Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Memory
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Describe the multi store model of memory. | A stimulus input first enters the sensory memory. It will stay there for a short time and be erased if attention is not paid to it. If attention is paid the stimulus moves to the short term store. With rehearsal it moves into the long term store. |
| Who designed the multi store model of memory? | Atkinson and Shriffin. |
| What type of model is the multi store model? | Structural, as it has different components. Information flows through the different stages of the system. |
| What are the different sensory stores in sensory memory? | Iconic for visual input, echoic for auditory input and haptic for tactile contact. |
| According to Baddeley (1988), what is the purpose of the stores? | To make sense continuous and not jerky and discontinued, for example when watching a film. |
| What four things have studies shown about sensory memory? | 1. Items remain there for less than 2 seconds. 2. Information in sensory memory is unprocessed. 3. We can't select what goes in, but we can select what moves to short term memory by giving it attention. 4. There are separate stores for different senses |
| What did Sperling (1960) do? | Investigate sensory memory. |
| Why did Sperling get different results for WRT and PRT? | With WRT the image of the letters decayed over the recall time. |
| What are two strengths of Sperling's methodology? | 1. Lab experiment, so high level of control. Means reliability is high as replicability is also high. 2. Sperling adapted the test to produce a new hypothesis, so the study is rich in detail. |
| What are two weaknesses of Sperling's methodology? | 1. The stimuli and lab situation are artificial - lack of mundane realism and ecological validity, so we must question external validity. 2. Ethical issues - participants could become frustrated, so reassurance and debrief afterwards needed to protect. |
| What was the first part of Sperling's experiment? | First participants were shown 3 rows of 4 letters were 50 milliseconds. They could recall 4/5 letters but knew there were more there. This was whole report technique. |
| What was the second part of Sperling's experiment? | A tone was then paired with each row - high was a cue for recall of the top row and so on. This was the partial report technique. On average participants remembered 3 letters from each row using this technique. Thus around 9 out of 12 letters were seen. |
| What is the capacity of STM? | 7 +/-2 items |
| What is the capacity of LTM? | Unlimited |
| What is the duration of STM? | Very limited |
| What is the duration of LTM? | Unlimited |
| How is information encoded in STM? | Mainly acoustically |
| How is information encoded in LTM? | Mainly semantically |
| How is information forgotten in STM? | Mainly displacement |
| How is information forgotten in LTM? | Mainly interference |
| What is displacement? | Displacement refers to items in STM being replaced by new ones coming in as capacity is so limited. |
| What is interference? | Interference refers to memories in LTM getting confused with each other, which may cause us to forget them. |
| What evidence is there for the distinction between STM and LTM? | The serial position curve |
| Describe the shape of the serial position curve. | Starts high (primacy effect) then dips (asymptote) then increases again (recency effect) |
| How does the serial position curve support the distinction between STM and LTM? | The primacy effect occurs because items are rehearsed and passed from STM to LTM. The recency effect occurs because items are still in STM. The asymptote occurs because neither of the above is able to happen so items are forgotten by displacement. |
| 1 strength of the serial position curve. | The curve is found after many different delays between seeing the words and recall, so it is high in external validity and can explain a multitude of scenarios. |
| 1 limitation of the serial position curve. | Some psychologists argue that different parts of the curve would be individually changed if it showed a true distinction. This makes us question the validity of the curve and the distinction. |
| What research showed the distinction between STM and LTM? | Glanzer and Cunitz (1966) |
| What did Glanzer and Cunitz do? | Two groups were shown a list of words. The first group then had free recall of the words, but the second group had to complete a 'distractor task' of counting back in 3s from a given number for 30 seconds before recalling. |
| What did Glanzer and Cunitz find? | The participants in the first condition produced the serial position curve. The participants in the second condition showed high primacy effect, but no recency effect as the distractor task had displaced the most recent words. |
| How did Glanzer and Cunitz's findings support the distinction between STM and LTM? | It supported the existence of STM and its capacity and duration as words were displaced by the distractor task. It also supports the idea that rehearsal is important for the transition from STM to LTM. |
| Strengths of Glanzer and Cunitz's methodology. | Repeats were carried out which makes the results more reliable as it proves the production of the serial position curve wasn't an anomaly. It was a lab experiment, which meant the experiment had high control of extraneous variables and replicability. |
| A limitation of Glanzer and Cunitz's methodology. | It was a lab experiment so very artificial and not representative of real life. It lacked mundane realism and therefore ecological validity. |
| What did Glanzer (1972) find about factors affecting the serial position curve? | The age of the participant, the familiarity of words and speed of presentation affect the primacy effect, but not the recency effect. |
| What neuropsychological evidence is there for STM and LTM? | 'HM' suffered brain damage - STM was intact (could remember 6 items) but could not commit items to LTM. Suggests specific brain areas for STM and LTM. 'KF' could still commit things to and recall from his LTM but STM was very bad (1 item). |
| What things can impede the capacity of LTM? | Interference or decay |
| What evidence is there for the capacity of STM? | Jacobs (1887) used the digit span technique (repeating lines of digits in the right order) to find that STM holds 7 items, plus or minus 2. Also supported by Miller. |
| What technique can improve memory span? | Chunking; for example 5 3-letter words are easier to remember than 15 single letters. |
| What do some psychologists remark about chunking? | Some think the term 'chunk' is too vague. Simon (1974) found that memory span is smaller for large chunks than small chunks. |
| Four factors which can influence STM capacity | 1. Influence of LTM 2. Reading aloud 3. Individual differences 4. Pronunciation time |
| How does LTM influence the capacity of STM? | Cowan (2000) suggested that Miller and Jacobs' tests lacked validity and STM only holds 4 items, because these tests allowed rehearsal. |
| How does reading aloud influence capacity of STM? | Baddeley (1999) thought this helps digit span because items remain in the echoic store. |
| How do individual differences affect capacity of STM? | Anxious people have shorter memory spans. |
| How does pronunciation affect capacity of STM? | Naveh-Benjamin and Ayres (1986) found a correlation between long digits and shorter memory span. |
| What research is there into duration of LTM? | Peterson and Peterson (1959) |
| What did Peterson and Peterson (1959) do? | To test duration of STM, participants had to repeat nonsense trigrams of letters after a 3/6 etc to 18 second gap. During the gap they had to count back from a number in threes to prevent rehearsal. |
| What did Peterson and Peterson (1959) find and what do these findings show? | 80% of trigrams were remembered correctly after 3 seconds, but only 10% after 18 seconds. We can conclude from this that it is difficult to hold items in STM for longer than 18 seconds. |
| What criticisms are there of Peterson and Peterson's methodology? | Trigrams and lab setting are artificial and lack ecological validity. Also proactive interference - only first trigram is a true trial as the other trigrams may be easily confused. Counting may have displaced the trigrams rather than preventing rehearsal. |
| What are the three factors affecting STM duration? | 1. Rehearsal 2. Intention to recall 3. Amount of information |
| How does rehearsal affect STM duration? | Items such as phone numbers may count as one item with rehearsal. |
| How does intention to recall affect STM duration? | STM recall is better if a concerted effort to remember is made. |
| How does information affect STM duration? | Peterson and Peterson that if the letters in a trigram formed a distinct words such as cat, recall after 18 seconds was 90%. |
| What did Bahrick et al. (1975) do? | To test duration of LTM, 392 American graduates were tested on their college classmates. The techniques used were photo recognition, matching names to pictures and free recall with no picture. |
| What did Bahrick et al. (1975) find? | 15 years after graduation, 90% of faces were recognised, and 60% on free recall. After 48 years, free recall was 30%, name recognition was at 80% and photo recognition at 40%. |
| 1 methodological strength of Bahrick et al. (1975) | This was a field experiment, so there was high ecological validity. |
| 3 methodological weaknesses of Bahrick et al. (1975) | This was a field experiment, so many factors could have interfered with results. Difficult to say whether decline in memory is due to passage of time or effects of aging, and results may be unreliable as some students may have only been acquaintances. |
| What four factors affect LTM duration? | 1. Experimental techniques 2. Depth of learning 3. Pattern of learning 4. Nature of learned material |
| How do experimental techniques affect LTM duration? | Bahrick et al (1975) found that memory was better with recognition than free recall. |
| How does depth of learning affect LTM duration? | If things are learned well a first time they are likely to be remembered better in the future. |
| How does pattern of learning affect LTM duration? | Things like vocabulary may be learned better in small chunks than in long, intense sessions. |
| How does nature of learned material affect LTM duration? | Some subjects may be easier to learn than others, perhaps if they are based on skills rather than facts. |
| What are the three types of encoding used in memory? | Acoustic (the sound of a stimulus), visual (the appearance of a stimulus), semantic (the meaning of a stimulus) |
| What evidence is there that STM encoding is mainly acoustic? | Conrad (1964) |
| What did Conrad (1964) do? | Participants were asked to write down letters in correct order immediately after presentation. One condition had acoustically similar letters and the other had acoustically dissimilar letters. Strings were 6 letters long, so digit span wasn't an issue. |
| What did Conrad (1964) find and what can we conclude from his findings? | Many recall errors were made with acoustically similar letters. This shows us that visual stimuli are encoded acoustically which is why mistakes are made in recall. |
| Name two issues with Conrad (1964)? | 1. The letters and setting were artificial, so ecological validity is low. 2. All participants were students, so population validity is low and results may not be applicable to the general population. |
| What evidence is there to support Conrad (1964)? | Posner and Keele (1967) |
| What did Posner and Keele (1967) do? | Participants were shown combinations of letters such as BB or Bb, then asked if the letters had the same name. |
| What did Posner and Keele (1967) find and what can we conclude from these findings? | Participants took the same length of time to respond to pairs such as BB and Bb, suggesting that stimuli are coded acoustically as if we code visually then Bb would take longer to respond to. |
| What evidence is there that LTM coding is mainly semantic? | Baddeley (1966) |
| What did Baddeley (1966) do? | 4 lists of words - acoustically and semantically similar and dissimilar. Participants had their recall tested on these words for STM and LTM. For LTM there were 20 minutes between presentation and recall to allow rehearsal. |
| What did Baddeley (1966) find and what can we conclude from these findings? | Test on STM found the same as Conrad - acoustically similar words hardest to remember. The test on LTM found that acoustic similarity had no effect on recall but semantically similar words were recalled poorly. |
| One strength of Baddeley (1966) | The setting is less artificial than Conrad's because it used words rather than letters. |
| One limitation of Baddeley (1966) | The setting is artificial so lacks ecological validity. |
| What other types of encoding are used in LTM? | Acoustic coding - we can recall the sound of a police siren - and visual coding - we can recall faces. |
| Two strengths of the multi store model | 1. It has made a significant contribution to psychology, and many psychologists agree with the idea of separate stores. 2. There is much evidence to support it, for example the case study of KF, who suffered brain damage. |
| Three weaknesses of the multi store model | 1. Too simplistic - disregards the nature of information 2. Information doesn't always flow through the system - flashbulb memory (Kulik and Brown)KF was able to commit items to LTM even though his STM was poor 3. Much supporting evidence is artificial |
| What inspired Baddeley and Hitch to devise the working memory model? | They observed that some parts of KF's STM worked, but others didn't. They asked 'What is STM for?' |
| How did Baddeley and Hitch test their theory about a new memory model? | They used the dual task method - participants recited 6 digits whilst performing a reasoning task. Performance on the reasoning task was not impaired, suggesting digit span is not a measure of STM capacity. |
| What did Baddeley and Hitch conclude from their research? | They concluded that STM has multiple components - more like a workplace where many tasks can be performed. LTM is a more passive store which contains information once used by STM. |
| What are the three components of the working memory model? | The central executive, phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketchpad. |
| What do the three components of working memory have in common? | They all have limited capacity. |
| What are the four features of the central executive? | 1. Can process any sensory information despite limited capacity 2. Sorts out relevant information 3. Retrieves memories from LTM 4. Commands 2 'slave systems' - phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketchpad |
| What is the purpose of the phonological loop? | To store verbal information. |
| What are the two parts of the phonological loop and what do they do? | The articulatory loop, which holds words by sub-vocal repetition, which is linked to the phonological store, a passive store. |
| What is the purpose of the visuo-spatial sketchpad? | To store visual and spatial information. |
| What are the two components of the visuo-spatial sketchpad and what do they do? | The inner scribe is an active rehearsal mechanism, which is linked to the visual cache, a passive store. |
| What evidence is there for the central executive? | Baddeley (1996) |
| What did Baddeley (1996) do? | Participants had to type random numbers on a keyboard whilst either reciting the alphabet, ascending numbers or switching between the two. |
| What did Baddeley (1996) find and what can we conclude from this? | In the third condition the typed sequence was less random because it used the same resources in the central executive. |
| What evidence is there for the phonological loop? | Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) |
| What did Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) do? | Participants were shown lists of words for short bursts, then had to write them down in serial order. One condition had 1 syllable words, the other had polysyllabic words. |
| What did Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) find and what can we conclude from this? | Words in the first condition were remembered far better, showing the 'word length effect' - capacity is for word length, not number of items. |
| What happened when Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) used articulatory suppression? | When participants had to repeat a meaningless phrase whilst doing the task, the word length effect was removed and all words were recalled poorly. This supports the articulatory loop as it shows the need for a rehearsal system. |
| One strength of Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) | This was a lab experiment, so there was high control over variables. |
| One limitation of Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) | It is possible that longer words were recalled poorly because they were less familiar to participants. |
| What evidence is there for the visuo-spatial sketchpad? | Shepard and Feng (1972) and Baddeley, Grant, Wight and Thomson (1973) |
| What did Shepard and Feng (1972) do? | Participants were shown nets of cubes and had to work out if a given two sides would meet. |
| What did Shepard and Feng (1972) find and what can we conclude from these findings? | The time taken to solve the puzzle was related to the number of folds in the cube. This suggests that mental visual images are much like real life perception. |
| What did Baddeley, Grant, Wight and Thomson (1973) do? | Participants had to follow a point of light on a wall whilst visualising a block letter. Starting at the bottom left hand corner and moving round, for each angle they had to say whether one corner of that angle was the top or bottom line of the letter. |
| What did Baddeley, Grant, Wight and Thomson (1973) find and what can we conclude from this? | Participants found it very hard to complete both tasks at once. This provides evidence for the visuo-spatial sketchpad as the two tasks were competing for its resources. |
| Two methodological issues with Baddeley, Grant, Wight and Thomson (1973) | 1. The experiment was artificial 2. Participants may have felt frustrated, so reassurance is important to ensure protection. |
| One strength of Baddeley, Grant, Wight and Thomson (1973) | The repeated measures design meant that individual differences were eliminated as extraneous variables. |
| 3 strengths of the working memory model | 1. It is more thorough than STM so many psychologists prefer it 2. It can explain things STM can't, eg only some aspects of KF's STM working 3. It can be applied to much MSM research, eg acoustic confusion and digit span |
| 3 limitations of the working memory model | 1. It still doesn't offer a complete explanation for memory processes. 2. Many psychologists say the role of the central executive is vague and unexplained. 3. It doesn't explain why we can listen to music whilst doing other tasks. |
| Why is it important to have accurate eye witness testimony? | Because it is heavily relied upon by juries, police officers and prosecutors. |
| Which 5 factors can affect EWT? | Misleading information, anxiety, age, consequentiality and individual differences. |
| Define misinformation acceptance. | When false memories are absorbed and implanted into the fragile memory of a crime. |
| What did Loftus (1975) do? | Participants were all shown a video of a car accident and then divided into a control and an experimental group. The control group were asked about what they had seen but the experimental group were asked about a barn which hadn't been there. |
| What did Loftus (1975) find and what can we conclude from this? | The misleading information was absorbed into the memories of 17% of the experimental group, compared to 3% in the control group. |
| 1 strength of the methodology in Loftus (1975) | The film was authentic and realistic - high in face validity |
| 1 limitation of the methodology in Loftus (1975) | The situation was artificial and in real life people wouldn't know they were about to observe something and have to remember details from it. |
| What did Loftus and Zanni (1975) do? | Participants were shown a short clip of a car accident and then asked questions about it. One group was asked if they saw 'a' broken headlight, the other if they saw 'the' broken headlight. |
| What did Loftus and Zanni (1975) find and what can we conclude from this? | 17% of participants claimed to have seen a broken light when 'the' was used, compared to 3% when 'a' was used. This shows how influential small changes of wording in a question can be. |
| What did Loftus and Palmer (1974) do? | Participants were shown a short film of a car accident and then asked questions about it, including "How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?" However sometimes words of varying severity from 'bumped' to 'crashed' were used instead of 'hit'. |
| What did Loftus and Palmer (1974) find and what can we conclude from this? | 'Smashed' produced the highest speed estimate, 'contacted' the lowest. 1 week later, those asked the question with 'smashed' were more likely to report broken glass even though there was one. This shows how leading questions can prompt a certain response. |
| What did List (1986) do? | Participants rated events likely to occur in a shoplifting in terms of how likely they were to happen. 8 items from the list were made into a video which was seen by new participants. After 1 week they had to recall what they had seen. |
| What did List (1986) find and what can we conclude from this? | Incidents rated as more likely to happen were remembered better and some highly rated incidents which weren't in the video were falsely remembered. |
| What did Tuckey and Brewer (2003) find and what can we conclude from this? | People have similar ideas about bank robberies (eg robbers are male, disguised, demand money and leave in getaway car) - the bank robbery schema. When shown a video of a bank robbery participants remembered parts conforming to the schema more accurately. |
| What did Loftus (1979) do? | Participants hear a discussion then see a man leave. In condition 1 conversation is amicable and about an equipment failure, then man with greasy hands leaves. In condition 2 conversation is heated, broken glass is heard and man leaves with bloody knife. |
| What did Loftus (1979) find and what can we conclude from this? | When asked to identify the man who left the room, 49% were successful in condition 1 and 33% in condition 2. This shows how anxiety and 'weapon focus' can reduce accuracy in EWT. |
| One strength of Loftus (1979) | High ecological validity, as participants didn't know the real trial was staged. |
| One weakness of Loftus (1979) | Ethical issues - participants could have been very distressed by the bloody knife. |
| What did Chrisianson and Hubinette (1993) do? | 110 people who were involved in 22 separate bank robberies were surveyed. Some were passive bystanders, but others were direct victims (eg held at gunpoint) |
| What did Chrisianson and Hubinette (1993) find and what can we conclude from this? | The direct victims had more accurate and detailed memories than those who were bystanders. This contradicts Loftus' research as these people presumably would have suffered more anxiety yet this hasn't affected their recall. |
| What did Poole and Lindsay (2001) do? | Children aged 3-8 were shown a science presentation, and later a parent read them a story containing facts from the presentation, as well as extra facts. Then the children were asked about what they had learned. |
| What did Poole and Lindsay (2001) find and what can we conclude from this? | Lots of the information from the story was absorbed into the memory of the presentation. Older children could identify which facts were from the story (source monitoring) but younger children couldn't. This has implications for EWT from younger children. |
| What did Foster et al (2004) do? | Two groups were shown the same video of a robbery, and then had to identify the robbers from an identity parade. One group were told that the video was real and would influence the trial, but the other group knew it was an experiment. |
| What did Foster et al (2004) find and what can we conclude from this? | The group who believed their EWT would have a consequence gave more accurate responses than the other group. Therefore can we really apply other EWT research to real life if participants knew it was all fake? |
| What 3 characteristics did Tomes and Katz (1997) find in people more likely to accept misinformation? | 1. They generally have poor recall of the event. 2. They score highly in terms of imagery vividness. 3. They are high in empathy. |
| What did Loftus (1979) do? | Participants were shown a video of a red purse being stolen, but later given an account of the theft with many errors, including that the purse was brown. |
| What did Loftus (1979) find and what can we conclude from this? | All but 2 participants accepted the misinformation that the stolen purse was brown. This shows that misinformation is less likely to be accepted if it regards an obvious detail. |
| Who designed the cognitive interview? | Geiselman |
| What has Geiselman's research found about the use of the cognitive interview? | Geiselman et al (1985) found that CI produced a more accurate EWT than a standard police interview. However Geiselman (1999) found it was less effective for children under 6 as they find the instructions confusing. |
| What are the four components of the cognitive interview? | 1. Context reinstatement (CI) 2. Report everything (RE) 3. Recall from changed perspective (CP) 4. Recall in reverse order (RO) |
| What happens in the CR stage of the cognitive interview? | In context reinstatement the witness describes the situation and everything about it; the weather, how they were feeling and any previous events. |
| What happens in the RE stage of the cognitive interview? | Recall everything requires the witness to recall every detail of the event, even if it seems trivial. |
| What happens in the CP stage of the cognitive interview? | Changed perspective requires the witness to recall the event from the perspective of other people who were there, not just themselves. |
| What happens in the RO stage of the cognitive interview? | Reverse order requires the witness to recall the event in different orders, going forwards and backwards. |
| How does the peg-word technique of memory improvement work? | There is a basic organisational structure - one is a bun, two is a shoe and so on. So you can create a visual image of the list of words that corresponds to each number - if word 1 is milk, you imagine a bottle of milk on top of a bun. |
| How does the method of loci technique of memory improvement work? | You imagine an everyday route that you know well, and attach things to be remembered to key locations. Visualise them in these places every day as you walk past. |
| What did Paivio (1965) find out about visual imagery? | 'Concrete nouns' which can be easily visualised are easier to remember than 'abstract words' which can't, like 'love', or 'nice'. |
| What did Bransford and Johnson (1972) find about organisation and understanding? | When participants were asked to remember details from a vague passage without a title they found this very hard, but if they were told before reading that the title was 'Doing the Laundry' they found it easier. This shows how important understanding is. |
| How does the chunking technique of memory improvement work? | Long strings of items which exceed digit span can be made into smaller chunks which fit within digit span and can be remembered easily. A good example is a phone number. |
| What did Geiselman and Glenny (1977) find about encoding and retrieval strategies? | Participants read a list of words, imagining them said in either a male or female voice. When the words were presented to them those which were read in the voice they had already imagined them read in were remembered better, as STM encoding is acoustic. |
| What did Craik and Lockhart (1977) find about the role of active processing in memory improvement? | Items are remembered best when they are either engaged with through a semantic task or just simply learned. |
| What evidence is there for the role of attention and practice in memory improvement? | A man called SF who had a normal digit span was able to remember 80 digits after practising 1 hour a day for 2 years. Research has also shown that spaced out learning is better for long term memory than mass learning. |
Created by:
strawberrydream96
Popular Psychology sets