Memory - the way in which we process information.

Memory - the way in which we process information.

1. Multi-store model

   • sensory memory
     • STM
       • LTM
         • up to a lifetime, unlimited
       • Rehersal
       • 20-30 seconds, 5-9 chunks
         • some remember more, 12, some remember less, 3.
       • too simplistic, can do more like music while driving
     • Attention
     • 2-3 seconds, limited
   • Murdock
     • Aim: find evidence to support the multi store model
     • Method: participants were asked to recall words that were displayed to them 2 seconds at a time
       • Artificial task of recalling a list of words, lacks ecological validity.
       • Many events that are remembered without rehersal
     • Results: word at at the begging and end were recalled best due to the primacy and recency effect
     • Conclusion: short term and long term are separate stores
   • Rehersal, use when revising, read over and over goes into long term
   • post codes and number plates only 7 digits easy to remember STM

2. Levels of processing

   • Depth we process information, the deeper information is processed, the better the recall
     • Structual - appearance
     • Phonetic - sound
     • Semantic - meaning
     • Aim: to see if the level info is processed affects recall
     • Method: told it's a test of speed, 3 types or questions; Upper case?, Rhyme? Go in this sentence? then given a list of words and asked to circle word that were in the previous questions.
       • artificial task of recalling a list of words, lacks ecological validity
       • lab setting, may not show natural behaviour
     • Results: 70% semantic, 35% phonetic, 15% structual were identified
     • conclusion: the more deeply information is processed, more likely it is to be remembered
   • revision, best to process information and write it up in your own words rather than coping.
   • the theory doesnt explain why deeper levels help remember things, may be concentration rather than the way we process

3. Reconstructive memory

   • memory is an active, we use knowledge we already have known as schemas to understand new information and give it meaning.
     • Schemas - mental building blocks of knowledge that develop with past experiences
     • Aim: to see if people would alter information, when given something unfamiliar to remember
     • Method: asked to read "the war of ghosts" asked to retell the story as accurately as possible over varying periods
       • artificial task to recall an unfamilar story, lacks ecological validity.
       • confusing story may affect recall
       • no scoring method to assess the recall, making the study less reliable.
     • Results: participants changed parts of the story so it would make sense to them.
     • Conclusion: we use schema to fill in gaps in our memory.
     • Doesn't explain how schemas are actually created.
   • eye witness accounts, 2 people with different stories, doesn't mean one of them is lying, both think they are being accurate because they are using their schemas

4. Amnesia

   • Anterograde - unable to learn new information
     • Miller - an epilespy patient had an operation to remove 2/3s of the hippocampus then was unable to learn new information.
       • advantage of case studies, provide rich detailed information in unique cases that cannot be ethically experimented
   • is memory loss usually caused by physical injury to the brain, also a traumatic, emotional event
   • Retrograde - loss of memory of the past
     • Russell and Nathan - 22 year old fell of his motorbike, suffered severe concussion and a fractured skull, and couldn't recall anything 2 years prior to the accident
       • disadvantage of case studies, only one person/unique case, hard to generalise

5. Context

   • the general setting or environment in which activities happen
   • Aim: to see if the environment information is learnt and recalled affects recall
   • Method: participant were all deep sea divers, 4 groups
     • Group 1 learnt underwater and recalled underwater
       • Group 2 learnt underwater and recalled on shore
         • group 3 learnt on shore and recalled on shore
           • group 4 learnt on shore and recalled underwater
     • artificial task of learning a list of words, lacks ecological valitity
     • deep sea divers used, results are not generalisable, as they are not a representative sample
   • Results: groups that learn and recalled in the same environment recalled 40% more than learning in one setting and recalling in another.
   • Conclusion: recall is better in the same context
   • when revising, recreate exam conditions e.g. silent, empty desk

6. interference

   • Aim: see if learning interferes with previous learning
   • Method: 2 groups, group A had 2 lists, group B had 1 list, both groups had to recall the same list
     • artificial task of learning words, lacks ecological validity
     • Supports retroactive interference and shows how new learning does interfer with recalling previous information especially when the information is similar
   • Results: group B had a more accurate recall than group A
   • Conclusion: learning interfered with participants ability to recall
   • REtroactive: REcently learnt information hinders our ability to recall previously learnt information
   • PRoactive: PReviously learnt information affects our ability to recall recently learnt information
   • revising two similar subjects should be learnt separately, or take breaks inbetween

7. Eye witness testimony

   • Legal term where someone gives an account of an event for example a robbery, this may include details of the crime, the suspect and the scene.
   • Leading questions - a question that hints to an answer
   • Aim: to see if leading questions affect the accuracy of recall
     • Method: shown film of car accidents, asked how fast the car was going when it hit/smashed into the other car?
       • Results: the smashed group gave higher estimate speed than the hit group
         • Conclusion: leading questions will affect the accuracy of recall
       • if you were witnessing the car crash in real life it may take you by surprise and you may feel in danger these factors may also affect recall
       • shows how important neutral questions are in interviews
     • Loftus and Palmer
   • police ask neutral style questions, and use cognitive interviews to ensure accurate recall.

8. unfamiliar faces

   • Aim: to see if familiarity affects the accuracy of identification
     • Method: security cameras caught psychology lecturers walking into a building. a group of psychology students and police officers were then asked to identify the faces from high quality photographs.
       • Results: lecturers students made more correct identifications than police officers
         • Conclusion: familiarity helps identify faces.
       • shows the importance of security cameras and how useful they are
       • small sample, make it difficult to generalise
         • psychology students may mean they knew the aim or how better recall after practising
   • faces can be unreliable, therefore other evidence is needed too.