Changing the way you learn

Memory

Key terms
1. Encoding - changing info so it can be stored
2. Storage - holding info in memory system
3. Retrieval - Recovering info from stroage
4. Multi-store - The idea that info passes through a series of memory stores
5. Sensory store - holds info received from senses for a short time
6. Short-term - holds about 7 pieces of info for limited time
7. Long-term - holds vast amount of info for long time
8. Recency effect - info received later is recalled better than old info
9. Primacy effect - first info received is recalled better than subsequent info
10. Reconstructive memory - altering recollection so they make more sense to us
11. Structural processing - thinking about physical appearance of the word
12. Phonetic processing - thinking about sound of a word
13. Semantic processing - thinking about meaning of words
14. Levels of processing - The depth at which info is thought about when trying to learn it
15. Interference - Things we learn that make it difficult to recall other info
16. Retroactive interference - Info we learn stops us recalling old info
17. Proactive interference - old info stops us learning new info
18. Context - General setting or environment in which activities happen
19. Anterograde amnesia - Being unable to learn new info after suffering brain damage
20. Hippocampus - A brain structure is crucial for memory
21. Retrograde amnesia - loss of memory of past events before brain damage occured
22. Reliability - In context of eyewitness testimony so it is accurate
23. Leading questions - Question that hints particular answers
24. Cognitive interview - Method of questioning witnesses that involves recreating context
25. Stereotype - An oversimplified set of ideas we have about others
Multi-store model
1. Peterson and Peterson
  1. A - To see if rehearsal was necessary to hold info in the short-term store
  2. M - Pps given list of 3 leters (RND OHR PLI). Then asked to count bck in 3s from 100 for different lengths of time to prevent rehearsal. They then had to recall.
  3. R - Most Pps had forgotten nearly all words by 18 seconds
  4. C - We can't hold info in short-term store unless rehearsed
  5. E - Lacks eco validity
  6. PA - Postcodes are only 7 letters/numbers so they fit in short-term store
2. Murdock
  1. A - To provide evidence to support multi-store model
  2. M - Pps learnt a list of words, two seconds per word, and then recalled them in order
  3. R - Words at the end of the list were recalled first (recency effect), then words from beginning (primacy effect) but words from middle were poorly recalled
  4. C - This provides evidence for separate short-term and long-term store
  5. E - Lacks eco validity.
Levels of processing
1. Craik and Lockhart
  1. A - To see if the type of question asked about words will have an effect on number of recalled words
  2. M - Pps given a list of words, one at a time, and asked questions about them (yes or no answers). Some questions required structural processing, others phonetic and the rest semantic. They then had to identify these words from a longer list.
  3. R - Pps identified 70% semantic words, 35% phonetic words & 15% structural
  4. C - The more deeply info is processed, the more likely it is to be remembered
  5. E - Doesn't explain why deeper levels of processing helps memory. Lacks eco validity
Interference
1. Underwood and Postman
  1. A - To see if new learning interferes with previous learning
  2. M - Pps divided into 2 groups. Group A learned two lists of word pairs and group and Group B just learned one
  3. R - Group B's recall was more accurate
  4. C - New learning causes people to recall old info less accurately
  5. PA - Study habits: only revise one subject at a time
  6. E - Used independent groups design
Context
1. Godden and Baddeley
  1. A - To see if people who learn and are tested in same environment can recall more than those in different environments
  2. M - Pps were deep-sea divers. Split into 4 groups. All given same list to learn and were tested in different environments
    1. Group 1 learnt underwater and recalled underwater
    2. Group 2 learnt underwater and recalled on the shore
    3. Group 3 learnt on the shore and recalled underwater
    4. Group 4 learnt on the shore and recalled on the shore
  3. R - Groups 1 and 3 recalled best
  4. C - Recall of info will be better in same environment as learning
  5. E - Lacks eco validity
  6. PA - Revise in similar environment to exam
Brain damage and forgetting
1. Milner et al.
  1. A patient with epilepsy had an operation where 2/3 of his hippocampus was removed
    1. He couldn't learn new things
      1. The hippocampus is needed for new memories
  2. Some people suffered brain damage and couldn't recall old memories.
    1. This is retrograde amnesia
2. Russell and Nathan
  1. 22 yr old patient fell off motorbike, hit his head and suffered from concussion
  2. X-rays showed no fractures of skull but he couldn't remember anything two years prior
Eyewitness testimony
1. Loftus and Palmer (Leading questions)
  1. A - To see if leading questions affect accuracy of recall
  2. M - Pps shown film of car accident. Some were asked 'How fast was the car going when it HIT the other car' Others were asked 'How fast was the car going when it SMASHED the other car'
  3. R - Pps that heard the word 'smashed' said a higher speed
  4. C - Leading questions reduce the accuracy recall
2. Bruce and Young (Unfamiliar faces)
  1. A - To see if familiarity affects accuracy of identifying faces
  2. M - Psychology lecturers caught on security cameras at entrance of a building. Pps asked to identify faces seen on security cameras from some high-quality photos
  3. R - Lecturers' student made more correct identifications than police and other students
  4. C - Previous familiarity helps identifying faces
3. Geiselman et al. (context)
  1. A - To see if reinstating context of event affects accuracy of recall
  2. M - Pps shown police training footage of violent crime. 2 days later they were interviewed about it. Half of the pps, context recreated. Half standard police interview
  3. R - Pps who had recreated context recalled more
  4. C - Recreating context during interviews increases accuracy of recall. This is called cognitive interview
  5. E - Some pps may have experienced similar things and changed what they saw because of this
4. Cohen
  1. A - To see if stereotypes affects memory
  2. M - Pps shown a video of a man and woman in a restaurant. Half were told she was a librarian and half were told she was a waitress. They then had to descrine her personality
  3. R - The two groups gave different descriptions which matched stereotypes of waitresses and librarians
  4. C - Stereotypes reduce accuracy of accounts
Reconstructive memory
1. Bartlett
  1. A - To see if people, when given something to remember, will alter info
  2. M - Pps asked to read a Native American legend calle 'War of the Ghosts'. They had to recall several times that week
  3. R - Pps found it hard to remember some parts. They changed it so it made sense to them
  4. C - Our memory is influenced by our own beliefs
  5. E - Only English pps studied
2. Wynn and Logie
  1. A - To see if recall of familiar stories changed like in Bartlett's study
  2. M - Uni students asked to recall first week at uni several times throughout the year
  3. R - The accuracy of descriptions remained the same throughout the year
  4. C - Memories of familiar events won't change over time
  5. E - Only Uni students studied

Next up

Memory

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Ilana Hawdon about 9 years ago