Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Memory - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Baddeley (1966) gave different lists of words to four groups of participants to remember
      - Group 1: accoustically similar - eg. cat, cab, can
      - Group 2: acoustically dissimilar - eg. pit, few, cow
      - Group 3: semantically similar - great, large, big
      - Group 4: semantically dissimilar - eg. good, huge, hot
      - STM recall: recall task immediately after hearing it
        
        participants tended to do worse with acoustically similar words
      - LTM recall: recall task 20 minutes after hearing
        
        participants tended to do worse with semantically similar words
    - - Artificial stimuli
        
        Baddeley's study used quite artificial stimuli rather than meaningful stimuli
        
        The word list had no personal meaning to participants
        
        Should be careful about generalising the results to different types of memory tasks
        
        Findings of the study have limited application
      - Criticising Peterson and Peterson
        
        One explanation for why we forget things is spontaneous decay - memory trace simply disappears if not rehearsed
  - - - STM
        
        Duration is a defining feature of the STM
      - LTM
    - - Meaningless stimuli in STM study
      - Higher external validity
  - - - Digit span
        
        Jacobs (1887) developed a technique to measure digit span
        
        The researcher gives for example, 4 digits and then the participant is asked to recall these in the correct order out loud. If the participant recalls correctly the researcher reads out 5 digits and so on until the participant cannot recall the order correctly. This determines an individuals digit span
        
        Jacobs found that the mean span for digits across all participants was 9.3 items. The mean span for letters was 7.3
      - Span of memory and chunking
        
        Miller (1956) made observations of everyday practice
        
        For example, he noticed that things come in sevens. 7 days a week, 7 notes on a music scale, 7 deadly sins etc.
        
        This suggests that the span/capacity of the STM is about 7 items (plus or minus 2)
        
        Miller also noted that people can recall 5 numbers as well as they can recall 5 letters
        
        This is done by chunking: grouping sets of digits or letters into units or chunks
    - - Lacking validity
        
        Jacob's study was conducted a long time ago
        
        Early psych research often lacked adequate control
        
        Results may have not been accurate due to confounding variables
        
        However, the results of this study have been confirmed in other research, supporting its validity
      - Not so many chunks
        
        One limitation of Miller's research is the capacity of the STM may have been overestimated
        
        Cowan (2001) reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity of the STM is only about 4 chunks
        
        This suggests that the lower end of Miller's estimate of 5 items is more realistic than 7
- - - - Proactive interference
      - Retroactive interference
    - - Procedure
      - Findings
    - - Evidence from lab studies
      - Artificial materials
      - Real-life studies
      - Time between learning
      - Interference effects may be overcome using cues
  - - - Procedure
      - Findings
    - - Findings
      - Procedure
    - - Supporting evidence
      - Questioning context effects
      - Recall versus recognition
      - Problems with the encoding specificity principle
      - Real-life applications
- - - - Procedure
      - Findings
      - Why do leading questions affect EWT?
    - - Procedure
      - Findings
    - - Useful real-life applications
      - The tasks are artificial
      - Individual differencs
      - Demand characteristics
      - Consequences of EWT
  - - - Procedure
      - Findings
    - - Procedure
      - Findings
    - - Weapon focus effect may not be relevant
      - Field studies sometimes lack control
      - There are ethical issues
      - The inverted-U explanation is too simplistic
      - Demand characteristics operate in lab studies of anxiety
- - - - The cognitive interview is time consuming
      - Some elements may be more valuable than others
      - Support for the effectiveness of the enhanced cognitive interview
      - Variations of the cognitive interview are used
      - Cognitive interview creates an increase in inaccurate information