Memory A01

Memory A01

1. Long Term Memory

   • Episodic
     • life events, daily happenings, time stamped, conscious effort to recall them
   • Semantic
     • world, encyclopaedia+dictionary, not time stamped, all share
   • Procedural
     • actions+skills, how do things, recall without awareness so difficult to explain

2. Explanations for Forgetting

   • Interference: 2 pieces info in conflict, forgetting LTM cos can't access mems even though available
     • Interference worse mems similar
       • Proactive: old interrupts new
       • Reteroactive: new disrupts with old
     • KEY STUDY: MCGEOCH+MCDONALD P's learn word list then given new list to learn varied in way which it was similar to original. = recall performance dependent nature of 2nd list. Most similar material= worst recall, very diff material=mean no items recalled increased.
       • Shows interference stronger when mems similar.
   • Retrieval Failure due to absence of cues: when info placed in mem cues stored same time, if these not available at recall might not access mems that are there.
     • Encoding Specificity Principle: Tulving- cues help retrieval if same cues present at encoding+retrieval.
     • Some cues linked to the material to be remembered in meaningful way
     • other cues encoded at learning not in meaningful way: 1. Context dependent forgetting- mem retrieval dependet external cue. 2. State dependent forgetting- mem retrieval internal cue.
     • KEY STUDY: GODDEN+BADDELEY DEEP SEA DIVERS learned list asked to recall. Land and Water. When contexts didn't match recall 40% less than did match, when external cues diff at recall led to retrieval failure due to absence of cues. Demonstrates context dependent forgetting as info not accessible when learning and recall contexts didn't match.

3. Eyewitness Testimony

   • Misleading Info:
     • LEADING Q'S
       • RESPONSE BIAS EXPLAN: wording of Qs no enduring effect of EW mem but influences answer given.
       • SUBSTITUTION EXPLAN: Q wording does effect EW mem distorting its accuracy
       • KEY STUDY: LOFTUS+PALMER 45 P's clips of car accidents answered Q's about speed. Critical Q- about how fast cars going when hit each other? verb 'contracted' = mean estimate 31.8mph verb 'smashed'= 40.5mph
         • Leading Q, the verb, biased EW recall of event, smashed suggested faster speed than contracted
   • Post event discussion
     • MEMORY CONTAMINATION: co-witnesses discuss crime, mix info from other witnesses with own mems
     • MEMORY CONFORMITY: witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or they believe other witnesses right
     • KEY STUDY: GABBERT ET AL P's watched vid of same crime some p's saw elements others didn't, discussed what seen then individual recall test. 71% p's recalled aspects they didn't see but picked up in PED, control group where no discussion= no errors
   • Anxiety
     • NEGATIVE EFFECT:
       • KEY STUDY:JOHNSON+SCOTT P's waiting room heard argument next room, low anxiety condition man walked through with pen and grease on hands. high anxiety condition heated argument breaking glass man walked through with knife covered blood. Asked pick man from pics. 49% P's low anxiety able to identify, high was 33%
         • Tunnel theory- attention on weapon bcos source danger+anxiety
     • POSITIVE EFFECT:
       • KEY STUDY: YUILLE+CUTSHALL Real life crime gun shop owner shot thief, 21 witnesses 13 participate. P's interviewed 4-5 months after compared to police interviews at time, also rated how stressed they felt
         • Witnesses very accurate and little change after 5 months, only some details less accurate, P's who reported highest levels of stress were most accurate 88% compared to 75% less stressed group
     • Explaining contradictory findings
       • Inverted U theory: Yerkes + Dodson- rel between performance and stress curvilinear rather than linear
       • Deffenbacher: lower anxiety levels produced lower levels of recall accuracy. Recall accuracy increases with anxiety up to optimal point. Drastic accuracy decrease when anxiety more than optimal point.

4. Cognitive Interview