Memory 3 (COG)

Memory 3 (COG)

1. Context Effects

   • when the SAME context is associated with both target and interfering list = mem reduced because of increase interference. inference list studied - separate room = interference reduced, mem is improved
   • Godden & Baddeley (1975) encoded info underwater/dry land. recalled info underwater/dry land. good mem in same context. memory was 40% better when recalled in same context
   • Smith et al (1978) studied in darkened/large room with windows. recalled words in either same or diff room. matching = 59% words recalled. mismatching = 46% recall
   • Parker Ngu & Cassidy (2001) effects of odour. studied words in either scented with lemon/lavender. recall words in same or diff room. changes in odour were sufficient to impair recall.
   • Recognition Mem
     • Murnane & Phelps (1994) see words and then tested recognition mem in either same or diff context. no context effects found for recog mem. BUT Russo et al (1999) recog mem for unfamiliar stimuli e.g. faces is influenced by changes of context
     • Macken (2002) presented with list of words in encoding phase, then test recog mem. for each word - indicated if mem was accompanied by experience of: recollection, knowing. R responses influenced by CC. K = NOT influence by CC. recog mem accompanied by recollection is reduced by CC. recog mem can be influenced by CC but only under certain conditions.
   • Encoding Processes
     • Smith (1986) process words as part of stm task, later unexpectedly asked to recall all words in same/diff context. context effects found = more recall when in same vs diff context
       • BUT, Fernandez & Glenberg (1985) construct sentences with target words e.g. pen, paper, write. requires deep processing. later recall target words in same/diff context. no context effects - when processing is deep = little/no CE
     • McDaniel et al (1989) encode sentences either bizarre/common, under conditions of imagery or semantic encoding. recall nouns in same/diff context. CE's found for common sentences. CE's reduced or eliminated when material to be recalled is processed in a more elaborative manner

2. Mental Reinstatement

   • Fisher et al (1984) mentally reinstate study context through imagination. MI of context reduced context effects.

3. Explaining Context Effects

   • i) Encoding Explanation: overshadowing account - some forms of learning processes do not favour encoding of associations betw. context and material being learned. when this occurs context dependency in memory = not found
   • ii) Retrieval Explanation: what really matters is conditions under which memory is retrieved. stated in principal of outshining. some retrieval cues are strong or weak. strong cues outshine weak cues.
   • iii) Other Explanations: Mood state dependant mem (Eich, 1995) claims diff rooms elicit diff moods. when ppts move from one room to another = mood change occur = mem reduced