Psychology: Memory

Psychology: Memory

1. Multi-store memory model

   • Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968
   • stimulus>sensory register>stm>prolonged maintenance rehearsal> LTM
     • LTM> retrieval>STM
   • evidence for more than 1 STM
     • Shalice and Warrington case study KF w/ amnesia
       • visual and auditory info (latter was harder)
   • only explains one type of rehearsal
   • research uses artificial materials
     • lacks external validity
   • oversimplifies LTM, as evidence suggests it not a unitary store
   • Baddeley 1966 found coding in LTM and STM different
     • supports model as two separate stores

2. Coding

   • STM: acoustic
   • LTM: semantic
   • Baddeley 1966 STM recall immediate, LTM after 30 mins
     • not meaningful stimulus so can't be generalised accurately

3. Capacity

   • 7+/- 2 Jacobs, 1887
     • read words until couldn't recall
       • old; lacked control of extraneous variables
       • may've been confounding variables
       • has research support
   • 7 items, Miller 1956, improved by chunking
     • Cowan found capacity as 4 chunks

4. Duration

   • STM: Peterson and Peterson 1959,
     • nonsense triad, count back in 3s from 3 digit number
       • 18-30 seconds
     • doesn't reflect real life, so lacks external validity
       • we do try to remember phone numbers tho
   • Bahrick et al 1975: LTM
     • 392 americans 17-74
       • recognition test and free recall test of yearbook
         • unlimited
       • only male and american so can't be generalised to everyone and everywhere
     • high external validity due to real-life memories

5. Types of LTM

   • episodic
     • events from our lives
       • time-stamped; have to make an effort to recall
     • case study support HM and Clive Wearing
       • can't be generalised as so unique
   • semantic
     • knowledge of the world
   • procedural
     • motor skills
     • recall without effort
   • brain scans (Tulving et al) support validity: ep and sem in prefrontal cortex
     • real-life application
     • suggests only two types

6. Working Memory Model

   • Baddeley and Hitch 1974
   • Central executive
     • allocates slave systems
     • monitors incoming data but has limited capacity
     • lack of clarity
   • explanation of STM
   • Phonological loop
     • phonological store and articulatory process
     • preserves the order of auditory info
     • world length effect
   • Visuo-Spatial Sketch-Pad
     • Logie 1995 split into visual cache (stores visual data) and Inner scribe: records arrangement of objects in a field
     • episodic buffer
       • added 2000
       • intergrates info from all stores and maintains time sequencing
   • KF case by Shallice and Warrington supports
   • dual-task performance, baddeley et al supports the VSS
   • brain scans suport

7. forgetting

   • interference
     • McGeoch and McDonald 1931
       • recall a list of words 100% accurately, then a second one
         • recall dependent on nature of second list
     • proactive is old over new
     • retroactive is new over old
     • lab study evidence supports w/ control of extraneous variables
       • valid
     • uses artificial materials
     • real-life support
       • Baddeley and Hitch' rugby players
     • dependent on time allowed before recall
   • retrieval failure
     • absence of cues
       • context-dependant is when retrieval depends on an external cue
         • Godden and Baddeley's deep sea divers
           • research support increases validity
           • only occurs in certain tests, not recognition
         • have to be v different, Baddeley
         • useful everyday application
       • state-dependant forgetting depends on internal cues
     • encoding specificity principle
       • Tulving 1983 cues help if present at encoding
       • can't be tested, leading to circular reasoning

8. Eye-Witness testimony

   • misleading information
     • leading questions
       • substitution explanation
         • interferes with original memory
       • Loftus and Palmer 1974
         • 45 students watched a car accident w/ different leading q's which caused bias
           • artificial materials
             • Yuille and Cutshall found accurate after 4 months
       • real-life application
     • post-event discussion
       • memory contamination and conformity
         • Gabbert et al 2003
           • paired p's watched vid at diff angle, discuss, and saw things they didnt
             • demand characteristics
               • challenges validity of which it lacks externally anyways
     • individual differences
   • anxiety
     • Johnson and Scott found it has a negative effect in 1976
       • waiting room where they heard a low-anxiety or high-anxiety condition
         • asked to pick man
           • tunnel theory of memory pus focus on weapon
         • 49% in low recalled him, 33% in high
         • may test surprise not anxiety
           • demand characteristics reduces the validity
     • Yuille and Cutshall 1986 found it has a pos effect
       • real life crime, owner shot thief dead
         • most stressed were most accurate
         • lacks control of extraneous variables
           • ethical issues
     • Yerkes and Dodson's inverted U theory
       • simplistic
   • cognitive interview
     • report everything
       • change perspective
     • reinstate context
       • reverse the order
     • Fisher and Geiselman
     • enhanced
       • puts focus on social dynamics of interview
         • reduce anxiety, minimise distraction and open questions
     • Milne and Bull found elements valuable, espesh report everything and reisntate together
     • meta-analysis by Kohnken et al looked at 50 studies and found more correct recall
     • may be unreliable due to variations
       • may produce more inaccurate info too