Memory

Memory

1. Levels of Processing

   • Craik & Lockhart
     • Aim - To see if the type of question asked about words will have an effect on the number of words recalled
       • Method - The participants, were presented with a list of words, one at a time. They were asked questions about each word, to which they had to answer yes or no. The questions were either related to the look of the word ( Structural processing), sound of the word (Phonetic processing) or meaning of the word (Semantic processing)
         • Results - Participants identified 70% semantic words. 35% Phonetic words and 15% Structural words
           • Conclusion - The more deeply information is processed, The more likely we are to remember it
   • Schema - Something we'd imagine when a word goes into our head

2. Reconstructive Memory

   • Bartlett
     • Aim - To see if we remember unfamiliar events/stories
       • Method - Students were given a story called 'war of the ghosts'' which they had to read. Over a few weeks they had to read the story over and over again so they could eventually recall it
         • Results - The story changed each time they recalled the story
           • Conclusion - We change or memory when faced with unfamiliar situations to fit our schemas
   • Conclusion - Memories of familiar events will not change over time
     • Results - The accuracy of their descriptions remained the same no matter how many times they were asked to recall the information. This is unlike Bartlett's participants who changed their stories every time
       • Method - They asked university students to recall details of their first week at university. They were asked to do this several times throughout the year
         • Aim - To see if the recall of familiar stories changed in the same way that bartlett found with unfamiliar stories
           • Wynn and Logie

3. Why do we forget

   • Brain Damage
     • Clive Wearing - He remembers things from his past but doesnt know how. He can also read and write without knowing what he's doing. This type of amnesia was caused by a flu which now means he can only remember things for a few seconds. He remembers his wife
   • Context
     • B.O.O.B Study
       • Aim - To see if people that learn and are tested in the same environment will recall more than those who dont
         • Method - Participants were deep-sea divers. They were divided into 4 groups and were all given the same set of words to learn. 1- beach beach. 2 beach ocean, 3 ocean ocean. 4 ocean beach.
           • Results - Group 1 and 3 recalled 40% more than group 2 and 4.
             • Conclusion - If you learn and recall in the same place you'll do better
   • Interferance
     • Underwood & Postman
       • Aim - To test the retroactive theory in experiments
         • Method - two groups were given a list of words to learn. Group 1 was a control group who had to learn one list if words. Group 2 was an experimental group who got given the same list as group one and another list where every second word was different to the second word in the first list. They were then both asked to recall the first list.
           • Results - The control group recalled more accurately than the experimental group
             • Conclusion - The group that only had 1 list had no inteferance so they remembered ore
   • Anterograde Amnesia - Loss of memories after brain damage
   • Retrograde Amnesia - Loss of memory before brain damage

4. Multi-Store Model

   • Retrival
     • storage
       • Ecoding
   • Conclusion - Short term memory has a limited duration when you cant reherse
     • Results - The longer the interval delay, the less trigrams were recalled. With a 3 second delay 80% were recalled properly. with a 18 second delay, only 10% were recalled properly
       • Method - A lab experiment was done to make students recall trigrams. To prevent rehersal, they had to count backwards in 3's from a certain number. They were asked to recall trigrams after 3,,9,12,15 and 18 seconds
         • Aim - To investigate the duration of short term memory
           • Peterson & Peterson
   • Long term memory
     • Short term memory
       • Sensor information store
         • Stimulous

5. Eye Witnesses

   • Conclusion - Previous familiarity helps when identifying faces
     • Results - The lecturers' students made more correct identifications than experienced police officers
       • Method - Psychology lecturers were caught on cctv at the entrance of a building. Participants (Group 1 = lecturers students. Group 2 = experienced police officer) were asked to identify the faces seen on the cctv from a series of high quality photographs
         • Aim - To see if familiarity affects the accuracy of identifying faces
           • Bruce & Young
   • Eye Witness Testimony is an eyewitness recalling something at a crimescene
   • Loftus and Palmer
     • Aim - To see how accurate memory is and to see how words effect accuracy
       • Method - 45 students were shown traffic accident films. After each film they were given a question to describe what happened and what they speed of the car was. The question used verbs such as smashed, collided, bumped or contaced
         • Results - The more extreme the word in the question sounded, the higher the estimated speed of the car was. The less extreme the word, the lower the estimated speed was
           • Conclusion - Eye witness testimonys are generally unccurate and unreliable

6. Short term memory - when we can only recall things for a short time