MEMORY

MEMORY

THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL
1. CENTRAL EXECUTIVE
  1. CO-ORDINATES THE ACTIVITIES OF THE THREE SUBSYSTEMS IN MEMORY. IT ALSO ALLOCATED PROCESSING RESOURCES TO THOSE ACTIVIITES
    1. ALLOCATED SLAVE SYSTEMS TO TASKS
  2. LIMITED PROCESSING CAPACITY
2. PHONOLOGICAL LOOP
  1. PART OF WORKING MEMORY THAT DEALS WITH SPOKEN AND WRITTEN MATERIAL. IT CAN BE USED TO REMEMBER A PHONE NUMBER. - CONSISTS OF TWO PARTSs
  2. PHONOLOGICAL STORE (INNER EAR)- LINKED TO SPEECH PERCEPTION. HOLDS INFORMATION IN SPEECH-BASED FORM (I.E. SPOKEN WORDS) FOR 1-2 SECONDS.
  3. ARTICULATORY CONTROL PROCESS (INNER VOICE) - LINKED TO SPEECH PRODUCTION. USED TO REHEARSE AND STORE VERBAL INFORMATION FROM THE PHONOLOGICAL STORE.
3. BADDELEY AND HITCH DEVELOPED AND ALTERNATIVE MODEL OF SHORT-TERM MEMORY
  1. THERE ARE DIFFERENT SYSTEMS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES ON INFORMATION
4. VISUO-SPATIAL SKETCHPAD (INNER EYE)
  1. STORES AND PROCESSES INFORMATION IN A VISUAL OR SPATIAL FORM. THE VSS IS USED FOR NAVIGATION
5. EPISODIC BUFFER
  1. TEMPORARY STORE FOR INFORMATION, INTEGRATING THE VISUAL, SPATIAL AND VERBAL INFORMATION PROCESSED BY OTHER STORES AND MAINTAINING A SENSE OF TIME SEQUENCING - BASICALLT RECORDING EVENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING. IT CAN BE SEEN AS THE STORAGE COMPONENT OF THE CENTRAL EXECUTIVE AND HAS A LIMITED CAPACITY OF ABOUT FOUR CHUNKS. THE EPISODIC BUFFER LINKING WORKING MEMORY TO LTM AND WIDER COGNITIVE PROCESSES SUCH AS PERCEPTION
CODING, CAPACITY AND DURATION
1. CODING (THE FORMAT IN WHICH INFORMATION IS STORED IN THE VARIOUS MEMORY STORES)
  1. CONVERTING INFO FROM ONE FORM TO ANOTHER
  2. ALAN BADDELEY (1966)
2. CAPACITY
  1. JOSEPH JACOBS 1887
    1. PARTIPANT ASKED TO RECALL (4 DIGITS) IN CORRECT ORDER OUT LOUD. INCREASE BY ONE IF SUCCESSFUL ETC.
      1. FOUND THE MEAN SPAN WAS 9.3 ITEMS FOR NUMBERS. THE MEAN SPAN FOR LETTERS WAS 7.3
        GEORGE MILLER 1956 - NOTED THAT THINGS COME IN SEVENS: (7 NOTES ON MUSICAL SCALE, DAYS OF THE WEEK, DEADLY SINS). THIS SUGGESTS THAT THE SPAN OF STM IS ABOUT 7 (PLUS OR MINUS 2) . HOWEVER, MILLER ALSO NOTED THAT PEOPLE CAN RECALL 5 WORDS AS WELL AS THEY CAN RECALL 5 LETTERS. THEY DO THIS BY CHUNKING- GROUPING SETS OF DIGITS OR LETTERS INTO UNITS OR CHUNKS.
3. DURATION
  1. STM - MARGARET AND LLOYD PETERSON
    1. TESTED 24 UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS (8 TRIALS PER). ON EACH TRIAL GIVEN A CONSONANT SYLLABLE TO REMEMBER AND ALSO A 3 DIGIT NUMBER. THE STUDENT WAS ASKED TO COUNT BACKWARDS FROM THE 3 DIGIT NUMBER UNTIL TOLD TO STOP. (prevent mental rehearsal) ON EACH TRIAL THEY WERE TOLD TO STOP AFTER A DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF TIME (RETENTION INTERVAL)
      1. % OF CORRECT RESPONSES DECREASED LONGER THE INTERVAL. SUGGESTING STM MAY HAVE A VERY SHORT DURATION INDEED UNLESS WE REPEAT SOMETHING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
  2. LTM - HARRY BAHRICK ET AL
    1. STUDIED 392 PARTICIPANTS (HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOKS OBTAINED) . RECALL WAS TESTED IN VARIOUS WAYS,
4. DURATION
TYPES OF LONG TERM MEMORY
1. EPISODIC
  1. ABILITY TO RECALL EVENTS FROM OUR LIVES. THESE MEMORIES ARE ' TIME-STAMPED' ALLOWING YOU TO REMEMBER WHEN THEY HAPPEN. A MEMORY OF A SINGLE EPISODE WILL INCLUDE SEVERAL ELEMENTS
  2. HAVE TO MAKE A CONSCIOUS EFFORT TO RECALL EPISODIC MEMORIES. MAY BE ABLE TO RECALL (BUT NEED TO KNOW WHAT YOU WERE DOING)
2. SEMANTIC
  1. CONTAINS OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLD. INCLUDES FACTS IN THE BROADEST SENSE.
    1. NOT TIME STAMPED. WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE LEARNT IT. SEMANTIC KNOWLEDGE IS LESS PERSONAL . IMMENSE COLLECTION OF INFO
3. PROCEDURAL
  1. MEMORY FOR ACTIONS, SKILLS OR BASICALLY HOW WE DO THINGS. WE CAN RECALL THESE MEMORIES WITHOUT CONSCIOUS AWARENESS OR A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT. (DRIVING) OUR ABILITY TO DO THIS DEPENDS ON PROCEDURAL MEMORY. HARD TO EXPLAIN TO SOMEONE ELSE.
MULTI-STORE MODEL
1. SENSORY REGISTER
  1. STIMULUS FROM THE ENVIRONMENT PASSES INTO THE SENSORY REGISTERS ALONG WITH LOTS OF OTHER SIGHTS,SOUNDS, SMELLS AND SO ON.
    1. ICONIC MEMORY
      1. VISUAL INFO CODED VISUALLY
    2. ECHOIC MEMORY
      1. SOUND- OR AUDITORY INFO CODED ACOUSTICALLY
  2. LASTS BIREFLY
  3. HIGH CAPACITY
2. SHORT-TERM MEMORY
  1. LIMITED CAPACITY STORE. CAN ONLY HOLD A CERTAIN AMOUNT ( AROUND 5 )
  2. CODED SEMANTICALLY
  3. MAINTENANCE REHEARSAL OCCURS WHEN WE REPEAT MATERIAL TO OURSELVES OVER AND OVER AGAIN. WE CAN KEEP THE INFORMATION IN OUR STMS AS LONG AS WE REHEARSE IT LONG ENOUGH, IT PASSES INTO LONG-TERM MEMORY
3. LONG-TERM MEMORY
  1. PERMANENT MEMORY STORE FOR INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN REHEARSED FOR A PROLONGED TIME
4. Atkinson’s and Shiffrin’s (1968)
EXPLANATIONS FOR FORGETTING
1. RETRIEVAL FAILURE
  1. A FORM OF FORGETTING. IT OCCURS WHEN WE DON'T HAVE THE NECESSARY CUES TO ACCESS MEMORY. THE MEMORY IS AVAILABLE BUT NOT ACCESSIBLE UNLESS A SUITABLE CUE IS PROVIDED
  2. ENCODING SPECIFICITY PRINCIPLE
  3. CONTEXT-DEPENDENT FORGETTING
  4. STATE-DEPENDENT FORGETTING
2. INTERFERENCE
  1. PROACTIVE
    1. WHEN OLDER MEMORIES, ALREADY SORTED, DISRUPT THE RECALL OF NEWER MEMORIES. THE DEGREE OF FORGETTING IS GREATER WHEN THE MEMORIES ARE SIMILAR.
  2. RETROACTIVE
    1. WHEN NEWER MEMORIES DISRUPT THE RECALL OF OLDER MEMORIES ALREADY SORTED. AGAIN GREATER WHEN THE MEMORIES ARE SIMILAR.
  3. EFFECTS OF SIMILARITY
    1. JOHN MCGEOCH AND WILLIAM MCDONALD 1931
      1. SIMILAR MATERIAL (SYNONYMS) PRODUCED THE WORST RECALL. THIS SHOWS THAT INTERFERENCE IS STRONGEST WHEN THE MEMORIES ARE SIMILAR
EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
1. ANXIETY
  1. NEGATIVE
    1. ANXIETY CREATES PHYSIOLOGICAL AROUSAL IN THE BODY WHICH PREVENTS US PAYING ATTENTION TO IMPORTANT CUES, SO RECALL IS WORSE.
      1. JOHNSON AND SCOTT (1976) - LOW ANXIETY AND HIGH ANXIETY CONDITIONS. GREASE ON HANDS VS BLOOD ON HANDS. = 49% WAS ABLE TO PICK OUT THE MAN FROM LOW ANXIETY CONDITION AND HIGH ANXIETY = 33%. TUNNEL THEORY ARGUES THAT WITNESS'S ATTENTION NARROWS TO FOCUS ON A WEAPON, BECAUSE IT IS A SOURCE OF ANXIETY
  2. POSITIVE
    1. FIGHT OR FLIGHT RESPONSE TRIGGERED IMPROVING OUR ALERTNESS AND MEMORY OF THE EVENT BECAUSE WE BECOME MORE AWARE OF CUES IN THE SITUATION
      1. JOHN YULIE AND JUDITH CUTSHALL 1986 - STUDY OF A REAL-LIFE SHOOTING IN A GUN SHOP IN VANCOUVER, CANADA. 13 PARTICIPANTS WHO WHITNESSES SHOP OWNER SHOT. WITNESSES WERE VERY ACCURAYE AND LITTLE CHANGE AFTER 5 MONTHS THOUGH SOME DETAILS LESS ACCURAT. HIGH STRESS LEVELS = MOST ACCURATE
2. COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
  1. RONALD FISHER AND EDWARD GEISEKMAN (1992)
    1. FOUR MAIN TECHNIQUES: 1. REPORT EVERYTHING (ENCOURAGED TO INCLUDE EVERY SINGLE DETAIL ) 2. REINSTATE THE CONTEXT (RETURN TO CRIME SCENE IN THEIR MIND AND IMAGINE ENVIRONMENT AND EMOTIONS CONTEXT DEPENDENT FORGETTING), 3. REVERSE THE ORDER, (EVENTS SHOULD BE RECALLED IN DIFFERENT CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER) 4. CHANGE PERSPECTIVE (RECALLED FROM SOMEONE ELSE'S PERSPECTIVE TO DISRUPT THE EFFECT OF EXPECTATIONS AND SCHEME ON RECALL.
3. MISLEADING INFORMATION
  1. ELIZABETH LOFTUS AND JOHN PALMER 1974 - ARRANGED FOR PARTICIPANTS TO WATCH FILM CLIPS OF CAR ACCIDENTS AND THEN GAVE THEM QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACCIDENTS. USED LEADING QUESTION FROM VERB E.G. 'HIT'. THE MEAN ESTIMATED SPEED WAS CALCULATED FOR EACH PARTICIPANT GROUP. CONTACTED = 31.8MPH SMASHED = 40.5 MPH.
    1. WHY DO LEADING QUESTIONS EFFECT? - THE RESPONSE BIAS EXPLANATION SUGGESTS THAT THE WORDING OF THE QUESTION HAS NO REAL EFFECT ON THE PARTICIPANTS' MEMORIES BUT JUST INFLUENCES HOW THEY DECIDE THE ANSWER.
  2. POST- EVENT DISCUSSION
    1. TESTIMONIES MAY BECOME CONTAMINATED THROUGH HIS AS THEY COMBINE INFORMATION FROM OTHER WITNESSES WITH THEIR OWN MEMORIES
      1. FIONA GABBERT ET AL 2003 - PARTICIPANTS IN PAIRS. WATCHED THE SAME VIDEO OF THE SAME CRIME BUT FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES LETTING ONE SEE WHAT THE OTHER COULD NOT AND THEN DISCUSSED WHAT THEY HAD SEEN = 71% OF PARTICIPANTS MISTAKENLY RECALLED ASPECTS OF THE EVENT THAT THEY DID NOT SEE IN THE VIDEO BUT HAD PICKED UP IN DISCUSSION. - CONTROL GROUP WITH NO DISCUSSION = 0%

Nächster

Beschreibung

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

ähnlicher Inhalt

	Erstellt von Chloe Hughes vor etwa 7 Jahre