Term
|
Definition
| area of Brain where STM and LTM is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| establish how quickly info is forgotten over time |
|
|
Term
| Ebbinghaus 1885 procedure: |
|
Definition
long list of nonsense syllables
tried to recall them
noted how many times he could remember
repeated until he could say whole list
looked at how quickly forgotten |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
At start - items forgotten quickly
At End - rate of forgetting decreased |
|
|
Term
| Ebbinghaus 1885 Conclusions |
|
Definition
immmediate forgetting at start - loss of material from STM
Gradual forgetting - loss of material from LTM |
|
|
Term
| Ebbinghaus 1885 Criticisms |
|
Definition
Low ecolgoical validity
Bias - tested on himself |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| analyse previous research in this field |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| most people could only recite 7+-2 items |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
CHUNKING - way to increase STM
2+ items to form one piece of info |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| compare forms of encoding into STM and LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
PPS given word list
- acoustically similar words
- semantically similar words
CONTROL LIST acous/seman different.
PPS asked to recall immediately and later STM AND LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Immediate Recall - confusion with acoustically similar words
Later Recall - confusion with semantically similar words |
|
|
Term
| Baddeley 1966 conclusions |
|
Definition
STM - acoustic encoding
LTM - semantic encoding |
|
|
Term
| Peterson and Peterson P&P 1959 AIM |
|
Definition
| STM duration when rehearsal prevented |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
PPS heard TRIGRAM
asked to recall after interval (counting back in 3's)to prevent maintenance rehearsal |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
3 second delay - recall was high
longer delay - recall dec |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| without rehearsal STM duration is only a few seconds |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| to find the encoding of STM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Pps show 6 letter sequence
Asked to write them down
Presentation shown too fast, unable to keep up
Letters had to be held into STM
Errors analysed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Acoustic confusion occurred.
Letters they had seen had been replaced with similar sounding ones. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Info presented visually - encoding is acoustic |
|
|
Term
| Multi-Store Model of Memory |
|
Definition
| Atkinson and Schriffin 1968 |
|
|
Term
| Atkinson and Schriffen suggest: |
|
Definition
| memory is made up of several stores |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. info detected by sense organs
2. info enters sensory memory
3. attends to this, enters STM
4. no rehearsal, infor lost.
5. STM -> LTM - ONLY IF REHEARSED
6. no rehearsal. info lost |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| compare recall for words in different positions in a list |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
PPS presented with a word list
PPS asked to remember as many words in any order |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| words at start more likely to be remembered |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| words at the end more likely to be remembered |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| difference in position of recall |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
rehearsal - words into LTM
words at end - STM - recalled from there |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| investigate word recall in diff. positions when an inference task is introduced. |
|
|
Term
| Glanzer and Cunitz 1966 Procedure: |
|
Definition
| asked pps to count backwards in 3's as soon as list was completed. |
|
|
Term
| Glanzer and Cunitz 1966 Findings: |
|
Definition
| primary effect remained, yet recency effect disappeared |
|
|
Term
| Glanzer and Cunitz 1966 Conclusions: |
|
Definition
1st words had been processed into LTM
words nearer end affected by counting and did not remain |
|
|
Term
| 2 Case Studies that support 2 seperate memory stores: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
STM remained normal
could remember events for several seconds & longer if rehearsesd.
unable to transfer into LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
declarative memory damaged
procedural memory functioned
episodic damaged. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
STM unaffected
LTM severely impaired |
|
|
Term
| Critisms of Multi Store Memory: |
|
Definition
| MSM sees STMMAJOR PROBLEM: AS FRACTIONED. |
|
|
Term
| Tulvig suggested two seperate systems in LTM: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
memory of facts
eg paris = capital of france |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
memory of personal experiences
eg: marriage |
|
|
Term
| Brain Scans tell us that: |
|
Definition
episodic - front cortex more active
semantic - back cortex more active |
|
|
Term
| Cohen and Squire grouped semantic and episodic together and named them: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Cohen and Squire then suggested that the LTM is divided into |
|
Definition
| declarative and procedural |
|
|
Term
| Evidence to support declarative and procedural memory: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Hm supporting Cohen and Squire: |
|
Definition
Declarative damaged.
Procedural functioning. |
|
|
Term
| Clive Wearing supporting Cohen and Squire: |
|
Definition
Declarative memory did not function (confusion between semantic and episodic)
Procedural functioned. |
|
|
Term
| Further Evidence: Butterworth 1992: Dr S Case Study |
|
Definition
| Dr S was a neurologist who fell whilst skiing. |
|
|
Term
| Evidence Dr S episodic memory had been affected: |
|
Definition
could not recognise wife& colleagues
last 25 years of his life erased |
|
|
Term
| Evidence Dr S procedural memory still functioned: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Evidence Dr S semantic memory still functioned: |
|
Definition
| remembered previous medical experience and knowledge. able to diagnose his own brain scan. |
|
|
Term
| Another problem with MSM: says info needs to pass throught STM to LTM. KF case study challenges this because: |
|
Definition
STM damaged
LTM intact- could produce and establish new memories. |
|
|
Term
| MSM is only concerned with the amount of information and not the nature. |
|
Definition
| Eg. we remember the football score yet fail to remember the date of a historical event |
|
|
Term
| Flashbulb Memory - Brown and Kulick 1977 |
|
Definition
| used to describe memories that are vivid, detailed and associated with strong emotion. Can relate to public and personal events. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| found that people had vivid memories of 9/11 with little loss of detail after 2 years. these memories go directly into the LTM without rehearsal. |
|
|
Term
| WMM: working memory model |
|
Definition
| developed by Baddeley and Hitch 1974 |
|
|
Term
| WMM is only concerned with |
|
Definition
STM.
It only focuses on processing systems and functions. |
|
|
Term
| WMM model sees memory as: |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
controls 3 slave systems.
limited capcity.
modality-free.
used for temp storage of info. |
|
|
Term
| Phonological Loop is composed of: |
|
Definition
1. phonological store
2. articulary loop |
|
|
Term
| Phonological Store "Inner Ear" |
|
Definition
recieves info directly from the ear or via the articulary loop using an acoustic code.
added when the 2nd task wasn't affected by Articulary supression. |
|
|
Term
| Phonological Store "Inner Ear" |
|
Definition
recieves info directly from the ear or via the articulary loop using an acoustic code.
added when the 2nd task wasn't affected by Articulary supression. |
|
|
Term
| Articulary Loop "inner voice" |
|
Definition
holds info in an auditory code.
BADDELEY found it was limited by time.
can hold up to 2secs of info.
role of the loop is demonstrated by concurrent verbalisation. |
|
|
Term
| Visio-Spatial sketchpad "inner eye" |
|
Definition
deals with info visually and spatially
cannot encode acoustically |
|
|
Term
| Visio-Spatial sketchpad "inner eye" |
|
Definition
deals with info visually and spatially
cannot encode acoustically |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
added in 2000 by Baddeley
filled a gap in the model |
|
|
Term
| Coding into STM with modality specific interference BY: |
|
Definition
| Den Heyer and Barrett 1971 |
|
|
Term
| Den Heyer and Barrett 1971 aim: |
|
Definition
| investigate coding into STM using modality specific interference. |
|
|
Term
| Den Heyer and Barrett 1971 prodcedure: |
|
Definition
pps shown a grid. asked to remember location and letters.
given an interference task:
verbal task - count backwards in 3's
visual task- pattern matching
Then asked to complete grid |
|
|
Term
| Den Heyer and Barrett 1971 findings: |
|
Definition
| recall of letters more disrupted by verbal. position recall affected by visual. |
|
|
Term
| Den Heyer and Barrett 1971 conclusions: |
|
Definition
Letters - encoding acoustic.
Position - encoding visual.
Shows that there is separate systems in STM. |
|
|
Term
Evidence to support WMM:
PET SCANS |
|
Definition
| PET scans show evidence that when different tasks are preformed, diff. parts of the brain are active. |
|
|
Term
Evidence to support the WMM:
Practical uses in child education |
|
Definition
| eg. difficulty learning to read, interventions focusing on the articulary loop could overcome this |
|
|
Term
Evaluation of WMM Model:
☹ ignores LTM |
|
Definition
| Limited as it only concerns LTM ☹ |
|
|
Term
Evaluation of the WM Model
☹ still being developed. |
|
Definition
|
|
