8013491
Description
Flashcards by Diana Domingues, updated more than 1 year ago
|
|
Created by Diana Domingues
over 7 years ago
|
|
| Question | Answer |
| What is encoding? | Changing information so it can be stored |
| What is storage? | Holding information in the memory system |
| What is retrieval | Recovering information from storage |
| What is the multi-store model of memory? | The idea that information passes through a series of memory stores |
| What is the sensory store? | Holds information received from the sense for a very short period of time. If attention is payed to it, it will flow into the Short Term Store |
| What is the short term store? | Holds approximately 7 chunks of information for a limited amount of time Maintenance rehearsal is needed for the information to stay in the short term store If elaborative rehearsal is done, the information will flow into the long term store |
| What is the long term store? | Holds a vast amount of information for a very long period of time |
| Murdock aim | To provide evidence to support the multi-store explanation of memory |
| Murdock method | Participants had to learn a list of word presented one at a time, for two seconds each word, and then recall the words in any order. |
| Murdock results | The words at the end of the list were recalled first (recency effect), and words from the beginning of the list were recalled quite well (primary effect). Middle words were not recalled very well at all. |
| Murdock conclusion | This provides evidence for separate short-term and long-term stores. Recency is evidence that the last few words were still in the short-term store Primary effect is evidence that the first few words flowed into the long-term store |
| What is reconstructive memory? | Altering our recollection if things so they make more sense to us |
| Bartlett aim | To see if people, when given something unfamiliar to remember, would alter the information, |
| Bartlett method | Participants were asked to read a story called 'The War of the Ghosts' - a Native American legend.. Later they were asked to retell the story as accurately as possible. This retelling was repeated several times along the weeks that followed. |
| Bartlett results | Bartlett discovered that his participants found it difficult to remembers bits of the story about spirits and changed other bits so it made more sense to them. Each time they retold the story, they changed it some more. |
| Bartlett conclusion | Memory is influenced by our own beliefs |
| What is structural processing? | Thinking about the physical appearance of words to be learnt |
| What is phonetic processing? | Thinking about the sound of words to be learnt |
| What is semantic processing? | Thinking about the meaning of words to be learnt |
| Craik and Tulving aim | To see if the type of question asked about words will have an effect on the number of words recalled |
| Craik and Tulving method | Participants were presented with a list of words, one at a time, and asked yes/no questions about each word. The questions either required structural, phonetic or semantic processing. They were then given a longer list of words and asked to identify words they had answered questions about. |
| Craik and Tulving results | Participants identified 70% of words that required semantic processing, 35% of words that required phonetic processing and 15% of words that requires structural processing. |
| Craik and Tulving conclusion | The more deeply the information is processed, the more likely it is to be remembered |
| What is interference? | Things that we have learnt that make it difficult to recall other information that we have learnt |
| What is retroactive interference? | When information we have recently learnt hinders our ability to recall information we have previously learnt |
| What is proactive interference? | When information we have already learnt hinders our ability to recall new information |
| Underwood and Postman aim | To see if new learning interferes with previous learning |
| Underwood and Postman method | Participants were divided into 2 groups: Group A were asked to learn a list of word pairs (cat -tree,). They were then asked to learn a second list of word pairs (cat -glass) Group B was only asked to learn the first list of word pairs. Both groups were then asked to recall the first list of word pairs. |
| Underwood and Postman results | Group B's recall of the first list was more accurate than that of Group A. |
| Underwood and Postman conclusion | New learning will cause people to recall previously learnt information less accurately |
| What is context? | The general setting or environment in which activities happen |
| What is anterograde amnesia? | Being unable to learn new information after suffering brain damage |
| What is retrograde amnesia? | Loss of memory for events that happened before brain damage occured |
| Godden and Baddeley aim | To see if people who learn and are tested in the same environment will recall more information than those who learn and are tested in different environments |
| Godden and Baddeley method | Participants were deep-sea divers and were divided into 4 groups. They were all given the same list of words to learn. Group 1 learned underwater & recalled underwater Group 2 learned underwater & recalled on the shore Group 3 learned on the shore & recalled on the shore Group 4 learned on the shore & recalled underwater |
| Godden and Baddeley results | Groups 1 & 3 (learned and recalled in the same environment) recalled 40% more words than Groups 2 & 4 |
| Godden and Baddeley conclusion | Recall of information will be better if it happens in the same context that learning takes place |
| Loftus and Palmer aim | To see if leading questions affect the accuracy of recall |
| Loftus and Palmer method | 45 participants were divided into 5 groups and shown films of car accidents and asked questions about it. Group 1 : How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other? Group 2 : How fast were the cars going when they collided into each other? Group 3 : How fast were the cars going when they bumped into each other Group 4 was asked: How fast were the cars going when they hit each other? Group 5 was asked: How fast were the cars going when they made contact? They were then asked to estimate the car's speed. |
| Loftus and Palmer results | The more 'dramatic' the word, the higher the speed estimate. (Those who heard the word 'smashed' gave a higher speed estimate than those who heard the word 'hit') |
| Loftus and Palmer conclusion | Leading questions will reduce the accuracy of recall. |
| Bruce and Young aim | To see if familiarity affects the accuracy of identifying faces |
| Bruce and Young method | Psychology lecturers were caught on security cameras at the entrance of a building. Participants were asked to identify the faces seen on the camera tape from a series of high-quality photographs |
| Bruce and Young results | The lecturer's students made more correct identifications than other students and experienced police officers |
| Bruce and Young conclusion | Previous familiarity helps when identifying faces |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.