Studies + Evaluations

• E: LTM being split into 3 categories

  +Brain scans show separate loactions, research shown episodic associated with right prefontal, semantic with left, procedural with motor, if these areas active when recalling different mem-supports

  +People with amnesia lose certain memory,Clive Wearing lost LTM-lost procedural+semantic, supports LTM in categories

  -No clear diff between episodic/semantic, most of our mem are fusions, 3 stores is oversimplification
• S: A study in encoding - Baddeley


  Aim: If there was a difference in encoding between STM and LTM

  Method: 4 groups (A,B,C,D) given word list(A,B,C,D): acoustically similar/dissimilar, semantically similar/dissimilar. Group A 12 sets of 5 words from list A, were then asked to recall words in order after each set, same with group B. Group C did the same but recalled after 20 mins, same with group D.

  Results: Worse recall with list A and C than B and D

  Conc: similar sounding/meaning words muddled up, STM acoustic, LTM semantic
• E: A study in encoding - Baddeley


  +Controlled experiment, no other factors affecting results as Baddeley controlled for poor hearing, makes the study valid as we are sure the results are due to the independent variables.

  -Didn't look at visual, researchers have found that visual in used in the STM, can't be confident that STM is always acoustic encoding.

  -May not have been looking at LTM, participants only waited 20mins, reduces validity as he may not have been testing what he thought he was.
• The multistore model of memory - Atkinson & Shiffrin


  Sensory: through our senses, high capacity, less than half a second

  STM: pay attention to sensory to be transferred here, acoustic coding, 7+/-2, <30 seconds

  LTM: info in STM is rehearsed to be remembered and then encoded into LTM, semantic encoding, potentially unlimited capacity and potentially a lifetime storage
• E: The multistore model of memory - Atkinson & Shiffrin


  +Evidence for many stores, Baddeley's study supports that STM and LTM are separate stores due to the different types of coding.

  -Criticised for being too simple, reasearch has shown that there are more stores within the 3 stores suggesting that our memory is more complex than we think.

  -Model states we only remember info that is rehearsed, doesn't explain how we are able to recall memories we do not rehearse and struggle to remember the ones we do, therefore not explaining the difficulties in recall.
• S: SERIAL POSITION CURVE STUDY - MURDOCK


  Aim: If memory of words was affected by amount of words need to be remembered

  Method: Selected words from 4000 most common in English. 103 psychology students. Listened 20 word lists - varied 10-40 words, after each list they were asked to recall.

  Results: Likelihood of recall related to word positioning, discovered primacy and recency effect

  Conclusion: recency - in STM, primacy - in LTM, words in middle in neither. Provides evidence for the existance of STM and LTM
• E: SERIAL POSITION CRUVE STUDY - MURDOCK


  +Controlled experiment - enhances validity of results, no other factor affecting - controlled for familiarity of words, confident recall is due to word positioning.

  +Research with people with amnesia supports, people with amnesia can't store LTM but they do show recency, confirms that primacy is related to LTM.

  -Word lists - artificial, only tells us one aspect of memory - remembering, reduces ecological validty - doesn't represent real life.
• Theory of reconstructive memory:

  • Memory is reassembled from fragmented pieces of info during recall
  • Gaps are filled with our expectations and beliefs in order to produce a story that makes sense
  • Our culture also affects how we recall the story
• S: WAR OF THE GHOSTS - BARTLETT


  Aim: How memory is reconstructed, having to recall something over a period of time.

  Method: Serial reproductions. Showed participants a story different to their culture, they then had to recall the story to other particiants.

  Results: Participants interpreted story within their own frames of reference, changing parts of it to make sense to them based on their culture.

  Conc: Reconstructed ver was simpler to remember, meaning of the story stayed the same.
• E: WAR OF THE GHOSTS - BARTLETT


  -Casual study, no set standards on how to recall, participants weren't given specific instructions - study is difficult to replicate and not reliable.

  -Bartlett's own beliefs may have affected data, he analysed results and decided what was accurate and what wasn't, therefore cannot trust the conclusions due to researcher bias.

  -Story was unusual - not reflecting everyday memory, our memories may not be as affected by cultual expecations, making us recall things more accurately, therefore study tells us little about everyday memory but more on story-telling.
• S: Study on Interference - McGeoch & McDonald


  Aim: What effect a second activity has on accuracy of memory

  Method: 12 participants, list of 10 words to 100% accuracy. Then shown a new list: synonyms, antonyms, unrelated words, consonant syllables, 3 digit numbers. Control condition - no new list

  Results: Ability is recall original list depended on nature of second list, synonyms - worst, numbers - best

  Conclusion: Interference is strongest when intervening activity is similar, more likely to forget if another activity is similar
• E: Study on Interference - McGeoch & McDonald


  +Many techiques used to ensure test was unbiased, used counterbalancing - gave lists in different orders to ensure order didn't affect their ability to recall, therefore interference has validity because supported by research.

  -Artificial - word lists, can't be applied to real life if our memory is more complex than recalling word lists

  -Possible that interference effects are temporary and info isn't forgotten, this shows how info is stored in memory but unable to access it.