Other slides in this set
Here's a taster:
1.1 What is the multi store explanation of memory processes? Multi-store- the idea that
information passes through
a series of memory stores
Sensory store- holds the
Encoding: Storage: Retrieval: info we collect from our
Changing information so it Holding information in the Recovering information senses for a short period
can be stored memory system from storage of time
Short-term store- holds
chunks of info for a
Memory Store Duration Capacity limited time
Peterson and Peterson (1959) Sensory Less than one Very limited Long-term store- holds an
Aim: To see if rehearsal of info is necessary to hold it in the second unlimited amount of info
STM store. for a very long time
Short-term Less than one Approx. seven
Method: participants were given sets of 3 letters (GYK, minute chunks of info
BMW) but immediately after were asked to count
backwards in 3's for different lengths of time, done to Long-term Up to a lifetime Unlimited
prevent rehearsal. Asked to recall in correct order.
Results: had forgotten virtually all the information after 18
seconds. Murdock (1962)
Conclusion: we cannot hold information in our STM unless Aim: to provide evidence to support the multi store
we rehearse it. explanation of memory
Method: had to learn lists of words, presented one at a
time, 2 seconds per words and recall them in any order.
Evaluation Results: the words at the end of the list were recalled very
Had to learn nonsense syllables and lists of words, not well (Recency effect), words at the start of the list were
the kind of memory tasks people normally have to do recalled very well (Primacy effect), words in the middle
daily, therefore study lacks ecological validity. weren't recalled well at all.
No everything we learn has to be rehearsed, sometimes Conclusion: concluded that this provides evidence for
information can be easily remembered. It doesn't't separate memory store.
necessarily make it easier to remember info if we repeat
over and over. It is more important to understand the
meaning of information so you can put it in your own
+ However, it does help understand why its difficult to Knowing the capacity of the STM is approx. seven
remember number plates of passing by cars or someone's chunks, car registration plates don't exceed that
telephone number. number. So you can remember it by repeating it over
and over to yourself.…read more
Here's a taster:
1.2 Other explanations of memory Levels of processing the different depths at which information
Is thought about while learning it.
posed the idea that memory isn't just a stored copy of facts and said
that we change our memories based on what we already know,
although we think that we are remembering it accurately. This is Levels of Processing
called reconstructive memory. it's the way you think about the information (process it) is what's
important if you want to recall it again. Shallow level (structural =
Bartlett (1932) physical appearance), middle level (phonetic = sounds) and deep level
Aim: is people would alter unfamiliar information if needed to (semantic = meaning).
Method: participants were asked to read a story called `war of the Craik and Lockhart (1972)
ghosts' which is a native American legend. Later they were asked to Aim: if the type of words asked affected the number of words
retell the story. This retelling was repeated several times in the recalled
weeks that followed. Method: were presented with a list of words, one at a time, and
Results: he found that participants found it hard to remember asked questions about each word which they replied with `yes' or
about spirits and changed other bits so it made more sense to them. `no'. Some questions required structural, phonetic and semantic
They also kept changing little details as they repeated the retelling processing. Were given a longer list of words and asked to identify
of the story. the words they were asked about.
Conclusion: our memory is influenced by our own beliefs Results: identified 70% of words semantically processed, 35% that
required phonetic processing and 15% that required structural
Evaluation: Conclusion: more deeply processed, more likely remembered.
- Emphasises the influence of peoples previous knowledge and
background on how they remember things. Can explain how
different cultures have difficulty agreeing with each other. Evaluation:
- Difficult to measure the accuracy of the stories told with a - Doesn't explain why deeper levels of processing helps with
reliable scoring method. The story is confusing and not similar to memory. Some people say deeper processing takes longer and that's
our everyday experiences. why we remember it better.
- How do we know exactly how accurate they were to begin with - Deeper processing also takes more effort and perhaps the extra
(University students + familiar events) effort helps us.
- Lacks ecological validity as real life memory tasks don't require
you to learn lists of words.
- Helps us to understand why when two people retell the same
story, details may differ. Doesn't mean they're lying as they Practical applications:
might genuinely believe that their version of the story is true. - Improves study skills as without just reading over and over, you
- Also teaches as that we need to careful when we listen or give an can read it once and then write it down in your own words. This
eye witness account of an event. requires semantic processing.…read more
Here's a taster:
1.3 Why do we forget?
New things we learn can cause problems when we try to recall
information we learned before. This is known as retroactive the general setting or environment in which activities happen
Underwood and Postman (1960) Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Aim: new learning interferes with previous learning Aim: people who learned and are tested in the same environment
Method: they were divided into two groups, GA was asked to recall better opposed to those who don't
learn a list of word pairs and then to learn a second list. GB were Method: were deep sea divers, divided into 4 groups. Learn
only asked to learn the first list. underwater + recall underwater. Learn underwater + recall on shore.
Results: Group B's recall of the first list was better than Group A's. Learn on shore + recall on shore. Learn on shore + recall
Conclusion: New learning interfered with participants ability to underwater.
recall first list. Results: G1 and G3 recalled 40% more words than the rest.
Conclusion: recall of information will be better if its in the same
Evaluation: context as where the information was learnt.
- Things we already know cause problems when we try to learn new
things. This is known as proactive interference. Evaluation:
- Better to take exams in the same room as where lessons took
Practical applications: place.
- Developing better study habits. Avoid studying similar subjects.
- Make learning environment at home similar enough to
resemble the examination hall.
Brain Damage and Forgetting
Miller (1969) Key terms:
A patient suffering from epilepsy underwent an operation in which Context the general setting or environment where activities
two thirds of his hippocampus was removed. Since the operation he happen.
was unable to learn new information. This shows that the Anterograde amnesia being unable to learn new information
hippocampus is crucial for recording new memories. after brain damage
Hippocampus a brain structure that is crucial for memory.
Other people have suffered brain damage that has left them unable Retrograde amnesia when you can't remember anything that
to recall anything that has happened before the damage occurred,
happened before the brain damage.
Retrograde Amnesia.…read more
Here's a taster:
1.4 How accurate are eye witness testimonies? Reliability- in the context of eyewitness testimony, it is the extent
to which something can be regarded as accurate.
Leading question- a question that hints towards a particular type of
Cognitive interview- when the context of the event is recreated to
Factors affecting eyewitness accounts increase accuracy of recall.
Leading questions Context Unfamiliar faces
Loftus and Palmer Geiselman et al. Bruce and Young
Aim: to see if asking leading questions affects Aim: to see if participant accuracy will be Aim: to see if familiarity affects the accuracy of
the accuracy of recall increased when the context of an event is identifying faces
Method: Participants were shown a film of a reinstated Method: psychology lecturers were recorded
car crash. Some were asked `How fast was the Method: participants were showed police on CCTV camera's at the entrance of a building.
car going when it hit the other car?' and others footage of a violent crime. Two days later they Participants were asked to identify the faces
were asked `How fast was the car going when were interviewed about what they saw. For seen on the tape from a series of high quality
it smashed the other car?' half of them, the context of the event was photographs.
Results: Those who heard `smashed' have a recreated during the interview, for the other Results: the lecturers students made more
higher speed estimate than those who heard half standard police interview techniques were correct identifications than other students and
`hit'. used. experienced police officers.
Conclusion: leading questions affect the recall. Results: the participants who had the event Conclusion: previous familiarity helps when
The word smashed led participants to believe context recreated recalled more accurate facts identifying faces.
the car was gong faster. about the violent crime than those the others.
Conclusion: recreating the event context
during interviews will increase the accuracy of
recall. This method is known as the cognitive
Evaluation: Practical applications:
- Watching a film or video isn't the same as a real life experience, - We know that leading questions can change memory therefore,
as when you watch a film you are prepared for the oncoming when talking to witnesses police and lawyers should avoid
event. asking leading questions.
- The length of time between the incident and the time the - We also know that memory of faces can be unreliable in certain
witness was questioned might be important (other factor that situations, therefore we should realise that identity parades
affects eyewitness accounts) as memory fades over time. alone aren't effective.
- Our emotional state at the time of the incident might also affect - We know that context is important for accurate recall, therefore
recall and stereotypes that we hold can influence recall. people should take witnesses back to the scene of the crime.…read more