1711431
Beschreibung
Karteikarten von Angel Nicole , aktualisiert more than 1 year ago
|
Erstellt von Angel Nicole
vor mehr als 9 Jahre
|
|
| Frage | Antworten |
| Peterson and Peterson (1959) [Consonant Syllables] {Duration} | •24 students - eight trials each •Consonant syllables, verbal rehearsal prevented. • Retention interval of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 • After 3 seconds, recall = 80% •After 18 seconds, recall = 3% •Stimulus material artificial • lacks validity = displacement may explain findings |
| Nairne et al. (1999) [STM update] {Duration} | •Different iteams each trial, no interference •Participants shown five nouns •Asked to recall in correct order •Correct recall after 96 seconds •STM longer duration than expected •Realistic •Involves recognition memory. |
| Bahrick et al. (1975) [Duration of LTM] {Duration} | • Nearly 400 participants, aged 17 - 74 • High school yearbook • Recognised test of faces / recall of names • Face recognition = 90% = after 15 years • Declined to 70 % = after 48 years • Free recall = 60 % = after 15 years • Rehearsal may explain results • High ecological validity |
| Miller (1956) [The magic no. 7+2] {Capacity} | •The 'study' is review of other research. •Things come in sevens. •STM task = dots on screen. •Can count 7 but not 15 dots. •Capacity of STM = 7 items (+/- 2) • Chuncking used to increase capacity •Miller may have overestimated capacity •Miller's insight lead to everyday applications. |
| Jacobs (1887) [Capacity of STM] {Capacity} | • Developed digit span technique. • Digits/letters reads one at a time. •Recall tested. Another digit added until can't recall correctly. •Means span for digits 9.3. •Mean span for letters 7.3. • Digit span increased with age (Chunking) •Not a recent study. •Confirms Miller's conclusion. |
| Simon (1974) [The size of chunk matters] {Capacity} | •Tested own recall. •Recall with words or 2/3 Syllables •Recall with phrases •More syllables = shorter span, size of chunk matters •Digit span greater for longer words. •More words in span = shorter span. •May not be generalised •Supported by word length effect. |
| Baddeley (1966) [Encoding in STM and LTM] {Encoding} | •4 groups (acoustically, semantically similar/dissimilar •Recall was tested by placing words in right order. •STM and LTM tested. • Acoustically similar = worst for STM. •Semantically similar = worst for LTM. •Encoding differs in STM and LTM. •Artificial stimuli •LTM task wasn't very long term. |
| Brandimonte et al. (1992) [Visual encoding in STM] {Encoding} | • Visual task - 6 picture pairs. • Subtract one from other and recall •Some participants given an articulatory suppression task - some effect. •Encoding visual. •STM encoding not always acoustic. •Supported by other studies. •Conflicts with Baddeley's findings. |
| Frost (1972) [Visual encoding in LTM] {Encoding} | •Drawings of 16 common objects. •Recall or recognition test. •Responses timed. •Faster response - original orientation. • STM encoding - visual. •Those expecting recall, encoded semantically. •Requirement to be fast may have biased results. • Casual conclusions can be drawn. |
| Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) [Multi- store model] | • Information processing model diagram. •(Sensory Model) - milliseconds- large capacity. •Attention to items in SM - transfer to STM. •STM has limited duration - seconds - capacity- 5 chunks - acoustic encoding. •Increasing verbal rehersal - transfer to LTM. •LTM potentially unlimited - semantic. •Easy to test. • Support study of HM. • Further support comes from brain scans. •Oversimplifies memory processes. •Ignores importance of elaborative rehearsal. •No longer preferred theory of memory. |
| Baddeley and Hitch 1974 | • Working memory model explanation of STM • Central executive allocates slave systems. • Phonological loop consists of phonological store and articulatory process. •Visuo -spatial sketchpad •Episodic buffer, temporary storage. • Dual task performance illustrates WMM. • Supported by case study of KF • Word length effect supports phonological loop. • Supported by dual task performance activity • lack of clarity for cetral executive •◇restricted to STM •Offers refinement for MSM |
| Loftus and Palmer (1974) (Speeding cars part 1) (EWT) | • 45 participants - film of car accident • Asked to estimate speed • verb - 'smashed'/'contacted' •smashed = 40.8 mph • contacted =31.8 mph • faster than reality • lacked ecological validity • doesn't show whether memory itself is altered. |
| Loftis & Palmer ( 1974 ) [ Speeding cars part 2 ] (EWT) | •150 students -film of car crash - estimated speed •3 gropus - 'smashed', 'hit', 'control' •A week asked about broken glass • high estimate for smashed • reported glass in smashed • memory distorted - misleading information • lacks ecological validity • Supported by other research |
| Pickrell and Loftus (2001) ( Bugs Bunny ) ( EWT ) | •120 participants asked to evaluate advert about Disney land • one ad had Bugs Bunny mentioned •All groups werevasked if theyvsaw Bugs Bunny • more participants in Bugs ad reported seeimg Bugs Bunny • ripple effect = false memories • real world applications • Supports Loftus' earlier study |
Möchten Sie mit GoConqr kostenlos Ihre eigenen Karteikarten erstellen? Mehr erfahren.