phrasing -Loftus and Palmer: Aim: >to investigate whether leading Qs distort the accuracy of eyewitness immediate recall Procedure: > carried out lab experiment in which 45 ppts watched film of traffic accident >questioned them about accident >5 dif groups asked different leading questions>1 group asked “howfast were cars going when they HIT each other?” > every group was asked the same question but with different verbs e.g Contacted, bumped, hit, smashed , collided IV= Verb DV= Speed estimates Findings: >when verb SMASHED was used mean of 40.5 mph given (highest) > lowest was CONTACTED 31.8 mph |
|
What is a post event discussion and describe Gabbert et al experiment |
Occurs whenwitnesses may discuss what they saw in event after Gabbert et al : Aim: >investigated effects of Post event discussion on the accuracy of EWT Procedure: >pairs watched video of same crime from dif angles so each could see dif things >pairs then discussed what they saw in video Findings: >findings showed 71% ppts mistakenly recalled things not in theirvideo from discussion >controlgroup with no discussion had 0% mistaken recall Conclusion: >concludes people go along with each other to conform |
|
Explain how PED and leading Qs might influence the accuracy of EWT |
-responsebias explanation suggesting that wording has no real effect on memories but influencesthem to choose a higher speed estimate -substitution explanation; -- wording of question does actually change memory >did another experiment with 150 students, watched film of accident andgiven questionnaire >asked smashed or hit or control group no question >a week later asked if they saw any broken glass >those who had smashed question gave higher yes answer >showed wasn’t response bias but rather substitution, whole memory changed |
|
Evaluate the research into the role of misleading questions and PED on EWT |
STRENGTHS: Internalvalidity and reliability: -lab experiments can directly manipulate IVto effect DV so strong causal relationship -high replicability and reliable Realworld application: -criminal justice system reliant on eyewitnesses so this warns lawyers and police in problems of LQ ns PED WEAKNESSES Demand Characteristics: - In EWT people watch car accidents, robberies etc and be asked to chew gum or be asked Q's asked in a certain way - the people could then conclude a certain answer is expected from them and thus they behave in a different way we want them to - thus misleading and PEDs might no actually affect EWT in real life Low external validity- Artificialtasks: -ecological validity low as watching video not real life so stress levelsdiffer, pay less attention, ppts had no responsibility |
|
Describe how Anxiety has a positive impact on recall accuracy |
Anxiety has a positive effect on recall: -stress of witnessing a crime creates physiological arousal, leads to fight or flight response which improves alertness Procedure: -Yuille and Cutshall conducted a study of real life shooting, shop owner shot thief -13 witnesses agreed to take part in study -interviews were held straight away and then 4-5 months after original police interviews -in these, accuracy was measured by number details given & witnesses asked to rate how stressed they felt from 1-7 & if any emotional problems since Findings: -witnesses were very accurate in accounts and little change from the 2 interviews -the ppts who reported the highest stress level were most accurate (88% compared to 75% in low stress group) -showed higher anxiety caused better recall of events |
|
Describe how Anxiety has a negative impact on recall accuracy |
Anxiety has a negative effect on recall:
-anxiety creates arousal in body which prevents us paying attention so recall is worse -Johnson and Scott looked at the impact of weapons and recall to see impact of anxiety Procedure: -they told ppts they were in a lab study -whilst in waiting room, ppts heard argument in next room -in low anxiety situation, a man waked out holding a pen with grease on hands -in high anxiety situation, a man walked out holding a knife covered in blood and heard glass shattering Findings: -ppts later asked to pick man from set of 50 photos -49% of ppts could recall the pen man accurately - only 33% could recall knife man -showed higher anxiety situation caused worse recall due to tunnel theory (that persons attention narrows to focus on weapon) |
|
What was Yerkes and Dodson's law |
-Yerkes and Dodson said the relationship between arousaland performance looks like an inverted U on a graph -their theory was applied to EWT >low anxiety causes lower levels of recall accuracy >as anxiety increases so does recall accuracy>but there comes a point of optimal anxiety, anything above it then theirrecall suffers a decline |
|
Evaluate research into the effects of anxiety on EWT |
STRENGTHS: high ecological validity - as its not a lab study thus there's no artificial stimuli - there will not be any demand characteristics as it was a real life event High internal validity - strong causal relationship in Johnson and Scott experiment - lab study replicable and controlled WEAKNESSES Fieldstudies lack control: -researchers eg Yuille and Cutshallinterview ppts a while after events -other things could’ve happened in time eg post event discussion-therefore extraneous variables could impact accuracy Ethicalissues: -creating anxiety in patients is risky –could be unethical as puts ppts subject to harm -that’s why real life studies better -doesn’t question the results but questions the need for research, is it worthit? |
|
What is a cognitive interview |
Thecognitive interview is a method of interviewing eyewitnesses in a style whichhelps them remember more accurate memories |
|
What are the 4 main techniques which improve EWT |
1) REPORT EVERYTHING -witnesses encouraged to report everythingthey remember, whether relevant or not as they can trigger bigger details 2) REINSTATE THE CONTEXT -Witness should mentally return to crimescene and remember things like weather -this helps with context dependent forgetting 3) REVERSE THE ORDER -events should be recalled in differentorders eg middle to end and then final to beginning -this is done to prevent people reporting their expectation of events anddishonesty 4) CHANGE PERSPECTIVE -witnesses should recall event from otherspoint of view -this is done to disrupt any expectations and schema |
|
Evaluate the CI as a mean of improving EWT |
STRENGTHS:
Supportfor Effectiveness CI: -met analysis by Kohnken et al combineddata from 50 studies -the ECI consistently provided more correct info than standard interview -shows practical values of it
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES: - useful for interviewing the elderly as the negative stereotype of elderly having bad memory thus they aren't always interviewed - However the CI stresses this and thus asks to report every detail even if irrelevant this helps overcome their bad memory and help the interviewer
WEAKNESSES;
CI is time consuming: -police may be reluctant to use as takesway more time than a standard interview eg more time needed to help witnessrelax -this makes it more unlikely that CI will be properly used
CI creates an increase in inaccurate information: -the techniques used to create moreaccurate info may also increase amount of inaccurate info -Kohnken et al found an 81% increase in correct info but a 61% increase inincorrect info
|