The Nature and Structure of Memory

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • THE NATURE AND STRUCTURE OF MEMORY
    • Long Term
      • Duration
        • Refers to memories that last from 2 hours to 100 years.
        • Bahrick
          • 1. 400 participants aged 17-74.
          • 2. Photo recognitoin or free recall of their year book and classmates.
          • 3. Those within 15 yrs of graduation had 90% accuracy on photo recognition and 60% accuracy on free recall.
          • 4. Those within 45 yrs of graduation had 70% accuracy on photo recognition and 30% on free recall.
        • Shepard
          • 1. Showed participants 612 memorable pictures.
          • 2. An hour later participants were shown the pictures among other photos.
          • 3. They showed almost perfect recognition.
          • 4. Four months later they could still recall 50% of the photos.
          • The photos were more memorable therefore had a longer duration.
      • Capacity and Duration potentially unlimited.
    • Short Term
      • Duration
        • Evidence Suggests Memories Don't Last Long.
          • Like a note pad where ink fades.
          • Things remembered by repetition but then fade.
          • Rehearsal Keeps memories active.
        • Peterson And Peterson
          • 2. During the retention interval they counted backward in threes from a random number.
          • 3. Recall was 90% accurate at 3 seconds and 2% accurate at 18 seconds.
          • 1. Participants told to recall nonsense syllables after a retention period of 3-18 seconds.
      • Capacity
        • Miller
          • 1. 7+/- 2 items of chunks.
          • 3. Also found we can remember 5 words as easy as 5 letters.
          • 4. We chunk things together to remember more.
          • 2. Found this out from reviewing studies.
            • - such as the amount of dots someone can remember being flashed on a screen.
        • Simon
          • 2. Large chunks such as 8-word phrases and small chunks such as one syllable words.
          • 1. Found people had a shorter memory span for larger chunks.
        • Jacobs
          • 1. Used the digit span technique to asses the capacity of STM.
          • 2. Found 9.3 for digits and 7.3 for letters.
      • Encoding
        • Baddely
          • 1.Gave participants a list of words which were acoustically similar and semantically similar.
          • 2. Found it hard to recall acoustically similar words in the STM.
          • 3. Semantically similar words were muddled in the LTM but not STM.
          • 4. Suggested we encode accoustically in the STM and semantically in the LTM.
        • Acoustic: Codes information in the way it sounds.
        • Semantic: Codes information from it's meaning.
    • Evaluation
      • Duration
        • P&P
          • Study lacked internal validity as the syllables could have been displaced rather than forgotten.
          • Demand characteristics + people could cheat as it was obvious they were testing memory.
        • Narne: Found items could be recalled after 96 scns.
        • A study found that items could only be remembered for 2 scns without warning.
      • Capacity
        • Cowan found that STM is more likely to be limited to 4 chunks.
          • Vogel also concluded this.
      • Encoding
        • Brandimote
          • 3. Used an articulary  suppression task.
          • 1. Found STM had visual encoding.
          • 2. Asked participants to recall fragments of photos.
        • Frost has shown long term recall was also visual.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Memory resources »