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;
60 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Name some research into the duration of the STM |
Peterson and Peterson 1959
Nonsense trigrams |
|
|
Outline the procedure of Peterson&Peterson study 1959 |
PPs given a set of nonsense trigrams and asked to recall in order after a delay of 3-18 seconds (up in 3 sec increments). In this delay they had to count back from a 3 digit number (The Brown Peterson Technique) |
|
|
Outline the findings and conclusions of Peterson&Peterson study 1959 |
80% recall after 3 seconds, 2% after 18 seconds. Duration of STM is thus not much more than 18seconds. |
|
|
Criticisms of Peterson&Peterson study 1959 |
1. Trigrams are lacking in high mundane reality 2. Interference from numbers could have caused displacement- not the decay they claimed. Rietman (1974) used auditory tones so as not to interfere with verbal rehearsal and found a much longer duration. 3. Nairne et al found recall up to 96 seconds 4. STRENGTH Lab experiment made it easy to see cause and effect |
|
|
Name some theories into the capacity of the STM |
Miller (1956) identified span of 7 +/- 2 chunks Jacobs (1887) said we can store 9.3 digits or 7.3 letters |
|
|
Criticisms of theories into capacity of the STM |
Cowan (2001) meta-analysis found 4 chunks more realistic Simon (1974) found chunk size matters in relation into duration Jacobs age differences. 8yo recall 6.6 digits, 19yo recall 8.6 |
|
|
Name research into duration of the LTM |
Bahrik 1975, yearbook recall |
|
|
Explain Bahrik's 1975 research |
392 American ex-students aged 17-74. 1. Free recall 2. Photo recognition 3. Name recognition 4. Name and photo matching |
|
|
Findings of Bahrik's 1975 research |
90% face & name recognition 34yr 80% name recognition 48yr 90% 14yr 60% free recall 15 years 40% face recognition 48yr 30% free recall 30yr Cues are sometimes needed, recognition is better than recall. |
|
|
Criticisms of Bahrik's study |
STRENGTH Meaningful stimuli, relevant Unclear whether memory drop off at age is because of duration limits or age deterioration (Ref to Jacobs) |
|
|
Name some research into semantic/acoustic coding |
Baddley (1966) gave PPs lists of acoustically or semantically similar words and asked for immediate recall or recall after 20mins |
|
|
Results of Baddley's 1966 study |
Acoustically similar words were recalled better in the STM but semantically similar more in the LTM |
|
|
Criticisms of Baddley's 1966 study |
20minutes is not an accurate representation of LTM timeframes Wickens et al (1979) found STM sometimes uses semantic codes |
|
|
Who devised the MSM of memory |
Atkinson & Shiffrin 1968 |
|
|
Explain the MSM of memory |
I E S R O |
|
|
Explain some research that supports the MSM |
Terry 2005. 39 students shown ads no more than 10 months old and 30 seconds long, repeated measures. Recall immediate or after 3min written distractor task. Immediate had primacy and recency, delay only primacy. HM as LTM and STM being two completely separate stores. |
|
|
Problems with Terry's 2005 study? |
1. Lacks eco validity 2. Lacks construct validity, only explores one tiny aspect of memory 3. Demand characteristics |
|
|
Criticisms of the MSM |
It's too simple. Shallice & Warrington (1970) found KF struggled with auditory info more than visual, suggesting separate stores. LTM involves more than just rehearsal, Craig and Lockhart (1972) suggested levels of processing which was supported by Craik and Tulving (1975) |
|
|
Explain Craik & Tulving's study 1975 |
PPs given nouns and asked a question that involved shallow or deep processing. They remembered words more from the deep processing. |
|
|
How does Scoville and Milner's 1966 study into HM support the MSM? |
He couldn't form any more LTMs but had completely functioning STM, just lost said data after the 20 second duration (Peterson 1959). This evidence that they are separate stores supports the MSM. |
|
|
What is the role of the central executive in the WMM? |
To allocate tasks to the slave systems: phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketch pad. |
|
|
What are the names of all the stores in the WMM? |
Central executive, Phonological Loop (phonological store & articulatory process), Visuo-spatial sketch pad (visual cache & inner scribe), Episodic buffer |
|
|
What is the role of the phonological loop? |
Deal with auditory data. Contains... Phonological store: holds words you hear Articulatory process: Silently repeats words as form of maintenance rehearsal |
|
|
What is the role of the visuo-spatial sketch pad? |
To plan spatial tasks. Contains (Logie 1995)... Visual cache: Stores info about visual items (e.g. colour) Inner scribe: Stores arrangement of visual field |
|
|
What is the role of the episodic buffer? |
Added by Baddley in 2000, it acts as an overflow store for all kinds of data. It integrates data from all stores and records events that happen. Send info to the LTM. |
|
|
Strengths of the WMM |
Dual task performance Evidence from KF, SC and LH |
|
|
How does dual task performance support the WMM? |
Hitch and Baddley 1976 PPs were given a statement and asked to say True or False (Task 1), this occupies the central executive. Task 2 either involved the articulatory loop (saying words repeatedly) or both CE and AL (saying random digits) Task 1 was slower when 2 involved CE&AL which shows CE is a component of working memory. |
|
|
How does KF (Shallice and Warrington study 1970) support the WMM? |
His ST forgetting was greater for auditory than visual and furthermore worse for verbal material than meaningful sound, this showed that damage was restricted only to the phonological loop. |
|
|
How did Trojano & Grossi's 1995 research into SC support the WMM? |
He had good learning abilities other than for word pairs presented out loud which shows damage to the phonological loop. |
|
|
How did Farah et al's 1988 study into LH support the WMM? |
He performed well in spatial tasks but not those involving visual imagery which suggests separate visual and spatial systems (visual cache and inner scribe). |
|
|
What is the problem with using brain damaged patients as a way to support the WMM? |
Individual differences in general, but more specifically the differences caused by the accident which change behaviour in general which will in turn impact results. |
|
|
What are the limitations of the WMM? |
The central executive is too vague, it explains barely anything. EVR (Eslinger & Damasio 1985) was good at reasoning but terrible at decision making after receiving brain damage- this showed his CE was intact but not wholly functional. But there's no explanation! Can't apply to blind people. |
|
|
What are the different types of LTM? |
Episodic: Memories. Personal experiences. Semantic: General knowledge- often evolves from episodic as we learn through experience. Procedural: Skills, acquired through repetition and practice. |
|
|
What is a procedural memory? |
Knowing HOW. Procedural memories are this. |
|
|
What is declaritive memory? |
Knowing THAT. Episodic and semantic memories are this. |
|
|
Tulving 1960s Recall study |
Students given a list of 20 words to remember then recall. Recall was better when they grouped items in meaningful categories. Cues also helped to prompt memories that were there, just not accessible. |
|
|
Who devised the idea of different types of LTM? |
Tulving |
|
|
According to Tulving, what part of the brain is responsible for episodic memory? |
Medial temporal lobe- specifically the hippocampus |
|
|
What evidence is there to support Tulving's idea of three types of LTM? |
Brain scans showed that different areas of the brain were active for different kinds of LTM. Episodic= hippocampus, temporal lobe, frontal lobe Semantic= temporal lobe Procedural= cerebellum, basal ganglia & limbic system |
|
|
What is proactive interference? |
Past learning interferes with current attempts to learn something. |
|
|
What is retroactive interference? |
Current attempts to learn something interfere with past memories/learning. |
|
|
What study showed presence of RI? |
Muller and Pilzecker 1900. PPs memorized nonsense syllables for 6mins then recalled them either immediately or after a task where they were shown 3 paintings and asked to describe them. Recall was better immediately. |
|
|
What study showed presence of PI? |
Benton Underwood (1957). Metastudy. If participants memorised over 10 lists, 24hr recall was 20% but only one list was 70%. |
|
|
What real world study proved presence of PI and RI? |
Baddley and Hitch 1977 Rugby players recalled the games they played- some who played every game and some who didn't. If decay theory was right they would all remember the same amount BUT players who played all games proportionally forgot more games bc of interference. |
|
|
Problems with research into interference? |
A lot of it is done in labs. Anderson (2000) said interference can only account for so much. Accessibility VS availability. Which is it? Tulving said availability. |
|
|
Name a study into the reliability of EWT due to leading questions |
Loftus and Palmer (1974) Leading questions "smashed" "bumped" cars. Smashed 40mph Contacted 31mph BROKEN GLASS Smashed more than twice as many yes as hit |
|
|
Tell me about 3 studies Loftus did into reconstructed memories |
BROKEN GLASS. "Smash" made people say there was broken glass at car-crash scene. KID IN MALL. Telling kids they got lost, 5/24 believed it UNHEALTHY FOOD Planted memories of feeling sick after eating certain foods, at picnic they then didn't want to eat them. |
|
|
"Do you get headaches frequently?" "__ per week" "Do you get headaches occasionally, if so, how often?" "__ per week" -Loftus |
2.2 for frq 0.7 for occ |
|
|
How might post-event discussion impact accuracy of EWT? |
Conformity (Gabbert 2003). 71% who discussed the event mistakedly aquired new memories. Repeat interviewing (LaRooy 2005) Common with kids, pick up info from the interviewer. |
|
|
Evaluate research into the impact of misleading info on EWT |
-Cutshall (1989) found accuracy irl in Canada with PPs giving accurate recounts after 4months of armed robbery -Loftus was a lab experiment -Age! Think back to Jacobs. Old people could struggle |
|
|
Research into impact of anxiety on EWT? |
Johnson & Scott 1987. PPs in waiting room, hear argument. Man comes out with pen (low anxiety) or knife (high anxiety) then asked to recall who the guy was. 43% accuracy pen condition, 33% knife. YERKES DODSON |
|
|
Evaluate research into anxiety impact on EWT |
Christianson & Hubinette (1993) 58 witnesses of bank robbery in Sweden. Most stressed were most accurate in their recall. Pickel (1998) the chicken guy, high surprise the least accurate. SURPRISE NOT ANXIETY. Bothwell (1987) PPs assessed for neuroticism. Neurotics less accurate w anxiety, stable more accurate w anxiety. |
|
|
Name the 4 steps of the Cognitive Interview |
1. Mental reinstatement of original context 2. Report everything (free recall) 3. Change order of events 4. Change perspective |
|
|
Why do we do mental reinstatement in the cognitive interview? |
Makes memories accessible through contextual and emotional cues. |
|
|
Why do we do free recall in the cognitive interview? |
Memories are interconnected, one seemingly irrelevant one may trigger important info. |
|
|
Why do we do change order of events in the cognitive interview? |
Stops the pre-existing schema from impacting what you say; tests reliability. |
|
|
Why do we do change perspective in the cognitive interview? |
Disrupt schema impact. Prompts recall of different data. |
|
|
Evaluate the cognitive interview |
Hard to establish effectiveness bc it's a collection of techniques not one procedure. STRENGTH Milne 2002 found better recall with CI than just being told to say what happened then "try again". Quantity/Quality. 81% increase in accurate but 61% in non accurate. Kohnken 1999. Time consuming |
|
|
Who coined the term Flashbulb Memory? |
Brown and Kulik in 1977 |
|
|
Evaluate Craik & Lockhart's Levels of Processing theory |
SUPPORT from Craik & Tulving 1975 (shallow and deep processing questions) Mandler 1967. Organising words into sections helps memorise them. |
