Memory

Memory

1. Multi store memory

   • Enviromental stimuli
   • Sensory Memory
     • Duration: Fractions of a second.
       • Sperling- All items 42% Row- 75% Info decays rapidly
   • STM
     • Duration: 18-30 seconds
       • P&P- 3 seconds- 80% 6 seconds-50% 18 seconds- <10%
     • Capacity: 7 +/- 2 items
       • Miller- Digit span technique Simon- Chunking
     • Encoding: Acoustic
       • Conrad- row of acoustically sim and disim letters Brandimonte- Acoustic not visual used
   • LTM
     • Duration: Potentially forever VLTM
       • Bahrick
         • Recognition: 15 year-90%, 25 year-80%, 34 year-75%, 47 year-60%
         • Recall: 7 year-60%, 47 year- <20%
     • Capacity: Potentially Unlimited
     • Encoding: Semantic
       • Baddely: dissim/sim acoustic/samantic. SemSim-55% SemDis-85% Acoustic-No Diff
   • Evaluations
     • Influential
     • HM supports distinct diff between the 3 stores
     • Elab and Maintanence rehearsal added
     • Prim&Rece effect
     • Simplistic
     • Lab studs- low ev
     • Pysch students
       • Low pop v
       • Demand c
     • Emotional mem
     • One way direction is incorrect
     • Single STM&LTM

2. Working Memory Model

   • Central excecutive
     • Allocates resources to the 3 components. Like 'attention'. Limited capacity and flexible at using any senses info.
   • Phonological Loop
     • Deals with auditory info
       • Phonological store. 'inner ear'. Spoken words, articulated in 2 secs, limited capacity.
       • Articulatory control system. 'Inner voice' rehearses info like a 'tape loop' (sub vocal repetition)
     • Baddeley: More short words than long in immediate recall due to articulatory time. Word length dissapears when suppresion task is used.
   • Visuo-spatial sketchpad
     • 'Inner Eye' Stores visual &spatial info, anaylses by size, colour shape. Limited capacity.
     • Baddeley: (dual task) follow the sport on a 'F'
   • Episodic buffer
     • Baddeley; Extra storage system, Chunks&episdoes, limited capacity.
   • Evaluations
     • Influential and most preffered. More flexible.
     • Brain damage supports (SC) damage to Pl
     • PET Scans
     • Important applications for metal illness diagnosis. (Park)
     • Brain damage case studies- problematic as no before/end comparisons.
       • Too Vague as too less components.

3. Factors affecting EWT

   • Misleading Info
     • Loftus& Palmer: independent groups. 'How fast were the cars going when they hit/smashed/bumped/contacted. Speed effected by lang used.
       • Smashed; 41mph, Bumped; 38, Hit; 34, contacted; 32.
     • Loftus&Palmer. 3 groups one group hit one group smashed 3rd not asked. 1 week later 'did you see any broken glass' Group smashed twice as likely.
   • Anxiety
     • Loftus. Outside lab exposed to 1or2 situations. (1) Low key discussion about equip failure, left holding pen with greasy hands. (2) Heated discussion, breaking/crashing man with knife&blood. Given photos.
       • Pen man: 49%
         • Blood man 33% due to weapons effect which results in accurate weapon recall but diminished peripheral details(Man)
     • Christianson&Hubbinette, 110 witnesses, 22 real life robberies, greater anxiety better recall even after 15 month
   • Age
     • Kent&Youille: 9/14
     • Parker&Carranza: primary/college
     • Gross&Hayne: 5 year
     • Mermon: 16-33/60-82

4. Cognative Interview (Fisher&Geiselman)

   • Report Everything
   • Context reinstatement
   • Changing the order
   • Changing the perspective
   • Evaluation
     • Kohnken: Meta analysis, Increase of 34%
     • Fisher: Police miami real life settings showed big increase
     • Milne&Bull: all 4 aspects used=great recall
     • Kebbel: not all 4 aspects were used in Uk so not as good
     • Geiselman: not good on children under 8 as instructions too difficult
     • Wagstaff: Takes too long
   • Memory Improvement
     • Acronym
     • Acrostic poems
     • Rhymes
     • Chunking
     • Peg word system
     • Loci
     • Keyword
     • Bower: (Organisation) 112 words, 65% experimental, 21% control group.
     • Bower&Clark: (Story) 12 lists of 10 unrelated words into storys, 90% compared to 10%
     • Craik&Watkins: distinguished between rehearsals
     • Tulving&Thompson: encoding specificity principle
     • Godden&Baddeley: same location= more words.