Paper 1- Memory
- Created by: 12Hannah
- Created on: 01-05-19 12:41
View mindmap
- Psychology Paper 1- Memory
- Coding, Capacity & Duration
- Coding
- Baddely- STM= Acoustic LTM= Semantic
- Evaluation
- Artifical Stimuli- word lists has no persoinal significance
- Capacity
- Digit span- Jacobs: 9.3 digits, 7.3 letters
- Span of memory/ chunking- Miller: 7+/- 2 span. Chunking extends STM capacity
- Evaluation
- Lacking validity- Could be extraious variables (distractions, etc).
- Not So Many Chunks- Cowan: STM about four chunks
- Duration
- STM- Peterson & Peterson: up to 18 seconds (without rehersal)
- LTM- Bahrick et al. (yearbooks): recognition of faces 90% after 15 years, recall 60%. Recognition dropped to 70% after 48 years
- Evaluation
- Meaningless Stimuli- Consonant syllables used.
- Higher External Validity- Meaningful real life memories, showed greater recall than LTM studies with meaningless material (Shephard)
- Meaningless Stimuli- Consonant syllables used.
- Coding
- The Multi-Store Model
- Sensory Register- Iconic & Echonic stores = very brief duration, high- capacity. Transfer by attention.
- Short- term Memory- Limited capacity & duration store. Mainly acopustic coding. Transfer to LTM by rehersal.
- Long- term Memory (LTM)- Unlimited capacity & duration store. Mainly semantic. Created via maintenance rehearsal.
- Evaluation
- Supporting Research Evidence- Studies into coding, capacity & duration demonstrates differances between STM & LTM
- More Than One Type Of STM- Studies of amnesia (KF) show different STMs for visual & auditory materials
- More Than One Type Of Rehersal- Elaborative rehersal neccessary for transfer to LTM, not maintenance rehearsal
- Types of Long-term Memory
- Episodic Memory- Memory for events in our lives ('diary')
- Semantic Memory- Memory for knowledge of world. Like encyclopedia & dictionary. Includes language
- Procedural Memory- Memory for automatic & skilled behvaiours
- Evaluation
- Clinical evidence- Clive Wearing & HM damaged episodic memories but semantic & procedural memories fine.
- NeuroimagingEvidence- Episodic & procedural memories recalled from different parts of prefrontal cortex.
- Real-life applications- Training programme for adults with mild cognitive impairments.
- The Working Memory Model
- Central executive- Co-ordinates slave systems & allocates resources, limited storage
- Phonological loop- Auditory info- Phonological store & articulatory process (maintenance rehearsal)
- Visuo-spatial Sketchpad- Visual info- visual store & inner scribe (spatial arrangement)
- Eposodic buffer- Integrates processing of slave systems & records order of events. Linked to LTM
- Evaluation
- Clinical Evidence- KF had poor auditory memory but good visual memory. Damaged PL but VSS fine.
- Dual- Task Performance- Differcult to do visual tasks at same time, but one visual and one verbal OK (Baddley et al).
- Lack Of Clarity Over CE- Not yet fully explained, probably has different components.
- Explanations For Forgetting
- Interferance
- Types of interferance- Proactive = Old memories disrupt New ones. Retroactive = New memories disrupt old ones.
- Effects of similartity- McGeoch & McDonald: Similar words created more interferance.
- Evaluation
- Evidence From Lab Studies- Well- controlled studies show interferance effects
- Artificial Materials- Lists of words are not like everyday memory, may overemphasise interferance as an explanation
- Real-Life Studies- Baddely & Hitch (rugby players) supported interferance
- Retrieval Failure
- Encoding specificity principle- Tulving: Cues mosty effective if present at coding and at retrieval. May be meaningful link
- Context- Dependant Forgetting- Godden & Baddely (deep- sea divers): Recall better when external contexts matched.
- Evaluation
- Supporting Evidence- Wide range of support. Eysenck claims retrieval failure is most important reason for LTM forgetting
- Questioning Context effects- No forgetting unless contexts are very different e.g. on land Vs underwater (Baddeley)
- Recall Vs Recognition- Absence of cues affects recall but not recognition
- State-Depending Forgetting- Carter & Cassaday (anti-histamine): Recall better when internal states matched
- Interferance
- Factors Affrecting Eyewitness Testimony
- Misleading Information
- Leading questions- Loftus & Palmer (car speed): Estimates affected by leading question (smashed vs contacted)
- Why Do Leading Questions Affect EWT? Response bias- no change to memory. Substuitution explanation supported by Loftus & Palmer and report presence of glass.
- Post- Event Discussion (PED)- Discussions with others contaminates eyewitnesses' memories. Gabbert et al: Demonstrated effect, calling it memory conformity- informative & normative social influence involved
- Evaluation
- Useful Real- Life Applications- Could help prevent miscarriages of justice & change police interviewing.
- Tasks Are Artificial- Watching film clips ignores stress & anxiety associated with a real accident/crime
- Individual Differances- Oldfer people may be less accurate because of own-age bias
- Anxiety
- Anxiety has negative effect on recall- Johnson & Scott (weapon focus): high anxiety knife condition lead to less good recall. Tunnel theory of memory
- Anxiety has positive effect on recall- Yuille & Cutshall (shooting): high anxiety associated with better recall when witnessing real crime
- Explaning the contradictory findings- Yerkes-Dodson law suggests both low & high anxiety lead to poor recall (Deffenbacher)
- Evaluation
- Weapon Focus Effect May Not Be Relevant- Pickel (raw chicken) showed that it maybe surprise and therefore tells us nothing about effects of anxiety
- Field Studies Sometimes Lack Control- Resaerchers can't control what happens to witnesses between the crime and the interview
- There Are Ethical Issues- Creating anxiety in lab studies may cause psychological harm
- Misleading Information
- ImprovingThe Accuracy Of Eyewitness Testimony- Cognitive Interview
- Report Everything- Include even unimportant details
- Reinstate The Context- Picture the scene and recall how you felt. Context- dependant forgetting
- Change The Order- Recall from different points in the event i.e. from end to beginning, from middle to end, etc
- Change Perspective- Put yourself in the shoes of someone else present. Disrupts schema.
- Evaluation
- CI Is Time-Consuming- Takes longer and needs special training
- Some Elements More Valuable Than Others- Report everything & reinstate the context used together produced best recall
- Support For The Effectiveness Of ECI- ECI consistantly produces more accurate recall than standard interview
- Enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI)- Adds social dynamics, e.g. establishing eye contact.
- Coding, Capacity & Duration
Similar Psychology resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made