Memory - Multi-Store Model of Memory

Memory - Multi-Store Model of Memory

1. Short-term memory

   • Coding
     • Baddeley (1966)
       • Gave pp 4 different word lists:
         • Acoustically similar
           • Worse with acoustically similar words when immediately recalled
             • STM coded acoustically
         • Acoustically dissimilar
         • Semantically similar
         • Semantically dissimilar
       • Evaluation
         • Limitation
           • Used artificial stimuli
             • Word lists had no personal meaning to pp
               • Need to be careful about generalising findings to different kinds of memory tasks
                 • E.g. may use semantic coding when processing more meaningful information
                 • Findings have limited application
   • Capacity
     • Jacobs (1887) used digit span
       • Researcher gives pp e.g. 4 digits and pp has to recall in correct order. If correct, pp give 5 digits etc.
       • Mean span for digits = 9.3 Mean span for letters = 7.3
       • Evaluation
         • Limitation
           • Lacks validity/has temporal validity
             • Conducted long time ago so lacked adequate control
               • E.g. pp may have been distracted so not perform aswell
             • Results not valid as there were confounding variables that were not controlled
         • Strength
           • Results of study confirmed in other research, supporting validity
     • Miller (1956) used chunking
       • Published paper "The Magic Number 7 (plus or minus 2)
       • Pp remember 5-9 chunks/units
         • STM could only hold 7 plus or minus 2 chunks of information
       • Evaluation
         • Limitations
           • Overestimated capacity of STM
             • Cowan (2001) reviewed other reviewed other research and conclude STM capacity only 4 chunks
           • Did not take into account other factors that affect capacity e.g. age
         • Strength
           • Jacob's reults (7.3/9.3) supported 7+-2
   • Duration
     • Peterson & Peterson (1959)
       • Tested 24 psychology undergraduates
         • Given a trigram (e.g. KMN) and 3 digit number to count back in 3s from (to prevent rehearsal)
           • 3 seconds = 80% trigrams recalled 18 seconds = 10% recalled
             • Duration of STM = 18s
       • Evaluation
         • Limitations
           • Used psychology students
             • May have encountered MSM before so demonstrated demand characteristics by changing behaviour to assist experiment
               • Generalisations cannot be made to non-psychology students
             • Memory may be different - may have studied strategies for memory improvement
           • Lacked external validity
             • Artificial stimulus as memorising consonant syllables does not reflect real-life memory activities
               • Unable to conclude if duration is longer for more important info e.g. phone numbers
         • Stength
           • Highly controlled and took place in lab in Indiana University
             • High degree of control for extraneous variables

2. Long-term memory

   • Coding
     • Baddeley (1966)
       • Pp asked to recall word list 20 minutes after
         • Did worse with semantically similar words
           • LTM coded semantically
     • Evaluation same as STM
   • Duration
     • Bahrick et al. (1975)
       • 392pp 17-74 y/o
       • Recall tested - recognising photos from year books and free recall of names
         • Photo recognition: 15 years after graduation = 90% accurate, 45 years after = 70%
         • Free recall of names: 15 years = 60%, 48 years = 30%
     • Evaluation
       • Strengths
         • High ecological validity
           • Real-life meaningful memories were used
             • Therefore results reflect our memory for real-life events and can be applied to everyday human memory
       • Limitations
         • Only used American graduates
           • Lacks population validity
             • Unable to generalise results to other populations
         • Confounding variable not controlled
           • Pp may have looked at yearbook photos and rehearsed their memory over the years
   • Capacity
     • Impossible to measure but believed to be infinite

3. Sensory register

   • Coding
     • Sense specific (different store for each sense)
   • Duration
     • 1/4 - 1/2 second
   • Capacity
     • V/ large (all sensory experience)

4. Evaluation of MSM

   • Strengths
     • Glanzer and Cunitz
       • Showed primacy and recency effect
         • When presented with a word list, pp remembered first few words and last few words best
           • First words into LTM as had time to rehearse
           • Last words stayed in STM
           • Middle words lost due to rehearsal of first words
           • Supports MSM as shows rehearsal needed to transfer to LTM
         • Supports existence of separate STM and LTM stores

Imagens e arquivos do mapa