Memory Psychologists

HideShow resource information
Atkinson and Shriffin (1968)
Multi-store Memory Model
1 of 46
Sperling (1960)
participants were shown a grid of letters and numbers for 50 milliseconds, they could not remember all, but one line 75% of the time
2 of 46
Miller (1956)
Limited capacity of 7+- 2
3 of 46
Peterson and Peterson (1959)
90% recall after 3 seconds, 2% after 18 showing when prevented from rehearsing, STM is poor
4 of 46
Jacobs (1887)
9.3 items for numbers, 7.3 for letters
5 of 46
Cowan (2001)
more likely to be 4 rather than 7
6 of 46
Baddeley (1996a/b)
acoustically similar words get confused in the STM whereas semantically similar ones do in the LTM showing different encoding processes
7 of 46
Squire et al (1992)
hippocampus is active when recalling LTM
8 of 46
Scoville and Milner (1957)
HM could not created new LTM when his hippocampus was removed showing it is perhaps the gateway to LTM
9 of 46
Craik and Lockhart (1972)
Levels of Processing Model
10 of 46
Mandler (1967)
organising items causes deeper processing so improves recall
11 of 46
Palmere et al (1983)
elaborating information causes deeper processing so improves recall
12 of 46
Morris et al (1977)
the processing has to be relevant to what we are trying to remember to improve recall, this is transfer appropriate processing
13 of 46
Baddeley (1986)
further divided this into the phonological store and the phonological articulatory, one to hold, one to loop sounds in the STM
14 of 46
Logie (1995)
divided this into the scribe and cache
15 of 46
Baddeley et al (1975)
VSSP is separate to the PL as it is hard to track light and describe angles – dual performance tasks
16 of 46
Dolcos et al (2007)
fMRI shows different areas are active when performing tasks using different slave systems
17 of 46
Shallice and Warrington (1970)
amnesiacs VSSP is better than their PL showing separate stores
18 of 46
Eslinger and Domasio (1985)
the central executive is not one system, it is better conceptualised as many areas of the brain
19 of 46
Brain and Kulik (1977)
people remember assassinations specific to their ethnicity, this supports the theory of it having to have personal relevance
20 of 46
Neisser (1982)
repeated rehearsal means they are significant
21 of 46
Conway et al (1994)
86% of UK participants remember details of Margaret Thatcher’s resignation, only 29% of other participants did
22 of 46
Sheingold and Terry (1982)
good detail of births of siblings – real or someone told them
23 of 46
Wright (1993)
Hillborough disaster,5 months after memories were vague and both personal and media bias influenced
24 of 46
Williams (1994)
sexually assaulted women, 38% did not remember the abuse, 16% did not previously recall
25 of 46
Loftus and Pickrell (1995)
lost in the mall, 20%
26 of 46
Lyketsos (2001)
depression means low motivation and reduced awareness, meaning people remember less as they don’t pay attention to it
27 of 46
Antikanen et al (2001)
6 months after treatment, memory in depressed patients was better
28 of 46
Eich et al (1994)
sad and sad word pairs were easier to recall
29 of 46
Hebb (1949)
(1949) engram is fragile, neurochemical and neuroanatomical, needs rehearsal
30 of 46
Shallice (1967)
serial probe technique, memory better if present information quickly and the probe was early, i.e. memories could form after the probe and didn’t need to rewrite over others
31 of 46
Lashley (1931)
brain damages rats - rats could no longer navigate mazes,
32 of 46
Baddeley and Hitch (1977)
rugby players, remembered the amount of fixtures proportional to how many they had played, showing it is not dacay (all had the same time to forget) • Ecologically valid
33 of 46
Underwood and Postman (1960)
word pairing, proactive interference, people could only remember the first stimulus word pair despite later learning a new one
34 of 46
Abernethy (1940)
normal classroom and teacher in exams makes better results
35 of 46
Goodwin et al (1969)
durnk people had better memories when drunk of prior drunk experiences
36 of 46
Eysenck (1998)
cue dependent memory may be the main explanation for long term forgetting as situation affects the coding of memories
37 of 46
Schacter (1987)
amnesiacs are better at implicit memory tasks, rather than explicit that require conscious thought
38 of 46
Stickgold (2000)
tetris task, amnesiacs could learn new tasks (implicit) but could not explain how to do the task (explicit)
39 of 46
Ryan et al (2000)
word pairs in the same voice helped normal participants, not amnesiacs, showing memory is not always implicit
40 of 46
ssac and Myers (1999)
could retrieve memories but not consolidate them, meaning amnesiacs were good on recall but not recognition
41 of 46
Gabrieli (1998)
CA1 hippocampus damage causes anterograde amnesia
42 of 46
Reed and Squire (1998)
temporal lobe damage causes worsened affects
43 of 46
Remondes and Schman (2004)
rats with damage to the hippocampus could learn new maxes but forgot them quickly, showing there is a problem with consolidation
44 of 46
Hendrie (2001)
other cultures have the same frequency in other cultures but there is no such prevalence in the disease
45 of 46
St Georges Hislop (2000)
½ all Alzheimers patients have no relatives with the disease
46 of 46

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

participants were shown a grid of letters and numbers for 50 milliseconds, they could not remember all, but one line 75% of the time

Back

Sperling (1960)

Card 3

Front

Limited capacity of 7+- 2

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

90% recall after 3 seconds, 2% after 18 showing when prevented from rehearsing, STM is poor

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

9.3 items for numbers, 7.3 for letters

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Memory resources »