Memory AO3

avatar
Created by
Gabriella Piper

Cards (41)

  • Strength of research into coding of STM and LTM (Baddeley): separate memory stores

    P - Identified a clear difference between two memory stores.

    E - Later research showed that there are some exceptions to Baddeley's findings.
    - But the idea that STM uses mostly acoustic coding and LTM mostly semantic has stood the test of time.

    K - Important step in our understanding of the memory system, which let to the multi-store model.
  • Limitation of research into coding of STM and LTM (Baddeley): artificial stimuli

    P - Used quite artificial stimuli rather than meaningful material.

    E - E.g. the word lists had no personal meaning to participants.
    - Baddeley's findings may not tell us much about coding in different types of memory tasks, especially in everyday life.
    - When processing more meaningful information, people may use semantic coding even for STM.

    K - Findings from his study have limited application.
  • Strength of research into capacity of STM (Jacobs): valid study

    P - Study has been replicated.

    E - Very old study.
    - Early reseach in psychology often lacked adequate controls.
    - May have been confounding variables.
    - E.g. some participants' digit spans may have been underestimated because they were distracted during testing.
    - Despite this, Jacob's findings ahve been confirmed by other, better controlled studies since (e.g. Bopp and Varhaeghen 2005).

    K - Jacobs study is a valid test for of digit span in STM.
  • Limitation of research into the capacity of STM (Miller): not so many chunks

    P - May have overestimated STM capacity.

    E - Cowan (2001).
    - Reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity of STM in on about 4 + or - 1 chunks.

    K - Lower end of Millers estimate (5 items) is more appropriate than 7 items.
  • Limitation of research into duration of STM (Peterson and Peterson): meaningless stimuli in STM study

    P - Stimulus material was artificial.

    E - Study was not completely meaningless becuase we do sometimes try to remember fairly meaningless material (e.g. phone numbers).
    - However, recalling consonant syllables does not refelct most everyday memory activities where what we are trying to remember is meaningful.

    K - Study lacked external validity.
  • Strength of research into the duration of LTM (Bahrick et al.): high external validity

    P - High external validity.

    E - Researchers investigated meaningful memories (i.e. peoples names and faces).
    - When studies on LTM were conducted with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall rates were lower (Shepard 1976).

    K - Bahrick et al.'s findings reflect a more 'real' estimate of the duration of LTM.
  • Strength of multi-store model: research support

    P - Support from studies showing that STM and LTM are different.

    E - Baddeley found we tend to mix up words that sound similar when using our STM.
    - And that we mix up words with similar meanings when we use our LTM.
    - This showed that STM is acoustically coded and LTM is semantically coded.
    - Further support:
    - Studies show that STM and LTM have different capacities and durations.

    A - However...
    - Most of the studies that found that the duration, capacity and coding of STM and LTM are different used artificial stimuli.
    - E.g. Peterson and Peterson used consonant syllables.
    - These studies don't include meaningful stimuli and cannot be be generalised to the real world.
    - Lacks ecological validity.

    K - STM and LTM are separate and independent memory stores, as claimed by MSM.
  • Limitation of multi store model: more than one STM store

    P - Evidence for more than one STM store.

    E - KF study.
    - Client refered to as KF had a clinical memory disorder, called amnesia.
    - KF's STM for digits was very poor when they were read out loud to him.
    - His recall was much better when he read them to himself.
    -Further studied of KF showed that there could be another short term store for non-verbal sounds (noises).

    K - MSM is wrong in claining that there is just one STM store processing different types of information.
  • Limitation of multi store model: elaborative rehearsal

    P - Prolonged rehearsal is not needed for transfer to LTM.

    E - According to MSM, what matters about rehearsal is the amount of it.
    - The more you rehears something, the more likely it is to transfer to LTM.
    - This is prolonged rehearsal.
    - Researchers found that the type of rehearsal is more important than the amount.
    - Elaborative rehearsal is needed for long term storage.
    - This occurs when you link the information to your existing knowledge.
    - Information can be transfered to LTM without prolonged rehearsal.

    K - MSM does not fully explain how long term storage is achieved.
  • Strength of types of long term memory: clinical evidence

    P - Evidence from case studies of HM and Clive Wearing.

    E - Episodic memory in both men was severely impaired due to brain damage.
    - But their semantic memories were relatively unaffected.
    - E.g. HM could not recall stroking a dog half an hour earlier but he did not need to have the concept of 'dog' explained to him.
    - Their procedural memories were also intact.
    - They both still knew how to walk and speak.
    - Clive Wearing (professional musician) knew how to read music, sing and play the piano.

    A - However...
    - Clinical studies are not perfect.
    - Lack control variables.
    - Brain injuries are usually unexpected.
    - Researcher has no knowledge of individuals memory before the damage.
    - Difficult to judge how much worse it was afterwards.
    - Clinical studies are limited to what they can tell us about different types of LTM.

    K - Supports Tulving's view that there are different memory stores in LTM.
    - One store can be damaged but the others are unaffected.
  • Strength of types of long term memory: real world application

    P - Understanding types of LTM allows psychologists to help people with memory problems.

    E - E.g. as people age, they experience memory loss.
    - Research has shown it seems to be specific to episodic memory.
    - It becomes harder to recall memories of personal events that occurred recently.
    - Past episodic memories remain intact.
    - Belleville et al (2006).
    - Devised an intervention to improve episodic memories in older people.
    - The trained participants performed better on a test of episodic memory than a conrol group.

    K - Distinguishing between types of LTM enables specific treatments to be developed.
  • Limitation of types of long term memory: conflicting neuroimaging evidence

    P - Conflicting research findings linking LTM to areas of the brain.

    E - Buckner and Petersen (1996).
    - Reviewed evidence regarding the location of semantic and episodic memory.
    - Concluded that semantic memory is located on the left side of the prefrontal cortex.
    - Episodic memory on the right.
    - However, other research left prefrontal cortex with episodic memories and the right with semantic memories (Tulving et al.).

    K - Challenges any neurophysiological evidence to support types of memory as there is poor agreement on where each type might be located.
  • Strength of the working memory model: clinical evidence

    P - Support from case study of patient KF.

    E - After KF's brain injury.
    - He had poort STM ability for auditory information.
    - But could process visual information normally.
    - His immediate recall or digits and letters was better when he read them than when they were read to him.
    - KF's phonological loop was damaged but his visuo-spatial sketchpad was intact.

    A - However...
    - It's unclear whether KF had other cognitive impairments (apart from damage to phonological loop) which may have affected him performance on memory tasks.
    - E.g. his injury was caused by a motorbike accident.
    - The trauma may have affected his cognitive performance apart from any brain injury.
    - Problems with evidence from clinical studies of brain injuries as many different systems may have been affected.

    K - Findings strongly support the existence of separate visual and acoustic memory stores.
  • Strength of the working memory model: dual-task performance

    P - Studies of dual-task performance support the separate existence of the visuo-spatial sketchpad.

    E - Baddeley et al (1975).
    - His participants carried out a visual and verbal task at the same time (dual task).
    - Their performance on each was similar to when they carried out the tasks separately.
    - But when both tasks were visual (or both were verbal) performance on both declined substantially.
    - Becuase both visual tasks compete for the same slave system (VSS).
    - Whereas, there's no competition when performing a visual and verbal task together.

    K - Must be a separate slave system (the VSS) that processes visual input and one for verbal input (PL).
  • Limitation of the working memory model: nature of central executive

    P - Lack of clarity over the nature of the CE.

    E - Baddeleye (2003) recognised this when he said:
    - "The CE is the most important but least understood component of the working memory".
    - The CE needs to be more clearly specified that just simply being 'attention'.
    - E.g. some psychologists believe the CE may consist of separate subcomponents.

    K - CE is an unsatisfactory component and this challenges the integrity of the WMM.
  • Strength of interference as an explanation for forgetting: real-world interference

    P - Evidence of interference effects in more everyday situations.

    E - Baddeley and Hitch (1977).
    - Asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they played against that season.
    - The players all played for the same time interval over the season.
    - But the number of intervening gamwes varied as some players missed matches due to injury.
    - Players who played the most games (most interference for memory) has the poorest recall.

    A - Interference may cause some forgetting in everyday situations but it's unusal.
    - Conditions necessary for interference to occur are relatively rare.
    - Unlike lab studies.
    - Where the high degree of control means researcher can create idea conditions for interference.
    - E.g. two memories have to be fairly similar in order to interfere with each other.
    - This may happen occassionally in everyday life but not often.
    - Forgetting may better be explained by other theories such as retrieval failure due to a lack of cues.

    K - Interference can operate in at least some real world situations, increasing the validity of the theory.
  • Strength of interference as an explanation for forgetting: support from drug studies

    P - Retrograde facilitation.

    E - Researchers gave participants a list of words and later asked them to recall the list, assuming the intervening experiences would act as interference.
    - When the list was learned under the influence of the drug diazepam, recall one week later was poor compared to a control group.
    - When the list was learned before the drug was taken, latter recall was better than the control group.
    - Drug improved (facilitated) recall or material learned beforehand.
    - It was suggested that the drug prevents new information (after the drug is taken) reaching parts of the brain involved in processinh memories.
    - So it cannot interfer retroactively with information already stored.

    K - Forgetting can be due to interference.
    - Reduce the interference, reduce the forgetting.
  • Limitation of interference as an explanation of forgetting: interference and cues

    P - Interference is temporary and can be overcome by using cues.

    E - Tulving et al. (1971).
    - Gave participants a list of words organised into categories, one list at a time (participants were not told what the categories were).
    - Recall averaged about 70% for the first list, but became progressively worse as they learned each additional list (proactive interference).
    - At the end, participants were given a cued recall test - they were told the names of the categories.
    - Recall rose to 70% again.

    K - Interference causes a temporary loss of accessability to material that is still in LTM.
    - A finding not predicted by interference theory.
  • Strength of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting: real world application

    P - Retrieval cues can help overcome some forgetting in everyday situations.

    E - Cues may not have a very strong effect on forgetting.
    - Baddeley suggests they are still worth paying attention to.
    - E.g. being in one room and thinking 'I must go an get such-and-such from another room'.
    - You go to the other room only to forget what you wanted.
    - But the moment you go back to the first room, you remember again.
    - When we have trouble remembering something, it is probably worth making the effort to recall the environment in which you learned it first.

    K - Research can remind us of strategies we use in the real world to improve our recall.
  • Strength of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting: research support

    P - Range of research that supports the retrieval explanation.

    E - Godden and Baddeley.
    - Conducted research on context dependent forgetting.
    - Either learning underwater or on land, and then retrieving underwater or on land.
    - They found when the context of learning and retrieval was different, accuracy of recall was 40% lower than matching conditions.
    - Carter and Cassaday.
    - Conducted research on state dependent forgetting.
    - Either learning on drug or not on drug, and then retrieving on drug or not on drug.
    - Conditions where there was a mismatch between internal state at learning and retrieval, performancy on the memory test was significantly worse.

    A - Baddeley argues context effects are actually not very strong, especially in everyday life.
    - Different contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen.
    - E.g. land and underwater are very different.
    - Retrieval failure dure to lack of contextual cues may not actually explain much everyday forgetting.

    K - Retrieval failure occurs in real-world situations as well as highly controlled conditions of the lab.
  • Limitation of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting: recall vs recognition

    P - Context effects may depend substantially on the type of memory being tested.

    E - Godden and Baddeley.
    - Replicated their underwater experiment but used a recognition test instead of recall.
    - Participants had to say whether they recognised a word read to them from a list, instead of retrieving it for themselves.
    - When recognition was tested there was no context-dependent effect, performance was the same in all 4 conditions.

    K - Retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting because it only applies to when a person has to recall information rather than recognise it.
  • Strength of misleading information affecting accuracy of EWT: real-world application

    P - Important practical uses in the criminal justice system.

    E - Consequences of inaccurate EWT can be very serious.
    - Loftus (1975).
    - Believes leading questions can have such a strung distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be very carefulp about the phrasing of their questions when interviewing eyewitnesses.
    - Psychologists are sometimes asked to act as expert witnesses in court trials and explain the limits of EWT to juries.

    A - However...
    - Practical applications of EWT may be affected by issues with research.
    - Loftus and Palmer.
    - Participants watched film clips in a lan, a very different experience from witnessing a real event (less stressful).
    - Foster et al (1994).
    - Pointed out that what eyewitnesses remember has important consequences in the real world.
    - But participants' responses in research do not matter in the same way (so research participants are less motivated to be accurate).

    K - Psychologists can help improve the way the legal system works, especially by protecting innocent people from faulty convictions based on unreliable EWT.
  • Limitation of misleading information affecting the accuracy of EWT: evidence against substitution

    P - Limitation of substitution explanation is that EWT is more accurate for some aspects of an event than others.

    E - Sutherland and Hayne (2001).
    - Showed participants a video clip.
    - When participants were later asked misleading questions, their recall was more accurate for central details of the even than for peripheral ones.
    - Participants attention was focused on central features of the event and these memories were relatively resistant to misleading information.

    K - Original memories for central details survived and were not distorted, an outcome that is not predicted by substitution explanation.
  • Limitation of misleading information affecting the accuracy of EWT: evidence challenging memory conformity.

    P - Limitation of memory conformity explanation is evidence that post event discussion actually alters EWT.

    E - Skagerberg and Wright (2008).
    - Showed their participants film clips.
    - Two versions: muggers hair was dark brown in one and light brown in the other.
    - Participants discussed the clips in pairs, each having seen different versions of the clip.
    - They often didnt report what they had seen in the clip or heard from the co-witness, but a mix of the two.
    - E.g. medium brown hair.

    K - Memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than the result of memory conformity.
  • Strength of anxiety affecting EWT: support for negative effects

    P - Evidence supporting the view that anxiety has a negative effect on the accuracy of recall.

    E - Supporting research on weapon focus, finding negative effects on recall.
    - Researchers used an objective measure (heart rate) to divide participants into high and low anxiety groups.
    - In thi study anxiety clearly disrupted the participants' ability to recall details about the actor in the London Dungeons Labrinth.

    K - High level of anxiety does have a negative effect on the immediate eyewitness recall of a stressful event.
  • Strength of anxiety affecting EWT: support for positive effects

    P - Evidence showing that anxiety can have positive effects on the accuracy of recall.

    E - Study where 58 witnesses to an actual bank robbery were interviewed.
    - Some of the witnesses were directly involved (e.g. bank workers).
    - Some were indirectly involved (e.g. bystanders).
    - The researchers assumed those directly involved would experience the most anxiety.
    - Recall was more that 75% accurate across all witnesses.
    - The direct victims (most anxious) were even more accurate.

    A - The interview took place several moths after the event.
    - The researchers had no control over what happened to their participants in the intervening time (e.g. post-event discussions).
    - The effects of anxiety may have been overwhelmed by these other factors.
    - Possible lack of control over confounding variables may be responsible for these findings.
    - Invalidating research's support.

    K - These findings from actual crimes confirm anxiety does not reduce the accuracy of recall for eywitnesses and may even enhance it.
  • Limitation of anxiety affecting EWT: unusualness not anxiety

    P - Limitation of study by Johnson and Scott is that they may not have tested anxiety.

    E - The reason participants may have focused on the weapon may be because they were surprised rather than scared.
    - Pickle (1998).
    - Conducted an experiment using scissors, a handgun and a wallet or a raw chicken in a hairdressing salon video.
    - (Scissors would be high anxiety, low unusualness).
    - Eyewitness accuracy was significantly poorer in the high unusualness conditions (chicken and handgun).

    K - Weapon focus affect is due to unusualness rather than anxiety/threat.
    - Therefore tells us nothing specifically about the effects of anxiety on EWT.
  • Strength of the cognitive interview: support for effectiveness of the CI

    P - Evidence that it works.

    E - Meta-analysis.
    - Data from 55 studies comparing the CI (and ECI) with the standard police interview.
    - CI had a 41% increase in accuracy of information.

    A - However...
    - Increase in amount of innacurate information reported.
    - ECI produced more inaccurate information than CI.
    - CI may sacrifice quality for quantity.

    K - CI is an effective technique for witnesses to retrieve memories that aren't immediately accessible.
  • Limitation of the cognitive interview: some elements may be more useful

    P - Not all of its elements are equally effective or useful.

    E - Research found that each of the four techniques used alone produce more information than the standard police interview.
    - Using a combination of report everything and reinstate the context produced better recall than any of the other elements or combination of them.
    - Confirms police officers' suspicion that some aspects of CI are more useful than others.

    K - Casts some doubt on the credibility of the overall cognitive interview.
  • Limitation of the cognitive interview: time consuming

    P - Police officers may be reluctant to use the CI becuase it takes more time and training than the standard police interview.

    E - E.g. more time is needed to establish a rapport with a witness and allow them to relax.
    - CI also requires special training and many forces do not have the resources to provide more than a few hours.

    K - The complete CI as it exists is not a realistic method for police officers to use and it might be better to focus on just a few elements.
  • Evaluation of research into coding of STM and LTM (Baddeley)

    S - separate memory stores
    L - artificial stimuli
  • Evaluation of research into capacity of STM (Jacobs and Miller)

    S - valid study (Jacobs)
    L - not so many chunks (Miller)
  • Evaluation of research into duration of STM and LTM (Peterson and Peterson + Bahrick)

    L - meaningless stimuli (STM)
    S - high external validity (LTM)
  • Evaluation of multi-store model of memory

    S - research support
    L - more than one STM store
    L - elaborative rehearsal
  • Evaluation of types of LTM

    S - clinical evidence
    S - real-world application
    L - conflicting neuroimaging evidence
  • Evaluation of WMM

    S - clinical evidence
    S - dual-task performance
    L - nature of central executive
  • Evaluation of interference as an explanation for forgetting

    S - real-world interference
    S - support from drug studies
    L - interference and cues
  • Evaluation of retrieval failure as an explanation for forgetting

    S - real-world application
    S - research support
    L - recall vs recognition
  • Evaluation of misleading information affecting accuracy of EWT

    S - real-world application
    L - evidence against substitution
    L - evidence against memory conformity
  • Evaluation of the cognitive interview
    S - effectiveness
    L - some elements may be more useful
    L - time consuming