# Why do we process certain Information when other stimuli passes us by.

## Presentation on theme: "Why do we process certain Information when other stimuli passes us by."— Presentation transcript:

Introduction to Memory C:\Documents and Settings\fac6l170\My Documents\My Videos
Why do we process certain Information when other stimuli passes us by. We will be looking at Short term memory Long term memory

The difference between STM and LTM
Capacity Duration Encoding Forgetting STM Very limited (7 items) Mainly acoustic (By sound) Mainly Displacement LTM Unlimited (A lifetime) Mainly semantic (By meaning) Interference

Neuropsychological Evidence
Brain Damage: Shows some people lose the ability of one type of memory but not the other. (Milner, 1966 and Warrington 1970) Alzheimer disease: Shows that when a certain neurotransmitter is blocked LTM is affected. Squire 1992: Found the Hippocampus is active in LTM while the Pre-frontal cortex works for STM

Capacity

Check your Capacity in STM
Write down 8 strings of numbers first with three No then add one for each following string 265, 2768, and so on. In pairs : One person read out your no’s while your partner writes them down immediately after hearing them. Now swap roles. Note down your scores

Results of your STM 1: What is your score ( this is the longest strip of numbers you recalled ) 2: The class mean = 3: How did you try to remember the numbers. 4: How might you increase your STM span

Measuring the Capacity in STM
Digit span technique: Jacobs (1887) A number of digits are presented and participants must recall in the correct order George Miller (1957) devised “The Magical Number Seven” 7 +/- 2 digits Miller believed it was the number of chunks of information and not just number of digits

Miller’S Chunking C B T U O D S A G I L E P N G CBT UOD SAG ILE PNG
CAT SUN LEG DOT PIG Showing that memory scan can increase by chunking

Measuring the Capacity in STM
Simon (1974): argued That it depended on the size of the chunks. Small chunks More capacity, larger chunks smaller capacity. capacity. Cowan: More recent studies have argued that both visual and auditory capacity is around 4 chunks.

Factors that affect STM
Rehearsal and storage in LTM: This will increase the capacity for STM Reading digits allowed: Strengthens memory trace Pronunciation time: Lower capacity for Arabic than English as it is quicker to pronounce English.

Test (pages 4 – 12) 1) Outline how information is transferred from sensory memory to short-term memory in the multi-store model. (2 marks) 2) Outline two characteristics of short-term memory (2 marks) 3) What is the evidence for a distinction between STM and LTM. (2marks)

Duration

Retention in STM Peterson and Peterson: Discovered that we can only
hold information for a few seconds. They found that memory Deteriorated by 90% after 18 seconds When rehearsal was prevented information decayed or disappeared very quickly

Serial Position Stimulus lists
Distant Cottage Stable Bargain Cabbage Finger Mattress Landscape Uncle Future Minstrel Question

This time after you have looked at the words
This time after you have looked at the words. You need to count back in 3’s from 100 Velvet Village Stomach Carpet Flower Favour Gossip Lawful Chamber Started Sandal Warehouse

Studies in Duration Peterson and Peterson (1959)
found that when participants were given a 3-second interval they could remember 90% of data. However, when there was an 18- second interval retention reduced. This suggest that when rehearsal is prevented STM last about 20 seconds at most

Methodological Issues
Laboratory study using repeated measures. Trigrams are artificial = low validity May have been capacity rather duration Possible proactive interference (different items were used in each trial)

Factors Affecting Duration in STM
Rehearsal: increases duration. Intention to recall: When we are under pressure to remember. Sebrechts Relevance of information: Murdock showed the number of chunks was more important than the number of individual items.

Retention in LTM It is generally accepted that LTM lasts a lifetime.
Bahrick et al (1975) tested memory and found that after 34 years memory was good, but after 47 years there was a decided dip.

Factors affecting duration in LTM
Experimental techniques: Cues help recall, example recognition tasks were higher than recall tasks. Depth of learning: The more time spent learning, the longer information stays. Pattern of learning: Spaced out learning hold longer than intensive learning Nature of Material to be learned: Statistics was seen to be particularly well retained. It was a skill rather than just remembering facts

As stimuli reaches memory it is in it’s raw form. i. e
As stimuli reaches memory it is in it’s raw form. i.e. a visual picture or a sound It is believed that STM and LTM have different methods of encoding information Encoding

3 Main Types of Encoding Acoustic: The sound of the stimulus
Visual: The physical appearance of the stimulus Semantic: The meaning of the stimulus

Acoustic Coding in STM B G C T D V
Conrad ran a number of tests. Write these letters down in the correct serial order Acoustically similar B G C T D V

Second Condition. F J X M S R Acoustically dissimilar
Now write these letters down in the correct serial order F J X M S R

Conclusion Conclusion: Conrad believed that we must convert
information FLOWER that is visual into acoustic to store it in STM Therefore, participants were confused when faced with letters hat sounded the same Methodology: A little low in validity, not everyday chore to learn strings of letters.

Semantic coding in LTM Braddeley ran a similar test using words and
found that STM used acoustic coding He ran tests 4 times with participants to see how they faired in LTM = Semantic coding He found that words that were similar in meaning were poorly recalled.

Encoding in STM List A AS: Mad, map, mad, mat, cad, cap, cat.
List B AD: pen, cow, pit, sup, day , wet, ran List C SS: tall, high, broad, wide, big, large, fat List B SD: foul, thin, late, safe, strong, back, look

Encoding in LTM List A: Great, large, big, huge, broad, long, tall, fat, wide, high List B: good, huge, hot, safe, thin, deep, strong, foul, old, late

List A: cad, mad, cab, map, can, man, cad, cap
List B: cow, sup, hot, bun, bar, day, rig, few, fit, pen

Evidence for different Encoding
Conrad (1964) found that STM used acoustic coding. Baddeley (1966) found that LTM used semantic coding Peterson and Peterson (1959) found that information decayed quickly in STM

Sensory Memory This is where stimulus enters the brain and is sorted. Information is retained for only a fraction of a second. There are three separate stores Iconic store: for visual input Echoic store: for auditory input Haptic store: for tactile input

Sensory Memory Iconic store: Helps us see the world in one
smooth motion. Evaluation: What information requires our attention, thus moving into STM, and what stimuli should be discarded?

Evidence for Sensory memory
Sperling (1960): Used a chart containing three rows of letters. Showed for 50 milliseconds He found that we can only focus on a few pieces of information at once, as information fades quickly. This shows that memory has different components which are linear in nature.

Multi Story Model Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) created The information-processing system to help explain how memory works

What is a Model ? Psychologists have used
flow charts to try and explain how memory works Information-processing systems are similar to the workings of acomputer. There is a temporary store, a STM and LTM store. Temporary store = buffer on a computer

The Multi Store Model S memory STS LTS Stimulus input
Attention Rehearsal S memory STS LTS Visual, auditory Acoustic coding semantic coding Haptic coding limited capacity Unlimited capacity Limited capacity brief duration Unlimited duration Very brief duration Rehearsal Loop

Evidence for a distinction between STM and LTM
Glanzer and Cunitz (1966): When participants were distracted they lost the regency effect but not the primary words Long term memory: The Primary effect ( beginning of a word list) Short term memory: Recency effect ( the end of a word list) Their work showed that there was a difference between STM store and LTM store

Methodology and Ethics
Laboratory studies: Most research in memory has been done in a laboratory where variables are easy to control = high reliability. Validity: However, these experiments are something we would not normally Do in everyday life, = low validity memory loss - Google Video

Weaknesses Different types of information:
Some data is a lot more exciting and therefore easier to remember. It’s not always about how much! Repetition vs Semantic: Craik and Lockhart found that information is remembered better if it is processed with meaning rather than simple rehearsal.

Weaknesses Flashbulb memory: This supports Semantic
inputting Kulik and Brown argue that shocking events are imputed without rehearsal. Linear: Ruchkin (1999) Information in LTM helps to improve recall from STM. (words with meaning vs words without)

Weaknesses Brain Damage: It has been shown that people with damaged
STM do not necessarily have impairment to their LTM. Artificial Experiments: Laboratory experiments do not necessarily show us how we behave in the real world.

The Working Memory Model
Baddeley and Hitch believe that memory is much more complex than the Multi-story model suggests

The Working Memory Model
Baddeley and Hitch believed that there was more than one component to STM. One for information that we hear One for information that we see. Therefore we can do two tasks at once, i.e. driving a car and having a conversation at the same time attention test - Google Video

The Components of working memory

The Working Memory Model
There are three different components The Central Executive: Responsible for all the processing and attention tasks. The Phonological Loop: The temporary storage system for verbal information. The Visuo-spatial sketchpad: The temporary storage system for visual information

Recent model Baddeley (2000) 1.Central Executive 2.Episodic Buffer
4.Visio-spatial sketch pad (Inner eye) 3.Phonological loop Articulatory Control system (Inner voice) Phonological store (Inner ear)

This part of the loop holds
Phonological store: This part of the loop holds the words you hear, like an inner ear. Articulatory control system: This is where words are silently repeated or rehearsed, like an inner voice.

Evidence for Working Memory
Baddeley et al ran numerous experiments and found evidence to support the existence of the Phonological loop, the Visuo-spatial sketchpad and the Central Executive

Evidence for the Visuo-Spatial
Baddeley et al (1973) showed two tasks F H L Task one: identify the angles on a letter Task two: Follow a spotlight They could not do both tasks together. They could do one visual task and one auditory task. This shows that there is a difference between the phonological loop and the visual-spatial sketchpad

Evidence for the Phonological loop
Braddeley et al (1975): presented lists of words With one syllable: Harm, Wit, Twice With multi syllables: Organisation, University It takes longer to say multi syllable word, therefore participant remembered more single syllable words This shows that we remember information by listening to the word in our heads. Shorter words take shorter time to rehearse

Strength and Weaknesses of Working memory.
This model is generally accepted throughout the psychological world. It has a much more in-depth and logical interpretation of STM

Evidence for the Central Executive
Some evidence from Neurological investigation shows that brain activity is increased when doing two tasks that require attention and rehearsal. It is difficult to test the existence of a central executive. There has been limited evidence given and this is one of the weaknesses of this theory

Lesson Objectives Understand the concept that eyewitness testimony is not always reliable. Know the procedures of experimental research into eyewitness testimony Understand Reconstructive Memory

How accurate do we recall details of events witnessed.
Eye Witness Testimony How accurate do we recall details of events witnessed.

Psychological Experiment

Loftus discovered that a problem we have in recalling events often comes from stimuli experienced after the event. Participants were Shown a Video clip of a car accident. misleading information Caused errors in recall

Loftus’ Experiments Experiment 1: After watching the car
. Experiment 1: After watching the car Crash Participants were asked how fast the car was going. Some questionnaires said how fast Was the car going when it hit others others used the word smashed or Contacted instead or hit. Experiment 2: Students were shown a Video of a multiple car crash. One week Later they were brought back and asked Was there any broken glass? Again using The various verbs; hit, smashed, or contacted

The Results of Both Experiments
. VERB MEAN ESTIMATE OF SPEED (mph) Smashed 40.8 Collided 39.3 Bumped 38.1 Hit 34.0 Contacted 31.8 Results – Experiment 1 How fast was the car going? Results – Experiment 2 Did you see any broken glass? Response Smashed Hit Control Yes 16 7 6 No 34 43 44

Discussion Response Bias: critical words bias a person’s response.
Memory is altered: The critical word changes a person’s memory. Reconstructive memory Information processing for an event: 1: The person’s own perception, during the event 2: Information supplied after the event

Demand Characteristics
Participants might have guessed the aim of the experiment and changed their behaviour To reduce demand characteristics Loftus offered money to participants who got The recall correct. Despite this incentive over 70% still got the recall details wrong. Black et al

Methodology and Ethics
Laboratory experiments are high in reliability. Although films of real events were shown participants would have experienced things differently if they had been present at the car crash. Lack of validity/ emotional response Ethics: Participants were deceived therefore debriefing would be necessary afterwards

The Accuracy of EWT

Schemas Schema: Is our Preconceived ideas about certain experiences.
i.e. eating in a restaurant Tuckey and Brewer (2003) did an experiment on our ideas about bank robbers Participants recalled more details if they were in line with their schema of such events.

Anxiety Loftus and Burns (1982) found that high levels of
anxiety negatively effect memory. When people witnessed a Man with a knife covered in blood leaving a room Identification was poor. To busy looking at the knife. Christianson and Hubinette discovered that in real life experiences of anxiety often heighten recall. Witness bank robbery > Being threatened by robbers.

Age of Participant Children seem to accept what others tell them as part of their own memories (Poole and Lindsay 2001 = incorporate stories into real events) Flin et al (1992) found that children forget details much quicker than adults. Elderly people: Recall of events is less accurate

Methodology and Ethics
There is difficulties in eliminating extraneous variable with children There are also ethical issues when using children. Need informed consent from parent. In the real world when events happen we are not expecting them therefore not prepared to try and remember every detail . + demand Characteristics.

Improving EWT

Method of Questioning Fisher (1987) discovered
If misleading information has an affect of EWT then it is important that the police are careful not to misdirect witnesses. Fisher (1987) discovered that police asked closed questions which seems to conflict with the witnesses testimony. They also frequently interrupted breaking concentration.

The Cognitive Interview
Instructions to witness Context reinstatement Recall what you were thinking, feeling and the scene beforehand Report everything Report everything, even trivia Recall from changed Perspective Recall it from another’s point of view. Recall in reverse order Report from different ways moving backwards and forwards in time

Evidence for the Cognitive Interview
Geiselman et al (1985) found that the cognitive interview was better than the original method and hypnosis. More correct details were recalled But there was also more mistakes Fisher et al (1990) discovered that police in Miami were impressed with results.

Evidence for the Cognitive Interview
Police have expressed a concern, with the increase incorrect detail, when using CI. They believe that the context reinstatement and reporting everything are more useful than the other two categories This has been backed up by psychologists Milne and Bull (2002)

Improving Memory Teaching strategies for memory improvement is a useful tool for future exams

Mnemonics based on Visual Imagery
The Peg Word System One is bun Two is Shoe Three is tree Four is a door Five is a hive Six are Sticks Seven is Heaven Eight is a Gate Nine is a Line Ten is Hen

One is bun Two is Shoe Three is tree Four is a door Five is a hive Six are Sticks Seven is Heaven Eight is a Gate Nine is a Line Ten is Hen

Mnemonics based on Visual Imagery
The Peg Word System Eggs Bread Biscuits Tomatoes Potatoes Cheese Jam Pasta Juice Cornflakes

Six are Sticks One is bun Seven is Heaven Two is Shoe Three is tree Eight is a Gate Four is a door Nine is a Line Five is a hive Ten is Hen

Mnemonics based on Visual Imagery
The Peg-word system: Where you thing of one word and then peg another on to help recall The Method of Loci: Thing of things you see on your route to college. Then attach a list of item to each of the things on your route

Visual Imagery Paivio (1965): found that people could remember words that were easy to put pictures to – concrete V abstract nouns Beni and Moe (2003): Present words + images together, rather than words + words or images + images

Improving Memory

Organisation and Understanding
Bransford and Johnson gave a passage to participant. One with a title to the piece One with no title (Content was not clear) People remembered the title and that coupled with their schema helped recall.

Organisation in memory
Bransford and Johnson (1972) found that participants who were given a title to a passage of information found it easier to recall than those not given a title, as participants applied already stored knowledge on the topic to their understanding of the passage. This enhanced their recall later.

Chunking As already noted, chunking increases the amount we can recall and also reduces the load on memory. A difficult task can be reduced to a simpler task for STM.

Encoding and retrieval strategies
We recall things better if we try and retrieve the information in the same context or situation as when we learnt it. (Geiselman and Glenny (1977)

Active processing We are more likely to remember material that we have actively processed. Simple rehearsal is not enough to lay down long-lasting memories. Craik (1977) investigated recall of a word list under different conditions e.g. Is a word written in capital letters, does the word rhyme with another word, is it the name of a living thing. They found that group 3 remembered more than groups 1 and 2 because they had to think about the meaning of the word rather than just look at its structure.

Attention and practice
If we don’t pay attention to material we cannot remember it (as looked at in EWT). Practice is also important in order to remember large amounts of information for an exam, for example. Ericsson and Chase (1981) studied SF who could memorise up to 80 digits in one go – he had to practice for an hour a day over a two year period to do this! However, you need to be aware of your own memory and what works best for you!

Download ppt "Why do we process certain Information when other stimuli passes us by."

Similar presentations