memory

memory

1. models of memory

   • WMM - Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
     • • Robbins et al (1996)
         • AIM: to study the role of the central executive in remembering chess positions by investigating the effect of generating random letter strings.
         • PROCEDURE: 20 chess player had 10 seconds to memorise the positions of 16 chess pieces from a real game. The procedure was repeated 20 times using a different game each time. While memorising the positions, participants either: simultaneously engaged the central executive by generating random letter sequences, concentrating to avoid any meaningful combinations OR simultaneously, carried out an articulatory suppression task. After 10 seconds, the participants' memory was tested by asking them to arrange the pieces on another board to match what they had just seen.
         • FINDINGS: Participants in the articulatory suppression condition performed well in recalling the positions of the chess pieces. Participants in the letter generation performed poorly
         • CONCLUSION: the impaired performance of those generating the letter sequences demonstrated that the central executive played a role in remembering chess positions. The good performance of participants in the articulatory suppression suggests that the phonological loop was not involved in remembering the positions.
         • EVALUATION: well designed enables us to conclude that different tasks did cause the difference in performance (cause and effect). Generating meaningless letter sequences has been claimed by many cognitive psychologists as a valid way of engaging the central executive, as it requires lots of attention - eco validity.
   • characteristics
     • encoding
       • Baddeley (1966)
         • AIM: to explore the effects of acoustic and semantic encoding in STM/LTM
         • PROCEDURE: divided into 4 groups and shown a list of 10 words (5 words for STM): acoustically similar or dissimilar or semantically similar or dissimilar. This was repeated 4 times.
           • STM: recall immediately in correct order.
           • LTM: recall after 20 mins of doing another task
         • LTM
           • FINDINGS: recall was much worse for semantically similar (55%) than dissimilar (85%). Recall was the same for acoustic groups.
           • CONCLUSION: primarily semantic coding, difficulty recalling words with similar meanings.
           • EVALUATION: experimental method allows causal link between type of coding used and the recall accuracy. only looks at words, memories may be encoded differently.
         • STM
           • FINDINGS: recall was much worse for acoustically similar (55%) than dissimilar (75%). semantically similar had a slight detrimental effect on recall.
           • CONCLUSION: relies more on sound of words than meaning, as difficulty remembering words that sounded the same.
           • EVALUATION: supports Conrad. Causal link. However, might not represent the complexity of encoding. Brandimonte found that STM may use different forms of encoding.
     • Capacity
       • Baddeley (1975)
         • AIM:
   • MSM

2. memory strategies

3. EWT factors

Imagens e arquivos do mapa