Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Memory - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Bahrick et al.
        
        used 392 PPs from Ohio aged between 17 and 74
        
        asked PPs to recall details from their high school yearbook via photo recognition (the PPs would be shown a photo of someone who may have been from their high school yearbook. They were asked to name them.) or a free recall test (PPs were asked to recall as many names they could remember from their high school yearbook)
        
        PPs who graduated within 15 years had an average 90% accuracy in the photo recall test and an average 60% accuracy in the free recall test
        
        PPs who graduated past 48 years had an average 70% accuracy in photo recall and an average 30% in free recall
    - - Baddeley
  - - - Peterson et al.
        
        asked 24 undergrad PPs to remember 3 consonants in 8 trials.
        
        asked PPs to count backwards from a 3 digit number mentally to prevent rehearsal
        
        after 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 or 18 seconds they asked the PPs to stop
        
        without rehearsal, the STM has a short duration.
  - - - the meaning of a memory is remembered
    - - The sound of a memory is remembered
    - - asked PPs to remember information (acoustically similar/ dissimilar or semantically similar/ dissimilar)
        
        PPs had to immediately recall the information or recall it after a longer amount of time
        
        PPs who were asked to immediately recall acoustically similar information recalled it more poorly than acoustically similar information, implying that the STM codes acoustically as it confused the similar information
        
        PPs who were asked to later recall semantically similar information recalled it more poorly than semantically dissimilar information, implying the LTM codes semantically
  - - - the amount of numbers which the STM can remember
      - Proposed by Jacobs
        
        PPs were given 4 digits or letters and asked to verbally recall them. When correctly recalled, another digit/ letter was added to the sequence. PPs on average recalled 9.3 digits and 7.3 letters.
    - - grouping pieces of information together so that the STM can recall more information at once
      - proposed by Miller
        
        He suggested that the STM could hold at least 5 chunks of information
      - Cowan suggested that Miller overestimated how many items chunking allowed the STM to hold: he found that the STM could only hold 4 chunks of information
- - - - the part of the STM which stores the words which you hear
    - - the part of the STM which allows maintenance rehearsal to be performed
      - capacity of 2 seconds
  - - - the part of the STM which remembers currently visible objects
    - - the part of the STM which keeps track of how currently visible objects are laid out
- - - - scuba diver PPs learned a word list either on land or underwater. They were asked to recall the information either on land or underwater. The information was best recalled when the PPs were in the same place that they learned the information
  - - - male volunteer PPs learned a word list either sober or drunk and then after 24 hours recalled the information when either sober or drunk. More words were recalled when the PPs were in the same state they were in when they learned the word list.
- - - - echoic
        
        the way something sounds is remembered
      - iconic
        
        the way something looks is remembered
  - - - paying attention to something so that it is transferred from the sensory register to the STM
    - - repeating something to remember it
    - - repeating information for a long period of time so that it is transferred from the STM to the LTM
    - - recalling information from the LTM, transferring it to the STM
    - - repeating information to keep it in the STM
- - - - PPs were asked to learn different amounts of word lists. Eventually PPs could no longer learn new word lists or recall previous word lists. After 24 hours the PPs were asked to recall their wordlist(s). The PPs who learned over 10 word lists recalled 20% of what they learned whereas the PPs who learned 1 word list recalled 70% of what they learned
  - - - PPs learned a list of nonsensical syllables. After a retention interval they were asked to recall the information. Some PPs had an interview during the retention interval. The PPs who had an interview recalled fewer syllables correctly than the PPs who didn't, suggesting the interview interfered with what had previously been learned.
- - - - leading questions
        
        questions which imply something based on how it's worded
        
        Loftus
        
        45 student PPs were shown 7 videos of traffic accidents
        
        PPs were asked what speed the car was travelling at using different verbs (crashed, collided, bumped or contacted)
        
        PPs given the verb smashed averaged a speed of 40.8 mph
        
        PPs given the verb contacted averaged a speed of 31.8 mph
        
        Loftus used a new group of PPs divided into 3 groups and shown a 1 minute car accident video
        
        1 week later they were given a questionnaire of 10 questions in relation to the video
        
        one of the questions was "did you see any broken glass?" when there was no broken glass.
        
        PPs who heard the verb "smashed" more often said yes
        
        this proves that leading questions can create a bias
      - post-event discussion
        
        talking about the crime with other people after witnessing it which could alter the witness' memory
        
        Gabbert
        
        PPs were put into pairs and asked to discuss a video they had seen, believing that they had seen the same video when they had been shown different videos. 71% of PPs incorrectly recalled details which they had been told by the other PP in their pair
        
        the conformity effect
        
        changing your beliefs to align with someone else's because you trust them to be correct
    - - stress which can negatively effect the accuracy of an EWT
      - Deffenbacher
        
        reviewed 21 studies, 11 proposed anxiety was beneficial to EWTs and 10 proposed it was detrimental to EWTs
      - the Yerkes-Dodson effect
        
        low stress = low accuracy, mid stress = high accuracy, high stress = low accuracy
      - the weapon focus effect
        
        a witness' EWT is more inaccurate if the criminal is holding a weapon because they are more likely to focus on the weapon because of the anxiety it causes
      - Johnson and Scott
        
        PPs sat in a waiting room. A supposed criminal would enter in 1 of 2 conditions (holding a pen covered in grease vs holding a knife covered in what appears to be blood). PPs who saw the man holding the pen has an average 49% accurate EWT whereas the PPs who saw the man wielding the knife had an average 33% accuracy
      - Hubinette et al.
        
        58 real Canadian eye witnesses to a bank robbery were asked questions 4-15 months after witnessing the robbery.
        
        The witnesses were either victims (high stress) or bystanders (low stress)
        
        All PPs had a good recollection of the event (an average accuracy of about 75%) but the victims tended to remember more correct info
  - - - report everything
        
        all details are important
      - reinstate the context
        
        get the witness to return to the place the crime occurred
      - change perspective
        
        recall the event from other peoples' perspectives to minimise the disruptions caused by their personal expectations
    - - created by Fisher
      - improved the social dynamics between the interviewer and witness. The interviewer needs to know when to do things like make eye contact, how to minimise distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly.