Memory

• Visualisation of working memory model

  
• 1.Central executive - Direct attention to particular tasks and coordinate the actions of the other components. It has limilted capacity.
• 2.Phonological loop= deals with auditory information. Contains 2 components- Phonological store and Articulatory rehearsal system
• Phonological store (inner ear)=one of the components of the phonological loop. Stores auditory information and relies on acoustic coding. Decays after 2 seconds
• Articulatory rehearsal system ( inner voice)= rehearses information from the phonological store verbally. Allows for maintenance rehearsal and lasts 2 seconds.
• Visuo-spatial sketchpad-VSSP ( inner eye)= stores and manipulates visual information. Made up of 2 components- visual cache and Inner scribe
• Visual cache= one of the components of VSSP. Stores information about visual item such as shape and colour
• Inner scribe= one of the components of the VSSP. Stores spatial and movement information.
• Episodic Buffer= Baddeley added this, as there was a need for a general store. Function is to recall material from LTM and integrate it into STM when working memory requires it.
• The working memory model= proposed by Baddeley and Hitch. Criticised the multi store model of being simplistic. Felt STM was a number of different stores.
• Limitation of the working memory model:

  • The central executive is the least understood component
  • It needs to be more specified, especially since it is considered the most important
  • This limitation hinders knowledge and advancement into the Working Memory Model
• Strength of the working memory model:

  • Case study of KF supports the Working Memory Model
  • KF suffered brain damage, affecting verbal information but not visual memory
  • Shows restriction to the phonological loop and separation from the visual sketchpad
• Practical application of the working memory model:

  • Cognitive stimulation uses the episodic buffer principle to retrieve and encode long-term memory for dementia patients
  • This application has been very successful
• Strength of the working memory model:

  • The Working Memory Model explains the word length effect
  • People cope better with short words compared to long words in memory tasks
  • This effect is attributed to the Phonological loop
• Research support for capacity of STM

  Jacobs: conducted an experiment using a digit span test to examine capacity of STM. Participants had to repeat back numbers or letters in the same order as they gradually increased, until they could no more. Found: average 9.3 digits remembered, average 7.3 letters remembered and recall increases steadily with age. Conclude: STM can hold around 7 items.
• Research support for capacity of LTM

  Standing et al presented 2560 photos to participants and found they recognised 90% a few days later.
• Research support in the duration of STM

  Peterson and Peterson: participants given trigrams to recall after a 3,6,9,12,15,18 seconds. Whilst waiting (retention interval) they counted back in 3's from a 3 digit number. Found: 3 seconds 90% recall, 9 seconds 20% recall and 18 seconds 2% recall. Conclude: duration of STM is not much longer than 18 seconds.
• Research support in duration of LTM

  Bahrick: 392 US ex high school students given a test to recognise 50 photos from high school year book. Found: when tested within 15 years of graduating, particpants face recognition was 90% accurate and declined 70% after 48 years.
• Research support for STM and LTM coding

  Baddeley gave participants 1 of 4 word lists to learn. The words were either acoustically similar/dissimilar or semantically similar/ dissimilar. For STM had to recall immediately and for LTM had to recall after 20 minutes. Found: did worse on acoustic similar words for STM because they conflict each other and for LTM did worse on semantically similar words as they also conflict each other. Conclude: STM is acoustic and LTM is semantic.
• Coding

  Sensory register- information from all senses

  STM- Acoustic

  LTM- Semantic
• Capacity

  Sensory register- Very large

  STM- around 7 items (5-9 chunks)

  LTM- unlimited
• Duration

  Sensory register- a fraction of a second

  STM- No more than 18 seconds

  LTM- infinite
• Types of LTM

  • Episodic memory: LTM store for personal events. Memories retrieved consciously and with effort
  • Semantic memory: LTM store for knowledge of the world. Memories have to be recalled with effort
  • Procedural memory: LTM store for knowledge of how to do things. Memory of learned skills. Recall without making a conscious or deliberate effort.
• Multi store model 

  
• Evaluation for types of LTM

  +practical application: Belleville found episodic memory in the elderly with cognitive impairment could be improved after training
• Evaluation for types of LTM 


  -Vague distinction: Episodic and semantic memories are both declarative and episodic becomes semantic over time. Semantic and procedural have a link as we able to produce automatic semantic concepts without recalling semantic ideas
• Evaluation for types of LTM

  +research support: H.M had brain damage following an operation for epilepsy. His episodic memory was damaged but his procedural memory remained mostly intact.

  -research: ideographic approach .Example H.M. Lack generalisability.
• Retroactive interferences

  Recent memory interferes with recall of early information
• Proactive interference

  Early memory interferes with recall of recent information
• Interference research 


  Underwood

  Pps had to look at studies that involved learning lists of words. Pps tend to remember the words encounter earlier. Proactive interference.
• Interference research

  Baddeley and Hitch

  Rugby players were asked which teams they had played over a season. Some had missed he game. Those who had missed the game remembered most. No specific type of interference but demonstrates that we can't explain forgetting by passage of time. Instead interfering memories caused the forgetting.
• Evaluation- interference 


  -doesn't account for all forgetting. The two pieces of information need to be relatively similar this is not always the case. Interference plays a role but the extent of the role is unclear.

  -individual differences. Kane and Engle found those with a greater working memory span were less affected by proactive interference. Makes studies invalid for proactive interference.
• Evaluation- interference

  -Methodological issues with studies: artificial task, lacks mundane realism. lab-based, lacks ecological validity.

  +real world application: advertising. Recall and recognition of advertiser's message were impaired when exposed to competing brand advertisements within a week. This understanding helps to save money
• Interference research

  McGeoch and McDonald

  Pps had 10 words to learn. They then had to learn another list of words which varied in terms of similarity to the original list. Pps were worse at recalling words similar to the original list. Retroactive interference.
• Retrieval failure

  failure to find or remember an item of information becuase of insufficient clues or cues
• Encoding specificity principle

  Tulving proposed the closer the cue is at retrieval to its form at encoding the most successful retrieval is likely to be.
• State dependent forgetting

  When you are more likely to forget if you recall information in a different mental or physical state to were you encoded the information
• Context-dependent forgetting

  When you are more likely to forget if you recall information in a different place to where it was encoded
• State-dependent forgetting research

  Goodwin et al: investigate the effect of mental state cues. Male volunteers. Remember a list of words either drunk or sober. Then recall after 24 hours sober or drink. Recall was best if the state of learning matched the state of recall.
• Context- dependent forgetting research

  Godden and Baddeley: Investigate the effect of the contextual cues. Recruited scuba divers. Arranged for them to learn a set of words either on land or underwater. Highest recall occurred when he initial context matched the recall environment.