Memory

• Interefenece Theory 


  Where one piece of information stops you from remembering

  another – the more similar the information is, the

  more interference that occurs.
• Proactive Interference 


  Old information is so strong in your memory, that it stops you remembering the new information
• Retroactive Interference 


  New information overwrites the old information,which stops you remembering old information
• Contextual Cues 


  These are triggers within memory that are encoded alongside the information that you need to remember. If they are present at recall then you are more likely to remember information
• False memories 


  A false memory is a memory for something that did not happen but which feels as if it were a true memory.
• Example of proactive Interference 


  calling a teacher by her old name when she gets married
• Example of Retroactive Interference 


  someone annoyingly shouting random numbers at you when you are trying to remember a number
• Example of contextual cues 


  This is why you should revise in silence as the exam room is in silence
• Example of False Memories 


  Eye witnesses can often experience false memories, this can also be the case when people recall information from their childhood. Our memories can be influenced by the power of suggestion
• Primacy and Recency -Murdock's Named Study- AIM


  To see if memory of words was affected by where they were presented in a list.
• Primacy & Recency – Murdock’s Named Study-Method 


  In a repeated measures design, 103 participants listened to 20 lists of words. Each word list contained between 10 and 40 words – created through randomisation from the 4,000 most common English words. Participants recalled the words in any order immediately after they heard each list.
• Primacy & Recency – Murdock’s Named Study-Result

  Recall of words was higher depending on where the words were presented. Primacy effect – high recall for words presented at the start of the list. Recency effect – highest recall was for words at the end of the list. Words in the middle were most commonly forgotten
• Primacy & Recency – Murdock’s Named Study-Conclusion

  These findings present the serial position effect – the likelihood that something is to be remembered depends on its position in the series. The serial position effect supports the MSM because primacy words (learnt at the start) have been transferred to LTM, whilst recency words (at the end) are still fresh in STM. Words in the middle have been pushed out of STM by the newer words, but haven’t had long enough to be transferred to LTM, so they are lost and forgotten (decay)
• Primacy & Recency Evaluating Murdock’s Named Study-Strength #1

  S-Lab experiement

  C-Murdock could standardise the words that were used and standardise the speed of presentation

  W-High internal validity & reliability
• Primacy & Recency Evaluating Murdock’s Named Study- strength #2

  S-Quantitative data

  C-It is easy to count the number of words that were recalled from each section of the list and compare the number from each section to each other

  W-Increases the internal validity
• Primacy & Recency Evaluating Murdock’s Named Study-Weakness #1


  S-Artificial Task

  C-We aren’t often asked to recall a random word list

  W-Low in external validity
• Reconstructive Memory – Bartlett’s Named Study-Aim


  How cultural influences affect the reconstruction of a story over weeks and months
• Reconstructive Memory


  Bartlett's Named Study-Method
• Bartlett's study method


  1. British students read a Native American story, 'The War of the Ghosts'

  2. After about 15-30 minutes, they were asked to retell the story

  3. Participants returned to Bartlett's lab days, weeks, or months later to reread someone else's recollection of the story, and recall the story again (serial reproduction)

  4. Bartlett kept a record of the version of the story that each person told
• What was the intention of Bartletts's study- method

  The intention was to see how much the story changed from the original, and whether the British students had a higher recollection of the culturally similar, or culturally different elements of the War of the Ghosts story
• Reconstructive Memory – Bartlett’s Named Study-Results

  There were considerable differences between the original story and the final story. Participants altered the Native American story to fit the British cultural expectations of the scenario, with Bartlett identifying 3 key findings: (1) The story was shortened through removing irrelevant information and keeping just the key themes. (2) Phrases were changed to fit cultural knowledge, e.g. ‘canoe’ became ‘boat’ & ‘hunting’ became ‘fishing’. (3) Eventually, the story became fixed, once it became culturally relevant to the British students
• Reconstructive Memory – Bartlett’s Named Study-Conclusion 


  All of the transformations made it easier for the British participants to remember the story. We don’t remember the details of memories, we tend to reconstruct them with assumptions that we hold.
• Reconstructive Memory Evaluating Bartlett’s Named Study-Strength#1


  S-External Validity

  C- The task was a real‐world task, storytelling, and used a real story for the materials

  W-Can explain how people make these mistakes in the real world
• Reconstructive Memory Evaluating Bartlett’s Named Study-Weakness#1

  S-Didn’t use the Scientific Method

  C-Participants weren’t given standardised instructions – no standardised time after which participants had to recall the story and they were not told to be as accurate as possible.

  W-Lacks internal validity
• Reconstructive Memory Evaluating Bartlett’s Named Study-Weakness#2


  S-Experimenter Bias

  C-Bartlett was the only one to analyse the responses – he was looking for changes based on culture

  W-May have led to inaccurate findings