Memory

Seite 1

Memory

Short term memory:

Multi-store model of memory

Strengths:

Glanzar and Cunitz (LTM and STM separate)

Sperling (Sensory memory)

Conrad ( STM encoding)

Miller (STM capacity)

Peterson and peterson (STM duration)

Bahrick et al (LTM duration)

Baddely (LTM encoding)

Clive wearing and HM - Retrival and recall and rehearsal.

Limitations

Clive wearing LTM

HM LTM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Working memory model:

Strengths:

-Shallice and warrington

-Simon and chabris

-Baddeley et al

-Baddely and Hitch

- HM

-Clive wearing

Weaknesses:

- The case study are based on people with brain damage which makes the results unreliable and cannot be generalised to everyone.

-Doesn't reflect everyday memory because participants are consciously trying to remember the facts which isn't reflective of everyday use of memory which is more unconscious and natural.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Long term memory:

Strengths:

- Clive wearing

- HM

- Neuro-imageing evidence

- Surgery application

Weaknesses:

- Clive wearing

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forgetting

Interference and forgetting:

-Retroactive interference= When you can't recall an old memory because a new memory is blocking the recall of it leading to the information to be forgotten

e.g Forgetting your old phone number, only remembering your new one.

-Proactive interference= When you can recall a new memory because an old memory is blocking the recall of it leading to the information to be forgotten

e.g Forgetting your new password, only remembering your old one.

Strengths:

-Mcgeogh and Mcdonald

Eval study!

Strengths:

- lab experiment which can reduce the effects of extraneous variables and creates valid results.

Weakneses:

-Much greater chance than interference will occur in the lab since its an artificial setting and the stimulus used isn't common to real life remembering.

Retrieval failure:

- Context dependant cues= Forgetting information because the environmental clues present when learning the information are no longer present to trigger the memory leading to the information being forgotten.

e.g revising in the classroom and forgetting information in the exam hall.

- State dependant cues= Forgetting information because your not in the same state as when learning the information so the cues are not present to trigger the memory leading to the information being forgotten.

e.g Remembering good memories when happy, but can't forgetting them when sad.

Strengths

- Godden and Baddeley

Eval study!!

Stengths:

- real life applcation, walk back into the room you remembered the thing in.

Weakenesses:

- Extreem difference in environment. Land and water are the most different environments real life is more likely to be more subtle and not have as much of an effect. therefore no real life application

- Godden and Baddeley replicated their study using a recognition test instead of memory and found no context dependant effect. This means context dependant cues only effect memory when you test it in a particular way.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eyewitness testimony

Yerkes and Dodson

- Predicted that different levels of anxiety would effect memory recall.

*Anxiety and eyewitness memory

- Fear produces anxiety

-Anxiety may make you more alert and cause better memory

-Panic might have caused reduction of information taken in

-If the experience was traumatic they might have tried to block it out.

-Nerves cause forgetting

-Fear for own safety so don't recall as much detail

Loftus and Palmer

Strengths:

- Lab setting gives good control of extraneous variables.

Weaknesses:

- Watching a video may affect attention to detail as less emotions are provoked than in the real life experience.

- Cant generalise because its in no way the same as being an real eyewitness.

- Lacks ecological validity since its in a lab setting.

- Individual differences could affect memory, such as age.

Galbert

Strengths:

- Lab setting good control of extraneous variables.

- Use of a control group gives good internal validity as you can be sure its the IV having a direct effect on the DV.

Weaknesses:

- Watching a video may affect attention as less emotions are provoked then in real life situations.

-Lacks ecological validity since its in a lab setting.

- Individual differences: Age.

Johnson and scott

Strengths:

- Lab experiment gives good control of variables.

Weaknesses:

- Low ecological because its a lab experiment which means it cannot be generalised.

- Participants where waiting for a study so may have expected something and were prepared.

-Didn't actually see the crime which could have caused lower anxiety so better or worse recall.

Yuille and Cutshall

Strengths:

- Field experiment, real life witnesses which gives high ecological validity.

Weaknesses:

- may not be anxiety improving memory, because its 4 months later they have had a chance for post event discussion and elaborate rehearsal improving memory.

- Only 13 participants which means low internal validity so results cannot be generalised.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cognitive interview:

Stages:

Report everything

Include all detail that you can remember, even if your not confident and you feel its irrelevant.

-These unimportant details may trigger the release of important information about the event.

Reinstate the context

Repeat everything you remember but this time focussing on your surroundings such as the weather, your emotions and the 5 senses.

- Remembering emotions or the surroundings may trigger key information about the event.

Reverse the order

Repeat in a different chronological order, such as last event to first event.

- Because of primary recency effect people tend to recall recent events more clearly and it reduced the witnesses use of prior knowledge.

Change perspective

Repeat everything this time thinking it through another persons point of view, such as the criminal or other eyewitness

- This can lead to more detail being uncovered as different perspective see different things and reduced use of expectation and pro knowledge.

Strengths:

- Fisher et al study supports this theory

Weaknesses:

-It would take a long time to train police

- It would cost a lot to train the police

- If police had a negative view of it they may not conduct it properly defeating the purpose.

- The style of interview may cause high anxiety and reduce recall.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------