☒ hat
$
.tk/Le* X-2O l-2O 3-
, ble
IS
THIS
ka
NOW
Re m a r
Types of Memory
#
Process in which information is Retained aboutthe past
↓ ↓
Long-term memory
Short-term
I
memory
↓
Sensory Register
I
.
Limited Limited
stores information
①
Temporarily Duration
from
capacity
receiving
dniie
our senses
&
-
information from around us
② Unless we
pay attention
to it,
it disappears quickly.
capacity, unlimited capacity
③ has limited
Sensory register a
I
and limited duration.
very
a
④ Information coded
depending ploding:semanti
is on the
thathas picked it
sense
up. Semantic Procedural
Episodia
MEMORY MEMORY
MEMORY
Peterson and Peterson (1959) -
the duration of STM
Results:After seconds, participants
could recall about80%
3
correctly.
After 10 seconds, participants could recall 10% correctly.
↓
Conclusion
Duration of STM-18 seconds.
Bahrick et. al. (1975) -
Long-term memory
Jacobs (1887) -
Capacity of STM
a
new
712 items
Baldelylegss)-rding
in, in
and
↓
, -
Baddeley -
and Hitch (191-4) -cing_emoryModd_fwM
They developed
Multi -
Store
the
Model
I¥••É
of STM
and called CENTRAL CO
NF
IDE
g
ttin
NT
EÉE
IAL
Ge ere
it WMM .
Th
→ visuospatial
It's ↓
E-pis-E.es#-hTad-
a
much more ʰgc#op .
:
TA
detailed
phonological 9 Articulatory
KEI
T EA
SY
store Process
explanation mm m m
of STM .
Evaluations :
that this of central executive
☆ So ,
they thought idea is
simplistic and vague .
Also it
only
☆
how STM LTM
explains
,
information is dealt with in
,
and not in .
*
.
It has less emphasis on Rehearsal .
Evidence from lab that
☆ a
study supports WMM .
FORGETTING (197-1)
so Tubing and Psotka
If can't retrieve it's forgotten in LTM depend
you
a
memory ,
~
Forgetting
~ mmmm
-
can
mm
on
getting
mm
cues
mm
.
Interference -
one
explanation for
forgetting Forgetting is treated as a retrieve -
↓ the information still exists but is not accessible
EkʰeEʰe Proactive
.
cues help us remember .
They can be
/ mood ) ( surroundings )
information interferes internal external
Cue -
dependent
when the when the old information and →
new .
learning
interferes
with the
ability to recall older with the
ability
information to recall new information +
Strongestin evidence for
LTM
forgetting
EVALUATION
.
lacks meaning in real
who - the
theory world
.
doesn't
@ it 's
supported by tons of ④ it
go
into
biological
.
and
studies
cognitive processes .
- The
theory does not explain all
⑥ there is evidence for it ④ the effects much greater of memory ( like
an are seem
types
existing in real world too .
in artificial
real
lab than
world
-
they do in
p-ro-cedui.ee)
.
☒
, E.yy ¥iÉEm%% Also ,
can be affected
F- 'NT can be inaccurate and distorter ; by TELLINGinformation
Loftus and Palmer (197-4) used
Leading questioning question
_
a
Also
that implied and answer in it .
'
,
during the study '
they changed
'
the word hit to smashed
'
or
' '
collided the
question
'
in How fast the cars were
going
when the collided ! The
'
'
participants given the word smashed
y
'
contacted
the
highest speed while the the lowest
'
who the word
gave ,
ones were
given ,
gave
.
É Leading questions affect the of people 's memory of event
accuracy
can an .
Post event
-
discussion can affect the Accuracy of Recall
Shaw et.at .
( 1997 ) paired participants with a confederate who pretended to be a
participant .
When the participant
responded first ,
the recall was accurate 58 % of the time .
When the confederate was first and
gave
accurate
answers
,
the recall of the
participants was 67% .
When the confederate
gives inaccurate answers
,
correct recall
of the participants fell to 42 % .
Loftus (194-9) -
Wmenaponfocusinfwlmnnnnm
with indendent heard condition
In a
study an
groups design participants ,
a discussion in a
nearby room .
In one
,
a
man came out of the room with a
.pe#gre&- on his hands .
In second condition ,
a man came
carrying a knifee Participants .
were asked to
identify the man from 50
photographs .
Participants in condition 1 we 49¥ . accurate .
Only 33% of the participants in condition 2
were correct .
↳ Conclusion when focus
: anxious and aroused ,
witnesses tend to on
the
weapon at the expense of
other details .
↳ Evaluation :
+
High ecological validity as
participants didn't know the
study was
staged .
Ethical distressed at the
issues
participants could have been
frightened and
sight of
-
,
as a man
with a knife covered in blood .
affect EWT !
Misleading questions and Anxiety do not always
I n -
- - - -
mum _ m -
☆H☆ A field
study by Yuille and Cutshall 6986 ) showed that witnesses of a real incident / a
gun shooting)
had
remarkably accurate memories .
$
.tk/Le* X-2O l-2O 3-
, ble
IS
THIS
ka
NOW
Re m a r
Types of Memory
#
Process in which information is Retained aboutthe past
↓ ↓
Long-term memory
Short-term
I
memory
↓
Sensory Register
I
.
Limited Limited
stores information
①
Temporarily Duration
from
capacity
receiving
dniie
our senses
&
-
information from around us
② Unless we
pay attention
to it,
it disappears quickly.
capacity, unlimited capacity
③ has limited
Sensory register a
I
and limited duration.
very
a
④ Information coded
depending ploding:semanti
is on the
thathas picked it
sense
up. Semantic Procedural
Episodia
MEMORY MEMORY
MEMORY
Peterson and Peterson (1959) -
the duration of STM
Results:After seconds, participants
could recall about80%
3
correctly.
After 10 seconds, participants could recall 10% correctly.
↓
Conclusion
Duration of STM-18 seconds.
Bahrick et. al. (1975) -
Long-term memory
Jacobs (1887) -
Capacity of STM
a
new
712 items
Baldelylegss)-rding
in, in
and
↓
, -
Baddeley -
and Hitch (191-4) -cing_emoryModd_fwM
They developed
Multi -
Store
the
Model
I¥••É
of STM
and called CENTRAL CO
NF
IDE
g
ttin
NT
EÉE
IAL
Ge ere
it WMM .
Th
→ visuospatial
It's ↓
E-pis-E.es#-hTad-
a
much more ʰgc#op .
:
TA
detailed
phonological 9 Articulatory
KEI
T EA
SY
store Process
explanation mm m m
of STM .
Evaluations :
that this of central executive
☆ So ,
they thought idea is
simplistic and vague .
Also it
only
☆
how STM LTM
explains
,
information is dealt with in
,
and not in .
*
.
It has less emphasis on Rehearsal .
Evidence from lab that
☆ a
study supports WMM .
FORGETTING (197-1)
so Tubing and Psotka
If can't retrieve it's forgotten in LTM depend
you
a
memory ,
~
Forgetting
~ mmmm
-
can
mm
on
getting
mm
cues
mm
.
Interference -
one
explanation for
forgetting Forgetting is treated as a retrieve -
↓ the information still exists but is not accessible
EkʰeEʰe Proactive
.
cues help us remember .
They can be
/ mood ) ( surroundings )
information interferes internal external
Cue -
dependent
when the when the old information and →
new .
learning
interferes
with the
ability to recall older with the
ability
information to recall new information +
Strongestin evidence for
LTM
forgetting
EVALUATION
.
lacks meaning in real
who - the
theory world
.
doesn't
@ it 's
supported by tons of ④ it
go
into
biological
.
and
studies
cognitive processes .
- The
theory does not explain all
⑥ there is evidence for it ④ the effects much greater of memory ( like
an are seem
types
existing in real world too .
in artificial
real
lab than
world
-
they do in
p-ro-cedui.ee)
.
☒
, E.yy ¥iÉEm%% Also ,
can be affected
F- 'NT can be inaccurate and distorter ; by TELLINGinformation
Loftus and Palmer (197-4) used
Leading questioning question
_
a
Also
that implied and answer in it .
'
,
during the study '
they changed
'
the word hit to smashed
'
or
' '
collided the
question
'
in How fast the cars were
going
when the collided ! The
'
'
participants given the word smashed
y
'
contacted
the
highest speed while the the lowest
'
who the word
gave ,
ones were
given ,
gave
.
É Leading questions affect the of people 's memory of event
accuracy
can an .
Post event
-
discussion can affect the Accuracy of Recall
Shaw et.at .
( 1997 ) paired participants with a confederate who pretended to be a
participant .
When the participant
responded first ,
the recall was accurate 58 % of the time .
When the confederate was first and
gave
accurate
answers
,
the recall of the
participants was 67% .
When the confederate
gives inaccurate answers
,
correct recall
of the participants fell to 42 % .
Loftus (194-9) -
Wmenaponfocusinfwlmnnnnm
with indendent heard condition
In a
study an
groups design participants ,
a discussion in a
nearby room .
In one
,
a
man came out of the room with a
.pe#gre&- on his hands .
In second condition ,
a man came
carrying a knifee Participants .
were asked to
identify the man from 50
photographs .
Participants in condition 1 we 49¥ . accurate .
Only 33% of the participants in condition 2
were correct .
↳ Conclusion when focus
: anxious and aroused ,
witnesses tend to on
the
weapon at the expense of
other details .
↳ Evaluation :
+
High ecological validity as
participants didn't know the
study was
staged .
Ethical distressed at the
issues
participants could have been
frightened and
sight of
-
,
as a man
with a knife covered in blood .
affect EWT !
Misleading questions and Anxiety do not always
I n -
- - - -
mum _ m -
☆H☆ A field
study by Yuille and Cutshall 6986 ) showed that witnesses of a real incident / a
gun shooting)
had
remarkably accurate memories .
