Karteikarten
Memory
Karten in diesem Stapel (28)
- 1STM-Your memory for immediate events.
-Measured in seconds and minutes.
-Has a shorter duration and a limited capacity.
-Coded acoustically. - 2LTM-Your memory formed from past experience.
-Lasts between 2 minutes and a lifetime.
-Unlimited capacity and duration.
-Coded semantically. - 3CapacityThe amount of information that can be held in a memory store.
Jacobs(1887)-STM:
-Digit span.
-Average span for digits is 9.3.
-Average span for letters is 7.3.
Miller(1956)-STM:
-7+/-2 items.
- We chunk letters/digits together. - 4DurationThe length of time information can be held in memory.
Peterson and Peterson(1959)-STM:
-Very short duration of approx. 18 seconds as long as rehearsal is prevented.
Bahrick(1975)-LTM:
- LTM contains a vast amount of information but is not always accessible. - 5CodingThe format in which information is changed so it can be stored within a memory store.
Baddeley (1966):
-STM is coded acoustically
-LTM is coded semantically - 6The Multi-Store Model of MemoryAtkinson and Shriffin (1968)
The multi-store model describes how information flows through the memory system.
A stimulus from the environment enters the sensory register. It contains several stores for our senses including the iconic, echoic and hepatic. The sensory register has an unlimited capacity but a very short duration. If information is attended to it passes through to STM.
STM has a limited capacity (7+/-2) and a limited duration of approx 30 seconds. maintenance rehearsal maintains information in our STM. Prolonged rehearsal passes information into our LTM.
LTM has a potentially unlimited capacity and duration and is coded semantically. If information needs to be recalled it is transferred back into STM by a process called retrieval. - 7Evaluation of the Multi-store modelWeakness:
Case studies. Shalice and Warrington studied a patient with amnesia known as KF. They found that there could be more than one STM store as the patient could recall more items of information when he visualised it rather than heard it. This suggests that STM is not one unitary store. Therefore, the multi-store model maybe over-simplistic.
Strength:
Evidence to suggest the nature of STM and LTM is different. This is because they are both encoded differently. Conrad found that STM is coded acoustically and Baddeley found that LTM is coded semantically. This suggests that encoding, duration and capacity are different in the types of memory. Therefore, the multi-store model is more reliable.
Weakness:
More than one type of rehearsal
Maintenance and Elaborative.
Another finding that cannot be explained by the model.
Weakness:
More than one LTM store - 8Types of Long-Term MemoryTulving (1985)
Episodic memory- A long-term memory store for personal events. It includes memories of when the events occurred and of the people, objects, places and behaviours involved. Memories from this store are retrieved consciously with effort.
Procedural Memory- A long-term memory store for our knowledge on how to do things. This includes our memories of learned skills. Memories are recalled without conscious effort.
Semantic Memory- A long-term memory store for our knowledge of the world. This includes facts and our knowledge of what words and concepts mean. These memories usually need to be recalled deliberately. - 9Evaluation of the types of Long-Term MemoryStrength:
Neuroimaging evidence
This is because there is evidence from brain scans to prove that different types of memory are stored in different parts of the brain. Tulving et al got participants to perform various tasks while being connected to a PET scanner. They found that different types of LTM were located in different areas of the prefrontal cortex. This increases the validity of the research.
Strength:
Real-life application
This is because being able to identify different types of memory can better peoples lives. Belleville et al demonstrated that episodic memories could be improved in older people who had a mild cognitive impairment. The knowledge of the different types of LTM enabled a suitable and specific treatment to be developed in order to benefit these individuals.
Weakness:
Problems with clinical evidence
This is because the researcher has no control over what happened to the patient/participant before they experienced the injury. Therefore, the conclusions researchers have reached about memory, based on clinical studies, may not be valid. - 10The Working Memory ModelBaddeley and Hitch (1974)
A representation of STM. It suggests hows STM is a processor with different sub-units coordinated by a central executive.
Central executive- Essentially an attentional process that monitors incoming data, makes decisions and allocates slave systems to the task.
Phonological Loop- Deals with auditory information and preserves the information in the order that it arrives. It is subdivided into 2:
Phonological store-Stores words you hear.
Articulatory process-Allows for maintenance rehearsal.
Visuo-spatial sketchpad- Stores visual and spatial information when is required and has a limited capacity of 3/4 chunks. Subdivided into 2:
Visual cache- Stores visual data
Inner scribe- Records the arrangement of objects in the visual field.
Episodic Buffer- Temporary store of information. Brings together material from all other slave systems into a single memory. This is then passed to LTM. - 11Evaluation of the Working Memory ModelStrength:
Clinical evidence from Shallice and Warrington's case study of patient KF. Patient KF had suffered from severe brain damage. After his damage he found that he had poor STM for verbal information but could process visual information normally. This suggests that there is separate acoustic and visual stores. Therefore, there are separate memory units.
Strength:
Dual-task performance. This is because it supports the existence of the visuo-spatial sketchpad. Baddeley et al(1975) conducted an experiment and found that it was easier to complete a verbal and visual task together rather than 2 of the same. This means that there must be a separate slave system that processes visual input. Therefore, providing good supporting evidence for the working memory model.
Weakness:
Little known about the central executive
This is because there is little evidence to prove the role of this key component. The capacity has never been measured and no one understands how it works or what it's role is. This means that the WMM has not been fully explained. - 12Explanations for Forgetting-InterferenceForgetting because one memory blocks another, causing one or both memories to be distorted or forgotten.
Proactive Interference:
Forgetting occurs when older memories disrupt the recall of newer memories.
Underwood(1997)-Meta analysis. Each list makes it harder to learn later lists.
Retroactive Interference:
Forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall older memories.
Muller and Pilzecker(1900)-The intervening task produced RI because it intervened with the previous learning. - 13Evaluation for Interference TheoryStrength:
Supporting evidence from lab studies. McGeoch and McDonald found that interference was strongest when memories are similar. This is a strength because it was conducted within a lab so extraneous and confounding variables are controlled. Therefore, this makes interference a valid and reliable explanation.
Weakness:
The use of artificial materials. This is because most of the material the participants had to earn were lists. This is problematic because it lacks mundane realism as it is unlike what we would have to learn in real-life. Therefore, the results lack ecological validity and cannot be generalised.
Weakness:
The time between learning and recall affects the amount of correct information recalled. - 14Effects of SimilarityInterference is worse when the memories are similar.
McGeoch and McDonald conducted an experiment into the effects of similarity of materials on interference.
They concluded that the most similar material produced the worst recall. - 15Explanations for Forgetting-Retrieval failureOccurs when we do not have the necessary cues to access a memory. The memory is still their but we are unable to access it.
Encoding specificity principle-The correct cue must be present at encoding and retrieval.
Context-Dependent forgetting:
Retrieval cues based on context(The Environment)
Divers learnt lists of words in 4 conditions. Accurate recall was better when the conditions for learning and recall were the same.
State-Dependent forgetting:
Memory will be best when a person's physical or psychological state is similar at encoding and retrieval.
Participants had to learn lists of words in 4 conditions. Recall was better when the conditions were the same. - 16Evaluation for Retrieval failureStrength:
Supporting evidence.
This is because there is an impressive range of research to support the explanation. Eysenck(2010) argues that retrieval failure is perhaps the main reason for forgetting from LTM.
This means that the explanation also has high internal validity as it applies to many real-life situations.
Therefore, the explanation has good generalisability.
Weakness:
Questioning context effects.
This is because Baddeley argues that context effects are actually not very strong, especially in real-life. The different contexts have to be very different before the effect is seen.
This is a limitation because it means the real-life application of retrieval failure due to contextual cues do not explain forgetting.
Therefore, it cannot apply to real-life and is a weak explanation.
Weakness-Recall versus recognition.
Presence or absence of cues only affects memory when you test it in a certain way. - 17Eyewitness testimonyThe ability of people to remember the details of events such as accidents or crimes which they have observed.
- 18Misleading InformationIncorrect information given to the eyewitness usually after the event.
- 19Factors affecting eyewitness testimony: Misleading information (Leading Questions)A question that suggests a certain answer due to the way it is phrased.
Loftus and Palmer(1974)
Procedure-Arranged for participants to watch film clips of car accidents. They were then all asked a critical question: About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other? Different verbs were given to each group of participants: hit, contacted, bumped, collided and smashed.
Findings-The verb contacted resulted in a mean speed of 31.8mph.
The verb smashed resulted in a mean speed of 40.5mph. - 20Factors affecting eyewitness testimony: Misleading information (Post-Event Discussion)Occurs when there is more than one witness at an event. Witnesses may discuss what they have seen with others. This may influence the accuracy of each witness's account.
Can lead to contaminated eyewitness testimonies as the eyewitnesses combine the information they have heard with their own memories.
Gabbert et al(2003)
Procedure- Studied participants is pairs. Each participant watched a video of the same crime but from a different angle. Both participants then discussed what they had seen before individually completing a test of recall.
Findings-71% of participants recalled aspects of the event that they has not witnessed but had picked up in the discussion. - 21Evaluation of Misleading informationStrength:
Real-life application
This is because Loftus believes that leading questions can have a distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be careful when phrasing a question during eyewitness interviews.
This means that by researching into the accuracy of EWT, a positive difference can be made to the lives of real people.
Therefore, the research can be generalised and applied to real-life.
Weakness:
Artificial tasks
This is because Loftus and Palmer's research involved participants watching film clips of car accidents rather than witnessing a real accident.
This means that the study tells us little about how leading question affect EWT in real situations.
Therefore, the study is unreliable.
Weakness:
Individual differences
This is because Anastasia and Rhodes (2006) found that people aged 18-25 were more accurate in recall than those aged 55-78. However, when identifying people of their own age group known as own age bias, both age groups were more accurate. - 22AnxietyA state of emotional and physical arousal.
- 23Factors affecting eyewitness testimony: Anxiety (Negative effect on recall)Negative effect on recall- Anxiety creates physiological arousal in the body which prevents us paying attention to important cues, so recall is worse.
Johnson and Scott (1976)
Procedure-Participants heard an argument while seated in a waiting room. In the 'low-anxiety' condition a man walked out with a pen. In the 'high anxiety' condition a man walked out with a knife.
Findings-In the 'low anxiety' condition 49% of the participants could identify the man from a set of photos. However, in the 'high anxiety' condition only 33% of the participants could identify the man. - 24Factors affecting eyewitness testimony: Anxiety (Positive effect on recall)Positive effect on recall- The stress of witnessing a crime triggers the fight or flight response which increases alertness and improves our memory.
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
Procedure- Conducted a study of a real-life shooting in Vancouver. The interviews were held 4-5 months after the incident and compared to the original interviews at the time. Accuracy was determined by the number of details reported.
Findings-The witnesses were very accurate in their accounts and there was little change in the amount of details recalled after 5 months. - 25Evaluation of AnxietyWeakness:
Weapons focus effect may not be relevant
This is because participants may only of focused on the weapon because they were surprised rather than scared. Pickel (1988) found similar results and suggested that the weapons focus effect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety. therefore, this tells us very little about the effect of anxiety on EWT.
Weakness:
Field studies lack control
This is because the researchers would have little/no control over events that happened to the participants within the 5 months. This is a limitation of the field research because it is possible that these extraneous variables may be responsible for the accuracy of recall. Therefore, the effects of anxiety may be overwhelmed by these factors.
Weakness:
Ethical issues
This is because participants were exposed to a high anxiety situation and therefore may have been subject to psychological harm purely for the purpose of research. - 26The cognitive interviewA method of interviewing eyewitnesses to help them retrieve more accurate information.
1.Report everything
-Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail of the event even if it seems irrelevant.
2.Reinstate the context
-The witness should imagine the environment of the crime scene and their emotions.
3.Reverse the order
-Events should be recalled in different chronological order to the original sequence.
4.Change perspective
-Witnesses should recall the incident from other people's perspective. - 27The enhanced cognitive interview(ECI)Fisher et al(1987) developed some additional elements to the CI to focus on the social dynamics of the interaction.
These included maintaining eye contact, minimising distractions and asking open-ended questions. - 28Evaluation of the cognitive interviewStrength:
The ECI is very effective
This is because a meta-analysis by Konnken et al(1999) showed that the enhanced CI consistently provided more correct information than the standard interview used by police.
This means that there are real practical benefits to the police using the ECI.
Therefore, the ECI has more validity and is more beneficial to society.
Weakness:
Time consuming
This is because the CI takes much more time than the standard police interview. It also requires special training which many forces cannot provide.
This means that the CI is rarely used and is not often used by the police.
Therefore, the CI is time consuming.
Weakness:
CI creates an increase in inaccurate information
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- AS - Level Psychology (AS) Karteikarten am Memory, erstellt von Ellie Shuter am 18/01/2016.
- Erstellt von
- Ellie Shuter
- Aufrufe
- 1
- Bewertung