4 Cognitive

4 Cognitive

1. Tulving Semantic & Episodic

   • Episodic memory- Memories for episodes/events that have happened to you
     • Episodic memory is a part of the long-term memory responsible for storing information about events (i.e. episodes) that we have experienced in our lives.
   • Semantic memory- Memory for meanings such as the meaning of words and symbols.
     • Semantic memory is a part of the long-term memory responsible for storing information about the world.
   • Tulving focuses on semantic memory and proposes two parts to what semantic memory is. (semantic and episodic)
     • They differ in the nature of info stored and the way one is autobiographical and one is cognitive.
       • Many tasks involove both semantic and episodic and therefore it is hard to test them individually.

2. Bartlett Reconstructive memory

   • Schema- A mental representation of a collection of knowledge about an event, situation or object.
     • Memory is grouped into categories eg. what a 'criminal' is
       • memory will use schemas to tell us what is supposed to happen. They may fill in gaps in our our memory and could even put pressure on our minds to remember things to fit in with our schemas.
   • Theory is that our memory does not play back our experiences instead it reconstructs or changes them imaginatively.
     • Loftus did the practical research into his theory and argued that reconstructive memory implies that eyewitnesses to crimes will often be unreliable.
   • Chinese Whispers
     • It was during a game of 'Chinese whispers' Bartlett came up with the idea of reconstructive memory due to the word/phrase changing as it moved around the group.
     • Study
       • he then designed a tudy based on this by showing 20 students a ghost story with unusal factors. He then asked them to read and then recall it on several occasions after a few hours, days, weeks, months. This is a technique called serial reproduction.
         • He then compared how the recalled versions differed from the original story. (shortened from 330 words to 180, changing unfamiliar parts to familiar ideas, rationalised the story with baffling parts)
   • Applying reconstructive memory
     • Unreliable eyewitnesses; they have to reproduce their testimony- you would expect leveling and sharpening of memories to happen.
       • They are exposed to leading questions and therefore make the eyewitness very unreliable.
     • Evaluation
       • Weaknesses- Not scientific, did not follow standarised procedures, no scoring for measuring changes in recall other than counting no. words. The study was unrealistic.
       • Strengths- Carried out plenty of lab experiments, all had tight controls, standarised procedures, and collected quantitative data making them objective and reliable.
       • Comparison- Tulving argues that our memory has semantic stores where we keep our understanding of relationships. A weakness is compared to other theories it doesn't explain how memory is reconstructed. Other theories describe the process at work in rehearsing, retrieving and recalling.

3. Sebastian & Hernandez-Gil's Study

   • Aim- To investigate the development of phonological loop in children between the ages of 5 and 17 using digit span. Also to compare findings with to their previous research of adult, aged and dementia patients.
   • Procedure
     • 570 volunteer participants from schools in Madrid. They were all native Spanish and impairments in hearing, reading and writing ability were controlled.
       • They were divided into 5 age groups and the average digit span was recorded.
         • Tested individually they were read the increasing sequences of digits to recall in the correct order. They were read out at a rate of 1 word per second and increased by one digit each sequence.
           • The digit span was recorded as the max digit recalled in the correct order without error.
   • Results
     • 5 years- 3.76
     • 6-8 years- 4.34
     • 9-11 years- 5.13
     • 12-14 years-5.46
     • 15-17 years- 5.83
   • Evaluation
     • Reliability = good.
       • By comparing to existing data it can easily be replicated. Results are likely to be reliable as they were similar to the English results.
     • Ecological validity = low
       • it was artificial and didn't reflect real life situations. You woudln't need to recall lists on a daily basis.
     • Controlled
       • Controlling participant variables (reading, writing and hearing) measn they are testing what they intended to (phonological loop capacity) without having extraneous variables.

4. PRACTICAL

   • Aim- to investigate the effect of acoustic similarity on short term memory.
   • ETHICS
     • Consent (given verbally when invited to take part)
       • Confidentiality (fully anonymous numbers will be issued)
         • Right to withdraw (told prior to it that they can withdraw themselves or their data at any time)
           • Risk (they may feel pressured so they will be reassured in the brief before)
   • SAMPLE
     • Target population- students 16-18 yrs
       • Sampling technique- Opportunity sampling
         • Sample size- 20
   • HYPOTHESIS
     • Research hypothesis- participants presented with acoustically dissimilar sounding words will recall significantly more words from a list of 15.
     • Null hypothesis- There will be no significant difference in the number of words recalled of 15 between participants presented with acoustically similar and those presented with acoustically dissimilar words.
   • Experimental design
     • Independent design
       • Why is it suitable- I won't get any order effects, there shouldn't be anyone with individual differences
       • A weakness- there may be a few individual variables
   • Variables
     • Independent- whether the words presented are acoustically similar or dissimilar in the way they sound.
     • Dependent- the number of words accurately recalled from a list of 15.
   • Statistics
     • Dissimilar
       • Similar
         • 9.5
           • 9
             • 9.6
               • 7
       • 9.5
         • 9
           • 9.8
             • 8
               • Range
             • Mean
           • Mode
         • Median
     • Very similar although the acoustically dissimilar words have a couple of slightly higher averages.
   • A Mann-Whitney (U) test is selected because the investigation is looking for a difference, the level of data is ordinal and unrelated.
   • ANALYSIS
     • STRENGTHS
       • Reliability- can easily be repeated again as we controlled the experiment
         • Ethical- no one went through psychological or physical pain so it was all ethical
     • WEAKNESSES
       • There wasn't an even spread of females to males in each group which may have effected the statistics.

5. Individual differences

   • Autobiographical memory
     • Episodic memory- individual episodes and events in our lives.
   • Brain damaged patients
     • If someone has brain damage that affects their memory, the effects will depend on where the damage is within the brain.
   • Schema's
     • Reconstructive memory suggests that we remember using schema's that we have built through our learning which means schema's are an individuals thing.