1. DEFINITION OF MEMORY: “The retention of learning or experience”
MODELS OF MEMORY
DEFINITION OF MEMORY:
“The retention of learning or experience”

2. MEMORY MEMORY ANALOGIES Library Aviary Underground map Computer
STAGES OF MEMORY
ENCODING
STORAGE
RETRIEVAL

3. MEMORY THE SHORT TERM MEMORY
DEFINITION: “Memory for events in the present or immediate past”
CAPACITY OF THE STM
The Digit Span Test (Jacobs 1887)
Magic number 7 (Miller 1956)
Note: Vogel and Cowan (2001) have concluded its more likely to be 4 items
Chunking ( a useful application of psychological theory)
rehearsal

4. THE SHORT TERM MEMORY ENCODING IN THE STM
Predominantly acoustic (sound)
Evidence = errors made with similar sounding letters when presented visually for 0.75 seconds (Conrad 1964)
Note: research has shown we use other forms of coding also e.g. visual
DURATION OF THE STM
Approx. 15 – 30 seconds without rehearsal

5. THE SHORT TERM MEMORY
A STUDY INTO THE DURATION OF THE STM (Peterson & Peterson 1959)
See worksheet

6. THE LONG TERM MEMORY
DEFINITION: “Memory for events that have happened in the past”
CAPACITY OF THE LTM
Unknown
Unlimited

7. THE LONG TERM MEMORY ENCODING IN THE LTM Predominantly semantic
Evidence: (Baddeley 1966) semantically similar words presented to the LTM are most susceptible to being muddled up
But also acoustic, visual,
olfactory, gustatory
DURATION OF THE LTM
Potentially a lifetime but there
are many individual differences

8. THE MULTI-STORE MODEL OF MEMORY (Atkinson & Shiffrin 1968)
DIAGRAM
New idea of sensory memory
Short term and long term memories are permanent, structural components

9. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE (mini experiment)
PRIMACY/
RECENCY
EFFECT
(Murdock
1962)
The above diagram is called a serial position curve and is produced when a word list is free recalled.
PRIMACY EFFECT =
RECENCY EFFECT =

10. 2. DIFFERENT TYPES OF CODING IN STM & LTM
Baddeley (1966) studied STM
P’s presented with acoustically similar words
P’s then presented with semantically similar words
Results = immediate recall of acoustically similar words was poor because the grammatical and phonemic parts of language are quickly forgotten

11. 3. USE OF DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE BRAIN
Using brain scans Beardsley 1997 found that people use the prefrontal cortex when doing a STM task and the hippocampus when doing a LTM task

12. 4. STUDIES OF PEOPLE WITH MEMORY LOSS
See video and worksheet

13. EVALUATING THE MULTI-STORE MEMORY
POSITIVES
Has evidence to support it
Looks at structure AND process
Enables us to make predictions

14. EVALUATING THE MULTI-STORE MEMORY
NEGATIVES
Oversimplified
Unitary stores
Proposal of one short term store is wrong (see next model)
Proposal of one long term store is wrong

15. EVALUATING THE MULTI-STORE MEMORY
Cohen & Squire (1980) distinguished between:
declarative memories (memories for ‘knowing that’) and
procedural memories (memories for ‘knowing how’) – people with different conditions can lose one or the other, e.g. HM his STM was damaged but he could still learn skills (learned to play tennis)
Clive Wearing – musical ability still intact
Sub-divisions of declarative = semantic
episodic (Tulving 1972)
Evidence for this in brain scans using radioactive gold to measure blood flow
Model finds it difficult to explain flashbulb memories (these can be autobiographical or historical)
Examples are:

16. EVALUATING THE MULTI-STORE MEMORY
Rehearsal – now accepted that is not to only way into LTM
Levels of processing model (LOP) – depth of processing is more important
3 levels i) visual ii) phonetic iii) semantic
Integrated STM and LTM not separate
STM relies on LTM’s to chunk for instance
e.g. AQABBCITVIBM
Supporting evidence comes from artificial, un-ecologically valid laboratory experiments

17. The Working Memory
See work sheet

18. Evaluating the Working Memory Model
POSITIVES
Can explain partial memory difficulties
e.g. case sudy of someone with normal LTM but phonological loop difficulties
Has plenty of research evidence, e.g. dual task experiments
Emphasizes the active nature of short term memories

19. Evaluating the Working Memory Model
Ties in with brain mapping technology
Brain imaging studies have shown the separate areas at work, e.g. phonological store in Wernicke’s area and the articulatory rehearsal process in Broca’s area

20. Evaluating the Working Memory Model
NEGATIVES
Little is known about the CE (vague concept) – its probably also subdivided
Using case studies of brain damaged people is problematic
Lab studies also have their drawbacks ????????
ACTIVITY
“Alice is ……

21. Levels of processing (LOP)
An alternative to the multistore model by Craik and Lockhart (1972)
Emphasises memory process rather than structure
Based on the idea that the strength of a memory trace is determined by how the original info was processed

22. Levels of processing Different levels of processing:
Different levels of processing:
Structural – appearance
Phonological – auditory/sound
Semantic – meaning
Structural is the shallowest, semantic is the deepest

23. Levels of processing www.psychlotron.org.uk Shallow processing
Deep processing
Structural
Phonological
Semantic
Weak memory trace
Strong memory trace

24. Levels of processing
Incoming stimuli pass through a series of analysing mechanisms
Memory traces are a product of how stimuli are analysed
Strength of trace depends on:
Attention paid to stimulus
Depth of processing carried out
Connections with existing knowledge

25. Levels of processing
The basic prediction of the LOP approach is that the amount of info P’s will recall/recognise will depend on how deeply the experimental stimuli were processed
Complete experiment into LOP

26. Supporting evidence Elias & Perfetti (1973)
Elias & Perfetti (1973)
P’s had greater recognition of words they had thought of similes for (semantic) than word they had thought of rhymes for (phono)

27. Supporting evidence Craik & Tulving (1975) Tested P’s in 3 ways:
Is the word written in capitals? BIRD (y/n)
Does the word rhyme with ‘love’? Dove (y/n)
Complete the sentence … ‘the man ate the … telephone/apple.’
Highest recognition of semantically processes stimuli, followed by phono, followed by structural

28. Levels of processing - positives
Influential model that focused researchers on processes that they had tended to neglect
The idea that the nature of a memory trace depends on encoding processes is well supported by empirical evidence
Theory can be applied to everyday life, e.g. exam revision
You will recall more if you use…
Depth – make sure you understand & make connections between the topics & ideas
Spread – use several different techniques on the material
Elaboration – mental effort is required to store material effectively
Distinctiveness – make the material your own

29. Levels of processing - negatives
Many different variables involved in determining how a stimulus is processed:
Depth
spread
Elaboration
Distinctiveness
Very difficult to isolate these variables experimentally

30. Levels of processing - negatives
Semantic processing was not always best; it depended on how recall was measured and how relevant the task was (Morris et al (1977):
Recognition – semantic best
Rhyming recognition – phonological best
It is difficult to measure ‘depth’
P’s may not process the info the way you want them to
The theory ‘describes’ rather than ‘explains’

31. Explanations of Forgetting
ACTIVITY – group work/presentations
Trace decay
Displacement
Lack of consolidation
Interference
Retrieval failure
Motivated forgetting (repression)