memory studies

• Sperling- investigated sensory memory capacity

  lab experiment

  condition 1- recall as many- 4-5 average

  condition 2- recall 1 row- 3 average

  findings: capacity large, duration short for SR
• Jacobs- investigated capacity of stm

  showed ppts strings of letters or digits

  capacity- 7+-2 digits or letters

  capacity of stm- limited
• Miller- chunking

  when group individual letters into meaningful units

  7+-2 chunks- is the capacity of stm
• Bahrick- investigated duration of ltm

  tested memory of names of ex classmates 15 nd 48 yrs after

  15 yrs: recall 60% and recog 90%

  48 yrs: recall 30% and recog 80%

  ✔high ecological validity- more likely to generalise

  x couldnt control extraneous variables e.g. love
• Atkinson and Shiffrin- MSMM

  3 seperate memory stores

  x oversimplified
• Henry Molaison- evidence for msm

  had his hippocampus removed

  damage to ltm but not stm

  suggested we have multiple mem stores which can be damaged independently
• Tulving- support for ltm model

  cw and hm had damage to episodic mem

  distinct mem stores for episodic and procedural mem

  hippocampus- episodic

  temporal lobe- semantic

  cerebellum and motor cortex- procedural. bis
• squire and zola- limitation of tulvings ltm model

  investigated ppl who had ltm loss due to damage brain

  found ppl w damage to temporal lobe had impaired semantic and episodic mem

  sp semantic and episodic may not be distinct types of memory

  might be stored in same mem store

  semantic memories may start as episodic
• patient KF- limitation of msm

  msm predicts if u have damage to stm, it cant be transferred to ltm

  patient KF had damage to stm w out damage to ltm

  support for wmm
• baddeley and hitch- wmm

  4 components: central executive, episodic buffer, phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad.
• Underwood- evidence for interference theory part 1

  aim- effect of learning other word lists on ppts recall of most recent

  1 list- 80% accuracy

  multiple wl (last)- 20% accuracy

  concluded- earlier wl interfered w recall of later ones

  evidence for proactive interfernce
• Underwood- evidence for interference theory part 2

  control group who just had to learn 1st word pair list recalled better than the experimental group who had to learn 1st and 2nd word pair list

  newer mems interfered w older mems

  evidence for retroactive interference
• Godden and Baddeley- support for cue dependent forgetting theory

  tested if internal cues help us retrieve mems

  asked ppts to learn lists of words to recall 24hrs later

  1 group in water, 1 on ground

  when tested in same context, recall was better (50%)
• Deffenbacher- investigated effect of emotional arousal on mem recall

  relationship between emotional arousal and mem accuracy- inverted u shape

  some anxiety, improved accuracy

  too much anxiety- worse accuracy
• Loftus and palmer- investigated factors that can influence accuracy of eye witness testimony

  lab experiment, watch car crash video

  manipulated wording across diff groups- 5 groups asked in a more or less leading way

  more intense verb- judged as going quicker

  in replicated study: ppts were tested twice (1 week later)

  did u see the broken glass? ppts had false mem


  more likely to have a false mem w more intense lang

  x may have suffered from demand characteristics

  x may lacked ecological validity
• Johnson and scott- investigated effect of anxiety on mem accuracy

  2 groups: 1) low anxiety- msn walked out w pen

  2) man walked out w knife covered in blood

  then asked to identify man from 50 photos

  low anxiety- 49% accurate

  high anxiety- 33% accurate

  x lab exp- lack ecological validity
• Yuille and cutshall- investigated effect of anxiety in real life setting

  investigated mem accuracy of real life witnesses who saw a gun shooting 5m earlier

  found they had extremely good mem accuracy

  x real life so difficult to control extraneous variables and establish c and e e.g. closer to event

  x doesnt support deffenbachers inverted u
• Gieslman- tested effectiveness of cognitive interview

  during a lecture, got an intruder wearing a blue rucksack to enter room and steal a slide projector

  interviewd students 2 days later

  control group: standard interview technique

  exp group: cog interview

  they were asked a leading question (green bag)

  cog int- were less likely to mistake it for green

  cog int lessened effects of leading q on mem accuracy
• Gieselman and fisher- enhanced cognitive interview

  modified version of ci

  focused on building trusting relationship between interviewer and witness

  more successful w children

  avoid interrupting or distracting, witness given more control, encourage not to guess and say when unsure. so reduced false mems
• clive wearing and henry molaison- case study support for tulvings ltm model

  both had damage to their episodic memory but not their procedural memory