Memory

Memory

1. Multi-store model of memory

   • Key words
     • Sensory
       • Duration-less than 1 second
         • Capacity-very limited
     • Short-term
       • Duration-Less than 1 minute
         • Capacity-Seven chunks of information
     • Long-term
       • Duration-Up to a lifetie
         • Capacity-unlimited
   • Murdock's study
     • Aim-To provide evidence to support the multi-store explanation of memory
     • Method-Learn a list of words presented one at a time and recall the words in any ordr
     • Results-The words at the end of the list were recalled first (recency effect) and words at the beginning were also recalled well (primary effect)
     • Conclusion-This provides evidence for seperate short-term and long-term stores. The recency and primary effect are evidence for this
     • Evaluation-Ecological validity, demand characteristics
   • Practical application
     • Rehearsal to plant something into the long term memory

2. Levels of processing

   • Key words
     • Visual-shallow
     • Phonetic-deep
     • Semantic-deepest
   • Craik and Tulving
     • Aim-To find out whether or not how the word was processed affected how well it was recalled
     • Method-Given words and questions about them to which they had to answer yes or no. Some required visual processing; otgers required acoustics and the others were semantic
     • Results-Words that required semantic processing were more likely to be remembered and the least remembered were the ones that required visual processing
     • Conclusion-Processing material in a deep way meant that recall was better
     • Evaluation-High Demand characteristics, low population validity, reliable
   • Practical application
     • In order to revise better, write things in your own words for emantic encoding so you're more likely to remember

3. Reconstructive memory

   • Bartlett
     • Aim-To see if people when given something unfamiliar to remember would alter the infornmation
     • Method-Given a story called 'The war of the ghosts' which is a native american legend and were later asked to recall the story as accurate as possible. This was then repeated several times during the weeks that followed
     • Results-Participants found it difficult to remember bits of the story concerned with spirits and changed bits of the story so it made more sense. Each time they retold the story they changed it more
     • Conclusion-Memory is influenced by our own beliefs
     • Evaluation-Low ecological validity, low poplulation validity

4. Explanation of forgetting

   • Context-Godden and Baddeley
     • Aim-To see if people who learn and tested in the same environment will recall more information thanthose who learn and are tested in a different one
     • Method-One group learnt on land and recalled on land, another on land and then in water, another in water then on land and the last in water and then recalled in water again
     • Evaluation-Low ecological validity, high demand characteristics
   • Brain damage
   • Interference

5. Leading questions-Loftus and Palmer

   • Aim-To see if asking leading questions affected the accuracy of recall
   • Method-Shown films of car accidents and some were asked 'how was fast the car going when it hit the car' and others were asked how fast when it smashed the car.
   • Results-Those who heard 'smashed' gave a higher speed estimate than those who heard 'hit'
   • Conclusion-Leading questions will affect the accuracy of recall

6. Context-Geiselman et al

   • Aim-To see if reinstating the context of an event will affect the accuracy of witnesses' accounts
   • Method-Shown a police training film of a violent crime. Two days later they were interviewed about what they saw. Half of the participants had the event recreated and the other half had standard police interview techniques
   • Results-The participants who had the context recreated recalled more accurate facts than the others
   • Conclusion-Recreating context during interview will increase accuracy of recall and is known as cognitive interviews

7. Unfamiliar faces-Bruce and Young

   • Aim-To see if familiarity affects the accuracy of identifitying faces
   • Method-Psychology lecturers were caught on security cameras at the entrance of a building. Participants were then asked to identify the faces
   • Results-The lecturers students made more correct identifications than other students
   • Conclusion-Previous familiarity helps when identifying faces

8. Stereotyping-Cohen

   • Aim-see if stereotypes affect memory
   • Method-Shown a video of a man and women eating in a restaurant and half were told the women was a waitress and the others a librarian
   • Results-The two groups had different descriptions which matched stereotypes
   • Conclusion-Stereotypes affect the accuracy of accounts