Memory

Memory

1. Short and long term

   • Capacity
     • Jacobs-9.3 digits, 7.3 letters
     • Miller- 7 items/chunks
     • - Larger chunks fewer recalls -teens have a larger digit span than 8 yr olds
   • Duration
     • Peterson and Peterson- Consonant syllables prevent verbal rehersal. STM lasted 18 sec.
     • Bahrick-After 48 yrs pp 70% accurate in face recognition and 30% for names
     • -Some memory activities involve meaningful stimuli. -Nairne - duration for STM 96 sec.
   • Coding
     • Baddley- difficulty remembering acoustically similar words in the STM but not in LTM, reverse for the semantically similar words.
     • -waiting 20 mins, not really the LTM. Frost- Visual coding was in the LTM.

2. Multi-store-model

   • Sensory register- large capacity, millisecond duration
     • Attention transfers information from sensory register to STM
       • STM- Limited capacity, (5 items/chunks), information decays unless rehearsed.
         • Rehearsal creates LTM (unlimited capacity, forgetting due to lack of accessibility)
           • Retrieval from LTM goes through STM
   • +Lab studies, Miller, Peterson and Peterson. +Brain scans. +HM's Case
   • -MSM is too simple, STM and LTM are not unitary stores. -LTM involves elaborative not just rehersal.

3. Working memory model

   • Central executive- acts as 'attention', allocates tasks , no storage.
     • Phonological loop-orders auditory information
       • Phonological store- holds words for PL .
         • Articulatoey process-performs maintainance rehersal for PL
           • Visio spacial sketchpad- processing visual tasks.
             • Visual cache for form and colour
               • Episodic buffer records events as they happen.
             • Inner scribe for spatial relations
   • +Hitch and Baddley- Participants slower doing dual tasks.
   • -Brain damage evidence may be unreliable because trauma may have caused problems

4. Types of LTM

   • Episodic
     • Personal memories for events forming a sequence. (include context and emotion)
       • -associates with temporal lobe (inc. hippocampus) plus frontal lobe.
   • Semantic
     • Knowledge shared by everyone, abstract and concrete via episodic memories.
       • -Associates with temporal lobe.
   • Procedural
     • Knowing how to do something, becomes automatic though repetition and are disrupted if you think about them.
       • -Associates with cerebellum and basal ganglia and limbic system
   • +HM- new procedural memories could be made but not sematic or episodic.

5. Forgetting explanations

   • Interferance
     • Retroactive
       • New interferes with old
       • recall was less good if there was an intervening task
     • Proactive
       • Underwood- The more lists learned the lower the % of recall.
       • Old interferes with new
     • word list + synonyms list , 12% recall. word list + digit list, 37%recall.
     • Baddley and Hitch-Rugby players who played fewer games had better recall of teams. (less interferance).
     • -Artificial research-words and nonsense syllables , low motivation don't represent everyday memory. -Spontaneous recovery of recognition memory after interference, memories are availble not accessible
   • Retrieval failure
     • Encoding specificity principle- material present at encoding is present in retrieval
       • Tulving and Pearson- Category + word learned. recall 40%, cued recall 60%
     • Context dependent forgetting- Abernethy- recall best with the same instructor in the room.
     • Context dependent forgetting- Baddley and Godden - recall best when context matched recall envirionment.
     • State dependent forgetting- Goodwin- recall best when initial state matched state of recall
     • +High validity-supporting research in lab and natural environments. +Real-world application-to revising and cognitive interview.
     • -Cues don'talways work- not useful when learning meaningful material.

6. Accuracy of eyewitness testimony

   • Misleading information
     • Leading questions suggested desired answer.
       • Loftus and Palmer- asked critical question about speed of car in crash. 'smashed, collided, bumped, contacted' highest speed with 'smashed'
         • Verb altered memory of event- more likely to report broken glass.
     • conformity effect- recollection influenced by others.
     • repeating interview- problematic especially with child witnesses.
     • -Braun- (bugs bunny) altered participant recall. -Real-life EWT may be more accurate as lab studies may not be taken seriously. -Real-world application- mistaken EWT largest factor in conviction of innocent people.
     • +Foster- Robbery film, high accuracy.
   • Anxiety
     • Stress reduces performance
       • Johnson and Scott- weapon focus effect reduces accuracy of face identification.
     • Evolutionary performance- adapted to remember stressful events.
     • Christiianson and hubinette- high anxiety victims remember most accurately.
     • -Pickel-weapon focus effect due to surprise not anxiety. -Real-life studies show underestimate of anxiety effects in lab studies, lab studies are less accurate.
   • The cognitive interview
     • 1)mental reinstatement of original context- physical, psychological and cued recall. 2) Report everything- even insignificant details, may cue recall 3)change order- reduces effect of schemas. 4)change perspective- disrupts schemas.
       • +review of 53 studies, 34% more information from CI. +effectiveness may be due to'report everything' and 'mental reinstatement' components.
       • -Quality may suffer,81% increase correct recall but 61% false positives.