Aqa Gcse Psychology Unit 1 - Memory

Front 1

What is the Multi Store Model of Memory?

Back 1

The idea that information passes through a series of memory stores.

Front 2

What is Encoding?

Back 2

The first stage in the MSM,

changing information so that it can be stored.

Front 3

What is Storage?

Back 3

The second stage in the MSM,

holding information in the memory system

Front 4

What is Retrieval?

Back 4

The third stage in the MSM,

recovering information from storage.

Front 5

1. What is the Sensory Store?

2. How long does it hold information for?

3. What is its capacity?

Back 5

1. The first place of storage in the MSM,

holds information received from the senses.

2. Less than one second.

3. Very limited.

Front 6

1. What is the Short-term Store?

2. How long does it hold information for?

3. What is its capacity?

Back 6

1. The second place of storage in the MSM, information comes here if attention is drawn to it in the sensory store.

2. Less than one minute.

3. Approx. 7 chunks of information.

Front 7

1. What is the Long-term Store?

2. How long does it hold information for?

3. What is its capacity?

Back 7

1. The last and largest place of storage in the MSM, information comes here after rehearsal from the short-term store.

2. Up to a lifetime.

3. Unlimited.

Front 8

Aim and Method of Peterson and Peterson (1959)

Back 8

Aim: To see if rehearsal is necessary to hold information in the short-term store.

Method: Participants remembered 3 letters (GYK, MWT), but immediately counted backwards in 3s for different lengths of time, then told to recall the letters in order.

Front 9

What are the Results and Conclusion of Peterson and Peterson (1959)?

Back 9

Results: Participants forgot virtually all information after 18 seconds.

Conclusion: We cannot hold information in the short-term store without rehearsal.

Front 10

Evaluate the Peterson and Peterson study.

Back 10

1. Unrealistic lab study, therefore lacks ecological validity

2. Helps us understand why it is so difficult to remember reg numbers, etc. without rehearsal.

3. Doesn't explain why we do not rehearse some everyday things but still remember them.

Front 11

What is the Aim and Method of Murdock (1962)?

Back 11

Aim: To support the MSM.

Method: Participants learnt a list of words one at a time, for two seconds each, then recalled the words in any order.

Front 12

Results and Conclusion of Murdock

Back 12

Results: The last words were recalled first (the recency effect), then the first words (the primacy effect), but the middle words were forgotten.

Conlusion: This provides evidence for separate S-T and L-T Stores. The recency effect shows the last words were still in S-T, primacy shows the first words were in L-T.

Front 13

Evaluate the Murdock study.

Back 13

1. Unrealistic lab study, therefore lacks ecological validity

2.

3.

Front 14

Practical applications of MSM

Back 14

This explains why registration numbers, postcodes etc. never exceed 7 numbers.

Front 15

What is Reconstructive Memory?

Back 15

Altering our recollection of things so they make more sense to us.

Front 16

What are the Aim and Method of Bartlett (1932)?

Back 16

Aim: To see if unfamiliar information would be altered when remembered.

Method: Participants read 'War of the Ghosts', then asked to retell as accurately as possible several times in the following weeks.

Front 17

What are the Results and Conclusion of Bartlett?

Back 17

Results: It was difficult to remember spirit-related parts and parts that didn't make sense were changed. Each time, the story changed some more.

Conclusion: Memory is influenced by our own beliefs.

Front 18

Evaluate Bartlett.

Back 18

1. Explains why different cultures find it harder to agree.

2. Difficult to measure accuracy of stories.

3. 'War of the Ghosts' is not similar to everyday life, therefore lacks ecological validity.

Front 19

Aim and Methods of Wynn and Logie?

Back 19

Aim: To see if familiar stories are recalled more accurately then unfamiliar like in Bartlett's study.

Method: University students retold their first week, several times throughout the year.

Front 20

Results and Conclusion of Wynn and Logie?

Back 20

Results: Accuracy of recall remained the same throughout, unlike Bartlett's findings.

Conclusion: Memories for familiar events will not change over time.

Front 21

Evaluate Wynn and Logie.

Back 21

1. Difficult to measure the accuracy

2. We cannot know if the first week story was ever actually true.

3. Relevant to everyday life, therefore has high ecological validity.

Front 22

Practical Applications of Reconstructive Memory?

Back 22

Helps us understand why two people can have two different versions of the same story.

We also must be weary of this with eyewitness accounts, as they could change to make sense to the witness.

Front 23

What are Levels of Processing?

Back 23

The depth at which information is thought about when trying to learn it.

Front 24

Describe the shallowest level of processing.

Back 24

Structural Processing, thinking about the physical appearance of a word being learnt.

Front 25

Describe the second deepest level of processing.

Back 25

Phonetic Processing, thinking about the sound of the word being learnt.

Front 26

Describe the deepest level of processing.

Back 26

Semantic Processing, thinking about the meaning of the word being learnt.

Front 27

Aim and Method of Craik and Lockhart.

Back 27

Aim: To see if the type of question asked about words affects the number of words recalled.

Method: Participants read a list of words, one at a time, and answered closed questions (either require structural, phonetic or semantic)about them. They then had to identify the words they were asked about.

Front 28

Results and Conclusion of Craik and Lockhart.

Back 28

Results: Participants identified; 70% of words requiring semantic processing, 35% phonetic and 15% structural.

Conclusion: The deeper information is processed, the more likely it is to be remembered.

Front 29

Evaluate Craik and Lockhart.

Back 29

1. Doesn't explain why deeper levels of processing help memory.

2. Could it be the extra effort needed that helps us remember instead?

3. Unrealistic lab study, therefore lacks ecological validity.

Front 30

What is interference?

Back 30

Things that we have learnt that make it difficult to recall other information that we have learnt.

Front 31

What is Retroactive Interference?

Back 31

When recently learnt information hinders our ability to recall old information we have learnt.

Front 32

What is Proactive Interference?

Back 32

When information we have already learnt hinders our ability to recall newer information.

Front 33

Aim and Method of Underwood and Postman.

Back 33

Aim: To see if new learning interferes with previous learning.

Method: 2 groups; Group A learnt List A, then List B; Group B only learnt List A. Both groups then recalled List A.

Front 34

Results and Conclusion of Underwood and Postman.

Back 34

Results: Group B recalled List A more accurately than Group A.

Conclusion: New learning causes people to recall old information less accurately.

Front 35

Practical Application of Interference?

Back 35

Develop better study habits, don't study two similar subjects in one night, etc.

Front 36

What is Context?

Back 36

The general setting/environment in which activities happen.

Front 37

Aim and Method of Godden and Baddeley.

Back 37

Aim: To see if learning and being tested in the same context will differ from learning and being tested in different settings.

Method: Group 1 learnt underwater, recalled underwater; Group 2 learnt underwater, recalled on shore; Group 3 learnt on shore, recalled on shore; Group 4 learnt on shore, recalled underwater.

Front 38

Results and Conclusion of Godden and Baddeley.

Back 38

Results: Groups 1 & 3 recalled 40% more than 2 & 4.

Conclusion: Recall of information will be better if it happens in the same context that learning takes place.

Front 39

Evaluate Godden and Baddeley.

Back 39

1. Not similar to everyday life, therefore lacks ecological validity.

2. Cannot be generalised, as it was conducted on deep-sea divers who could have been more trained in both conditions than the average person.

3.

Front 40

What is the Hippocampus?

Back 40

A brain structure that is crucial for memory.

Front 41

What is Retrograde Amnesia?

Back 41

Loss of memory for events that occurred before brain damage.

Front 42

What is Anterograde Amnesia?

Back 42

Being unable to learn new information after suffering brain damage.

Front 43

What is Reliability (in the context of eyewitness testimony)?

Back 43

The extent to which EWT can be regarded as accurate.

Front 44

What are the factors which affect eyewitness accounts?

Back 44

Leading Questions, Unfamiliar Faces and Context.

Front 45

What is a Leading Question?

Back 45

A question which hints at a particular type of answer.

Front 46

What is a Cognitive Interview?

Back 46

A method of questioning witnesses that involves recreating the context of an event.

Front 47

Aim and Method of Loftus and Palmer.

Back 47

(Leading Questions)

Aim: To see if leading questions affect reliability.

Method: Participants watch car accident films. Some were asked how fast the car was going when it 'hit' the other, others were asked with the word 'smashed'.

Front 48

Results and Conclusion of Loftus and Palmer.

Back 48

Results: Participants who heard 'smashed' gave a higher speed than those who heard 'hit'

Conclusion: Leading questions reduce accuracy of recall.

Front 49

Aim and Method of Bruce and Young.

Back 49

Aim: To see if familiarity affects accuracy of face identification.

Method: Lecturers were on CCTV, shown to participants. They were asked to identify the face.

Front 50

Results and Conclusion of Bruce and Young.

Back 50

Results: The lecturers' students identified the faces better than other students.

Conclusion: Previous familiarity helps when identifying faces.

Front 51

Aim and Method of Geiselman et al.

Back 51

Aim: To see if recreating context affects witness account accuracy.

Method: Participants watched a violent crime film, 2 days later they were interviewed. 1/2 went to the recreated scene.

Front 52

Results and Conclusion of Geiselman et al.

Back 52

Results: Those who were at the recreated scene recalled more accurately than others.

Conclusion: Recreating context during interviews will increase accuracy. This is a cognitive interview.

Front 53

Evaluate Loftus and Palmer, Bruce and Young and Geiselman et al.

Back 53

1. Watching a video isn't the real thing, therefore lacks ecological validity.

2. The 'real thing' may have been unexpected, therefore this lacks ecological validity again.

3. There could be extraneous variables which affect eyewitness testimony that these didn't address, like stereotyping.

Front 54

What is Stereotyping?

Back 54

An oversimplified, generalised set of ideas that we have about others.

Front 55

Aim and Method of Cohen.

Back 55

Aim: To see if stereotypes can affect memory.

Method: Participants watched a video of a man and woman eating in a restaurant. 1/2 were told she was a librarian, 1/2 were told she was a waitress. They then described her behaviour and personality.

Front 56

Results and Conclusion of Cohen.

Back 56

Results: The two groups gave entirely different descriptions, each matching either 'waitress' or 'librarian'.

Conclusion: Stereotypes reduce accuracy of accounts.

Front 57

Practical applications of eyewitness testimony

Back 57

1. (L&P) When talking to witnesses, police avoid leading questions.

2. (B&Y) Identity parades alone may have limited use when trying to identify criminals

3. (G) Taking witnesses back to the scene may help recall.