Memory

Paper 1 – Revision notes


STM + LTM




Capacity
Info - mind - limited time
- amount - info - held
- digit span - jacobs
- 9.3 items - 7 numbers
- reviewed Miller 7 +- 2




Evaluation


1) Cowen
- chinking - 4 chunks
- 4+ = forgotten
- not extensive


2) individual differences
- adults - 8 numbers
- children - 6 numbers


3) early research - not valid
- not as controlled
- extraneous variables


Duration
length time - info - held
Peterson
- nonsense syllables
- 3 numbers - count back - 3
- recall trigram
- duration = 3-18 seconds


Evaluation


1) artificial test
- trigram not everyday use
- ecological validity


2) tested capacity not duration
- syllable displaced than decayed
- lack validity

3) LTM = unlimited
yearbook - 15yr - 90%, 47yrs - fair amount
= unlimited

Coding
way - info - transformed - remember
beddeley
- list of acoustically/semantically word
- acoustic similar - STM error
- semantic similar - LTM error
= STM - acoustic
= LTM - semantic


Evaluation

1) LTM operationalized - 20m
- inaccurate
- Lasts longer

2) Acoustic not exclusive to STM
- LTM relys on acoustic




Types of LTM

LTM - 2 subsections
1- Explicit - conscious effort
2- Implicit - no active recall

Episodic
- personal memory
- specific to individual
Procedural
- how to perform activities, eg swimming
- implicit
- explicit - inhibits ability
Semantic
knowing information
e.g. - capitals of countries
explicit


Evaluations

1) Brains scans - support
episodic - hippocampus, temporal+frontal
procedural - cerebellum
semantic - temporal lobes

2) case study - HM
- damaged hippocampus
- no new episodic/semantic
- can develop procedural
- brain - different parts of memory

3) X case studies
- small samples
- X generalise
- X representative
- memory prior to damage - unknown



Multi-store model

Atkinson+shifren - 3 separate stores
linear direction

Sensory
- receives info - 5 senses
- bombarded w/ info
- recall - pay attention
- encodes - echoic + iconic
- duration - 2 seconds
- capacity - large

STM
- encodes - acoustically - baddeley
- duration - 3-18 sec - peterson
- capacity - 7 +- 2 - miller
- held - fragile state
- maintenance rehearsal - LTM
- decay/displaced

LTM
- encodes - semantically - baddeley
- capacity - unlimited
- duration - lifetime - birbeck
remains until recalled


Evaluation

1) Peterson research support theory
= stm limited
X - lab experiment
- lack ecological validity
- low mundane realism
- lack external validity
- cant generalise

2) KF - Amnesia
- read digits to him - poor recall
- read himself - good recall
visual - good
auditory - weak
stm - not unitary store

3) theory - LTM - unitary store
Amnesia
- forget episodic
- Retain semantic + procedural



Working memory model


- MSM = oversimplifies STM - not unitary
- 4 components
- 2 task - same component - interference
- 2 task - different component - successful

Central executive
- limited capacity
- modality free
- allocates tasks + attention
- monitors info

Phonological store
- inner ear
1- phonological loop - hear
2- Auticulatory process - speech
=can listen + speak - same time

Visio-spatial sketchpad
- inner eye
Visual cache - objects seen
Inner scribe - relationship between object

Episodic buffer
Temporary storage system
- interrogates info - all stores
- combines with LTM


Evaluations

1) Further evidence
baddeley
angles of letter F
same component - tracking lazer X
different component - saying 'the'
- cant do taks - same component

2) word length effect
Baddeley
short word - easy recall
long words - difficult
= P.L. - limited capacity

3) Methodology
- lab = artificial = ecological validity
- ignores real life examples
- lack external validity



Explanations for forgetting: Interference

forgetting - not accessing info in LTM
interference - new/old info


Proactive
old interferes new
Underwood
- 1 and 10 - list of words
- recall 24h later
1 list - 70% recall
10 list - 20% recall


Retroactive
new interferes old
muller
- word list - learn
- 20m interval
G1 - nothing, G2 - interference task
- interference task - performed worse
- not about time lapsed, about interferences

Similarity
McGough
- word list - learn
- 2nd word list learn - varied
- synonym list - performed worse
= greater interference


Evaluation

1) Methodology
- lab - controlled - no extraneous
X - ecological validity
- nonsense syllables not same as faces

2) Limited explanation
- interference - not often occurs
- memories need to be similar
- doesn't explain forgetting completely

3) Accessiblity vs Availabilty
- memory tested - 24hr later
- spontaneous recognition
- same recall
temporarily not accessible rather than lost



Explanation for forgetting: Retrieval failure


forgetting - lack of cues - retrieval failure

encoding specificity principle
- cue present at encoding and retrival - useful
- cues link to the memory
- other cues - learning - not meaningful C-DF, S-DF

Context-dependant forgetting
godden+baddeleyC
- learn words in environmental conditions that
matched and didn't match (land, underwater)
- recall - 40% lower and non-matching conditions
cues different = retrieval failure

State-dependant forgetting
Carter+casseday
- recall words in different internal staes
(hayfever drugs/ not)
- mismatch of internal state when recall
= forgetting


Evaluation

1) research to support
- lab, field, natural + anecdotal evidence
  = relevant to real life

2) Application
- exam - improve recall
- revise in room exam I held
- even imagining - effective
and cognitive interviews

3) Doesn't always work
- studying - complicated associations
- cues are less effective in presence of
better cues
= retrieval cues - relevant but doesn't
explain all



EWT: misleading information

leading questions
*loftus/palmer
Procedure
- traffic accidents
- questionnaire - "how fast was the car going
when the hit each other"
- (smashed, collided, bumped)
Findings
leading questions affect response
Procedure 2
"did you see broken glass"
- no broken glass
Findings
leading question changed actual memory

Post-event Discussion
Conformity effect
- co-witness - consensus view of incident
- watch same incident, different video
71% - discussed event - mistakenly recall event
Repeating interview
- use leading questions
- alter memory
- especially for children


Evaluation

1) supporting evidence
- bugs bunny - not Disney
- ppts evaluate bugs bunny ads
findings - report shaking hands - bugs bunny
= inaccurate memory

2) individual differences
- Age
- young remember better than old
= prone to misleading info

3) Applications
- criminal justice system
of problems w/ EWT
- large factor - convicting innocent ppl



EWT: Anxiety

Anxiety - negative emotion

*Johnson/scott
weapon affects EWT
procedure/Findings
- waiting room - argument
- greasy pen - 49% recall (low anxiety)
- bloody knife - 33% recall (high anxiety)
Weapon focus effect
- focus on weapon
- than key features
= reduces EWT

*Christian/hubinette
procedure
- real life bank robbery
- naturalistic
- high/low anxiety
asked 4-15months later
findings
victims 73% better recall than bystanders
= Enhances EWT

*Daffenbacher
review studies
10 - high anxiety - better recall
11 - high anxiety - poor recall
= yerks Dodson
   - moderate anxiety = high recall


Evaluation

1) pickle - surprise not anxiety
- reduces recall
hairdressers
- handgun, wallet, raw chicken, scissors
- raw chicken - high surprise = low accuracy

2) Individual differences
- emotionally sensitive/unstable
- more negatively affected

3) real life vs lab
- real - context of crime
- lab - not create real anxiety
eg of lab - reduce accuracy
real life - greater loss of accuracy



Cognitive interview

- improve standard interviews
- forgetting - lack of retrieval cue

1) Recall everything
- irrelevant - trigger

2) Change order
- reverse - prevent expectations

3) Reinstate context
- Recreate internal/external
environment

4) Change perspective
- pick up details - forgotten


Evaluations


1) time consuming than standard interview
- rush through answers without thinking

2) Fisher et.al
- report in greater detail
American detective - use technique


3) Koenken et.al
-witness - recall incorrect info
- more info - more mistakes