Summary Memory - Psychology A Level

The Coding, Capacity and Duration of Memory
Coding – Baddeley (1966) Capacity – Jacobs (1966) Digit Span Duration STM – Peterson + Peterson (1959)
Acoustic + Semantic Consonant syllables
 Procedure - Researcher reads
Procedure: 4 digits until participants can’t  Procedure - students were given a
 Acoustically similar (cat, recall it consonant syllable (e.g. YCG) to recall + a 3
cab, can) or dissimilar (pit, o Final number = digit span digit number to count back from
few, cow)  Findings – 9 no. + 5 words o Retention interval varied
 Semantically similar (great, could be repeated in correct  Findings – after 3 secs – average recall was
large, big) or dissimilar order 80% approx.. STM duration without rehearsal
(good, huge, hot) = 18 secs or over

Findings Duration LTM – Bahrick et al (1975) Yearbook
Miller (1956) Chunking + Memory
 Immediate recall was worse Strengths Weaknesses Photos
Span
with acoustically
 Research support similar  Studies don’t use everyday /meaningful information
 Procedure – American participants age 17-74
words,  Procedure
o Baddeley (1966) found we tend to mix up words – observed daily o Used onlyodigits/letters (Jacobs) or meaningful
Recognition test – 50 pics form high
o that
STM sound
= acoustic
similar when using STMspractise
(STMeg
is things that come in
acoustic) consonant syllables (Petersons)
school yearbook
 Recallbut mix
after 20up those
mins was 7 (dayswhen
th
with similar meanings of the week, music
using  May o not
Freeberecall
a valid model
test = doesn’t
– participant listed
LTMs (LTM is
worse with semanticallysemantic) scale) represent real life
names of graduating class
 Supports MSM view that these
similar words 2 memory
Findings – span of STM = 7  There is evidence suggesting there is more than one
 Findings – recall was mostly accurate
stores
o LTM = semantic are separate + independent
items STM store o Recognition test – 90% accurate after
 Research is often done through lab studies o Chunking makes it easier o KF had amnesia (Shallice and Washington 1970),
Acoustic osimilarity of the words 15 yrs, 70% after 48 yrs
Much evidence comes from lab studies(grouping= reliablethings
and into STM for recall was poor but was better when
confuse thecanSTMbewhen it’s trying o Free recall test – 60% after 15 yrs, 30%
replicated – more valid meaningful units) reading. Other studies confirm there is another STM
to encode information (+ vice after 48 yrs
for noises
versa for LTM)  Wrong to claim there is only one STM store
processing different types of information
Strength – Identified difference of 2 Strength – Jacobs’ study can be replicated Strength – Bahrick studied meaningful memories - appliable
memory stores
 Lacked adequate controls (confounding  Meaningless pictures were remembered, recall rates were
 STM = mostly acoustic + LTM = variables – being distracted lower (Sheperd 1967)
mostly semantic o Digit span could be affected as o Reflects a more realistic estimate of the duration of
o Led to multi-store memory participants could be distracted LTM
model during testing
Weakness – the Petersons’ study was artificial
Weakness – used artificial stimuli Weakness – Miller may have overestimated STM
capacity  Sometimes we recall meaningless things – not completely
 Words had no personal meaning – irrelevant
can’t be generalised to daily life  Cowan (2001) concluded STM capacity is o Recalling consonant syllables doesn’t reflect
only 4 chunks

, Types of Long-Term Memory

LTM Store 1 : Episodic Buffer Strengths
 Stores events (episodes) from our lives = like a  Case study evidence of different types of LTM
diary of daily personal experiences o Clinical studies of amnesia (Clive Wearing) showed
 Episodic memories are complex = they are time- that patient had difficulty recalling events that had
stamped (you remember what happens + how they happened to them in the past (episodic memory)
relate in time o Semantic memory were mostly unaffected +
o Involves several elements – people, places, procedural memory was intact (Clive still played
objects, behaviours are woven into one memory piano)
 There are different memory stores in LTM as
o You have to make a conscious effort to recall
one was damaged whilst other were intact
 Practical use => helps people with memory problems
o Old age memory loss is specific to episodic memory
LTM Store 2 : Semantic Memory (hard to recall recent memories but older ones are
intact)
 Stores our knowledge of the world= it’s like an
encyclopaedia/dictionary
 Semantic memories are not time-stamped = less
personal than episodic memories and are more about Weaknesses
facts/knowledge we all share
 Clinical studies lack control
o Researchers don’t know anything about the person’s
memory before brain damage
 Clinical studies are limited in what they tell us
about different LTM types
 There are conflicted findings about LTM types and brain
areas
o Buckner and Petersen (1996) reviewed findings
LTM Store 3 : Procedural Memory and concluded that semantic memory is in the left
 Stores memories for actions and skills = memories prefrontal cortex and episodic is in the right
of how we do things  Other studies (Tulving et al 1994) show
 Recall occurs without awareness or effort = these semantic memory is in the right and left for
skills/actions become automatic with practise (E.g. episodic memory
changing gears in a car)  Challenges neurophysiological evidence
to support memory types due to poor
agreement on when these types are