MEMORY
, Coding in STM and LTM EVALUATION:
• Arrives from SR in raw form such as in sound or vision and then is encoded in a form STM can easily cope with.
Baddeley ! P: A limitation of Baddeley’s study is that it
• acoustically similar words (cat, cab, cap) or dissimilar (pit, few, dog). material.
• Semantically similar (large, big, huge) or dissimilar (hot, fit, peng) E: the words used in the study had no perso
Findings/conclusions ! participants.
• Immediate recall worse with acoustically similar words, STM is acoustic. E: when processing more meaningful inform
• Recall after 20 minutes worse with semantically similar words LTM is semantic. semantic coding even for STM tasks.
L: This means the results have limited applic
Capacity of STM cautious about generalizing the findings to
• Has a limited capacity, as only a small amount of information is held in the tasks.
store.
Jacobs ! P: a limitation of Jacobs study is that it was
ago.
• Digit span: researcher reads four digits and increases until the participant
cannot recall the order correctly. Coding, E: Early research in psychology often lack ad
extraneous variables.
Findings/conclusions !
• Participants could repeat 9.3 number and 7.3 letters in the correct order
Capacity, E: for example some may have been distrac
being tested so they didn’t perform as well
immediately after they were presented. Duration of L: this would mean that the results may not
Miller !
• Capacity to STM is 5-9 items but chunk was basic unit of STM.
memory confounding variables.
• This means 5-9 chunks can be held at any one time – increasing the stores P: a limitation of Miller’s research is that it
capacity. estimated the capacity of STM.
• 7+-2 magic number E: Cowan reviewed other research.
E: he concluded that the capacity of STM w
Duration
chunks.
Peterson & Peterson – STM !
L: This suggests that the lower end of Mille
• 24 students were given nonsense trigrams (TYG) to remember and a 3 digit number to count backwards for 3-18 seconds.
appropriate than 7+2 items.
Findings/conclusions !
• On average recalled 80% of syllables correctly with 3 second interval. P: A strength of Bahrick et al’s study is that
• After 18 seconds recall fell to about 3%. validity.
• Duration of STM without rehearsal is about 18-30 seconds.
E: real life meaningful memories were stud
Bahrick et al – LTM !
E: Shepard did study in a lab with meaning
• 392 Americans age 17 to 74.
1. Recognition test: 50 photos from participants in high school year book. was lower.
2. Free recall test: participants listed names of their graduating class. L: downside of real life research is that conf
Findings/conclusions ! aren't controlled – participants may have lo
• Participants tested 48 years after graduation – 70% accurate in recognition and less accurate in free recall. and rehearsed their memories over the yea
, Coding in STM and LTM EVALUATION:
• Arrives from SR in raw form such as in sound or vision and then is encoded in a form STM can easily cope with.
Baddeley ! P: A limitation of Baddeley’s study is that it
• acoustically similar words (cat, cab, cap) or dissimilar (pit, few, dog). material.
• Semantically similar (large, big, huge) or dissimilar (hot, fit, peng) E: the words used in the study had no perso
Findings/conclusions ! participants.
• Immediate recall worse with acoustically similar words, STM is acoustic. E: when processing more meaningful inform
• Recall after 20 minutes worse with semantically similar words LTM is semantic. semantic coding even for STM tasks.
L: This means the results have limited applic
Capacity of STM cautious about generalizing the findings to
• Has a limited capacity, as only a small amount of information is held in the tasks.
store.
Jacobs ! P: a limitation of Jacobs study is that it was
ago.
• Digit span: researcher reads four digits and increases until the participant
cannot recall the order correctly. Coding, E: Early research in psychology often lack ad
extraneous variables.
Findings/conclusions !
• Participants could repeat 9.3 number and 7.3 letters in the correct order
Capacity, E: for example some may have been distrac
being tested so they didn’t perform as well
immediately after they were presented. Duration of L: this would mean that the results may not
Miller !
• Capacity to STM is 5-9 items but chunk was basic unit of STM.
memory confounding variables.
• This means 5-9 chunks can be held at any one time – increasing the stores P: a limitation of Miller’s research is that it
capacity. estimated the capacity of STM.
• 7+-2 magic number E: Cowan reviewed other research.
E: he concluded that the capacity of STM w
Duration
chunks.
Peterson & Peterson – STM !
L: This suggests that the lower end of Mille
• 24 students were given nonsense trigrams (TYG) to remember and a 3 digit number to count backwards for 3-18 seconds.
appropriate than 7+2 items.
Findings/conclusions !
• On average recalled 80% of syllables correctly with 3 second interval. P: A strength of Bahrick et al’s study is that
• After 18 seconds recall fell to about 3%. validity.
• Duration of STM without rehearsal is about 18-30 seconds.
E: real life meaningful memories were stud
Bahrick et al – LTM !
E: Shepard did study in a lab with meaning
• 392 Americans age 17 to 74.
1. Recognition test: 50 photos from participants in high school year book. was lower.
2. Free recall test: participants listed names of their graduating class. L: downside of real life research is that conf
Findings/conclusions ! aren't controlled – participants may have lo
• Participants tested 48 years after graduation – 70% accurate in recognition and less accurate in free recall. and rehearsed their memories over the yea
