# data[].attributes.body
long term coding - semantic

# data[].attributes.body
stm capacity - 7 + or - 2 chunks
ltm capacity - unlimited

# data[].attributes.body
Baddley and Hitch 1974

# data[].attributes.body
Ronald Fisher and Edward Geiselman argued that eyewitness testimony could be improved if the police used better techniques when interviewing witnesses. They recommended that such techniques should be based on psychological insights into how memory works, and called these techniques collectively the cognitive interview (CI) to indicate its foundation in cognitive psychology. There are four main techniques that are used…

1.  Report everything:

Witnesses are encouraged to include everything detail of the event, even though it may seem irrelevant or the witnesses doesn’t feel confident about it. Seemingly trivial details may be important and, moreover, they may trigger other important memories.

2. Reinstate the context:

The witness should return to the original crime scene ‘in their mind’ and imagine the environment (such as what weather was like, what they could see etc.) and their emotions (such as whether they were happy or sad etc.). This is related to context-dependent forgetting.

3. Reverse the order:

Events should be recalled in a different order from the original sequence, for example, from the final point back to the beginning, or from the middle to the beginning. This is done to prevent people reporting their expectations of how the event must have happened rather than reporting the actual events. It also prevents dishonesty (it’s hard to produce an untruthful account if they have to reverse it).

4. Change perspective:

Witnesses should recall the incident from other people’s perspectives. For example, how it would have appeared to other witnesses or to the perpetrator. This again is done to disrupt the effect of expectations and also the effect of schema on recall. The schema you have of a particular setting (a shop) generate expectations of what would have happened and it is the schema that is recalled rather than what actually happened.

The enhanced cognitive interview (ECI)-

Fisher et al (1987) developed some additional elements of the CI to focus on the social dynamics of the interaction. For example, the interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to relinquish it. The ECI also includes ideas such as reducing eyewitness anxiety, minimising distractions, getting the witness to speak slowly and asking open-ended questions.

Effectiveness of the CI- (pro)

In 1999, a meta-analysis by Günter Köhnken et al combined data from 55 studies comparing CI with the standard police interview. The CI gave an average 41% increase in accurate information compared with a standard interview. Only four studies showed no difference between the types of interview.

However, Köhnken found an increase in the amount of inaccurate information recalled by participants. This was a particular issue in the ECI, which produced more inaccurate details than the CI. Cognitive interviews may sacrifice quality of the EWT in favour of quantity.

Some elements may be more useful- (con)

In 2002, Rebecca Milne and Ray Bull found that each of the four techniques used alone produced more information than the standard police interview. However, they also found that using a combination of report everything and reinstate the context produced better recall than any of the other elements or combination of them.

The CI is time-consuming- (con)

Police officers may be reluctant to use the CI because it takes more time training than the standard police interview. For example, more time is needed to establish rapport with a witness and allow them to relax. The CI also requires special training and many forces don’t have the resources to provide more than a few hours. Therefore, the complete CI isn’t a realistic method for police officers to use.

# data[].attributes.body
Main purpose: supervisory role - it monitors incoming data, focuses and divides our attention and gives slave systems to tasks.
Capacity: limited processing capacity. Does not store information.
Coding: modality free

# data[].attributes.body
Johnson and Scott (1976)- lab study
Low anxiety- man with pen and grease on hands.
High anxiety- heard glass crash and man walks out holding a knife with blood on it.
The participants picked out man from pictures.
Low anxiety group- 49% identified him.
High anxiety group- 33% identified him.
Therefore anxiety has a negative effect on recall.

# data[].attributes.body
stm duration - 18 seconds
ltm duration - lifetime

# data[].attributes.body
Baddley (1966) conducted an experiment into how memory is coded, and he found that words which are acoustically similar are not stored as well by the short term memory. This is because the short term memory is encoded acoustically.

Baddley also found from that experiment that when given a list of words that are semantically similar, our long term memory struggles to process it. This is because our long term memory is coded semantically.

one strength of this study is that it identified a clear difference between the two memory stores.

Counterpoint:

this study didn’t use consonant syllables (meaningful info), and instead used impersonal letters and numbers. This means that the MSM might not be a valid model of how memory works in everyday life where we have to remember more meaningful info.

# data[].attributes.body
George Miller (1956) did an experiment and found that individuals could remember 7 + or - 2 pieces of info in their short term memory.

The short term memory can store 5-9 pieces of information. 7 is the magic number

One limitation of this study is that Miller may have overestimated the STM capacity. Nelson Cowan (2001) reviewed other research and concluded that the capacity of the STM is only about 4 + or – 1 chunks. This suggests that the lower end of Miller’s estimate (5 items) is more appropriate than 7 items.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the slave systems.
Main purpose: processes auditory information and keeps the order that information arrives.
Subdivided:
- phonological store (stores words and sounds heard)
- articulatory process (repeating sounds and words in a loop) which allows maintenance rehearsal.
Capacity: 2 seconds worth of information
Coding:  coded acoustically

# data[].attributes.body
Joseph Jacobs (1887) first ran this study and found that people could remember an average of 9.3 numbers or 7.3 letters.

Miller followed this experiment with his own and found that if people chunk information, they can remember more, hence 7 + or – 2 chunks of information.

Our long-term memory has an unlimited capacity.

One strength of this study is that it has been replicated. Even though this is an old study which lacked adequate controls, Jacobs’ findings have been confirmed by Bopp and Verhaeghen (2005). It also tells us that the STM is a limited-capacity store.

One limitation of this study is that some participants’ digit and letter spans might have been underestimated due to being distracted during testing eg outside noises (confounding variables).

# data[].attributes.body
Tulving (1985) was one of the first cognitive psychologists to realise that the multi-store model's view of long term memory was too simplistic and inflexible. Tulving proposed that there are in fact three LTM stores, containing quite different types of information. He called them episodic memory, semantic memory and procedural memory.

# data[].attributes.body
Peterson and Peterson (1959) tested 24 students in 8 trials each. On each trial the student was given a consonant syllable (eg YCG) and a 3 digit number. Students had to count backwards from the number until told to stop. This counting was so there was no rehearsal of the consonant syllable which would increase the duration of STM memory for the syllable. On each trial they were told to stop counting backwards after a period of 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 seconds (the retention interval).

Findings: after 3 seconds the average recall was 80% but after 18 seconds it was only 3%. This therefore shows that the STM may be about 18 seconds unless we repeat the info over and over (verbal rehearsal)

One limitation of this study is that the stimulus material was artificial. Recalling consonant syllables doesn’t reflect most everyday memory activities where what we’re trying to remember is meaningful. This study lacks external validity.

Another limitation of this study of how long our stm lasts has low temporal validity as findings are not modern and adjacent with current life in the 21st century.

# data[].attributes.body
Sensory Register :
- modality-specific coding
- very brief duration, less than half a second
- high capacity

STM:
- acoustic coding
- 18 seconds = duration
- 7+-2 capacity items

LTM:
- semantically coded for
- unlimited duration (up to a lifetime)
- practically unlimited capacity

# data[].attributes.body
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)- real life shooting
Participants interviewed 4 to 5 months after the incident, had to recall details of the event. Accuracy determined by number of details reported by each participant. Also asked how stressed they were on a 7-point scale.
Little change in amount recalled or accuracy after 5 months.
Those who reported higher stress- 88%
Those who reported lower stress- 75%
Therefore anxiety has a positive effect on recall.

# data[].attributes.body
Bahrick (1995) got 392 US previous high school students aged 17 - 74 and were shown pictures from their high school yearbook. He used two different methods to test recall.

Recognition:

- participants were given a group of names and photos to match the name to face

- Bahrick found that participants were able to correctly match 90% of the names and faces, 15 years after graduating

- 70% after 48 years after graduating

Free Recall:

- participants were asked to free recall names of those in their year group with no photo cues,

-  recall was 60% after 15 years

-  30% after 48 years

These findings show that free recall is less accurate than recognition and that we sometimes need prompts to trigger the LTM. This also shows that the LTM may last up to a lifetime for some material.

One strength of this study is that it has high external validity so reflects everyday life. This is because researchers investigated meaningful memories (names and faces). When studies were carried out with meaningless pictures to be remembered, recall rates were lower (Shepard 1967). This suggest that Bahrick’s experiment findings reflect a more ‘real’ estimate of the duration of LTM.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the slave systems.
Main purpose: stores visual and spatial information in a mental space (‘inner eye’).
E.g if asked how many windows there are in your house, you visualise it.
Logie (1995) subdivided the visuospatial sketchpad:

Visual cache - stores visual data

Inner scribe - records arrangement of objects in visual field
Capacity: limited capacity. According to Baddeley (2003) it is 3 or 4 items.
Coding: coded visually

# data[].attributes.body
episodic memory refers to our ability to recall events from our lives.
eg. your most recent visit to the dentist or the breakfast you ate this morning. These memories are complex.
These memories are time stamped ( you remember when they happened as well as what happened ). Episodic memory also stores information about how events relate to each other in time.
Your memory of a single episode will include several elements which are all interwoven to produce a single memory.
-You have to make a conscious effort to recall episodic memories. you do this quickly but are still aware that you are searching for your memory of what happened and where.

# data[].attributes.body
To recall LTM, need to transfer back to STM by retrieval.

To keep info in STM, we need to rehearse it = maintenance rehearsal. If we rehearse enough, the info is transferred to LTM.

If you pay attention to information, it is passed further into the memory system.

# data[].attributes.body
Another slave system.
Main purpose: added by Baddeley in 2000.
Temporary store for information, integrates visual, spatial and verbal information processed by other stores.
It maintains time sequencing (records events that are happening in the moment).
It links working memory to long term memory e.g. perception.
Capacity: Baddley (2012) - limited capacity of 4 chunks

# data[].attributes.body
Proactive interference: (old effects new)

PI occurs when an older memory interferes with a newer one. For example, if you learnt tennis as child and take up squash in your teens, your skills from tennis might proactively disrupt your ability to learn squash easily

Retroactive interference: (new effects old)

RI happens when a newer memory interferes with an older memory. For example, you have been playing squash for several years and someone asks you about how you played tennis in your childhood, it might take you a minute to remember the rules as the new squash skills are retroactively interfering

# data[].attributes.body
Interviewed people who were affected by hurricane Andrew, a real life event. Researcher defined anxiety by the amount of destruction in their home.
There was a link between the level of recall and amount of damage experienced.

# data[].attributes.body
• Retrieval failure - not being able to access memories that are there (avaliable)

•Tulving (1983) - reviewed research into retrieval failure & discovered a consistent pattern to the findings

- Summarised this pattern in the Encoding specificity principle (ESP)

•States that a cue has to be:

1. Present at encoding
2. Present at retrieval

If cues at encoding and retrieval = different  - there will be some forgetting

•cues are used in mnemonic techniques

Non - meaningful cues:

• Context-dependent forgetting - recall depends on external cue

•State-Dependent forgetting - recall depends on internal cue

# data[].attributes.body
Horror labryrinth in London dungeons. They were scared by the actors working in the London dungeons. The visitors were offered a reduced fee if they agreed to complete questionnaires at the end of their visit. Divided into two groups- high and low anxiety.
17%- high anxiety identified the actor

75%- low anxiety identified actor

# data[].attributes.body
This store contains our shared knowledge of the world. it is likened to a combination of an encyclopaedia and a dictionary. it includes knowledge of things such as: what an orange tastes like and the meaning of words.
these memories are not time stamped. we don't usually remember when we first learnt our knowledge such as the meaning of words.
Semantic knowledge is less personal and more about facts we all share.
contains an immense amount of information and is constantly being added to.
It's less vulnerable to distortion and forgetting than episodic memory.

# data[].attributes.body
Clinical evidence:
Dual task performance:
Nature of the central executive:
Validity of the model: dual task studies support WMM - 2 tasks sharing a subsystem are harder to perform together than separate subsystems

# data[].attributes.body
Interference is when two pieces of information disrupt each other, resulting in the distortion of one or both pieces infomation

There are two different types of interference, proactive and retroactive interference.

proactive is when an old memory interferes with a new and retroactive is when new memories interferes with an old

McGeoch and McDonald (1931) found that the similarity of memories influences the likelihood / power of interference. Gave participants a list of words that they learn until they can 100% recall, then gave them a new list. The participants who received a list of synonyms performed the worst, confirming similarity effects the interference.

Baddley and Hitch (1977) asked some real-life rugby players to be participants, the idea was that rugby players who played the most games would have the worst recall of who they played due to interference as they were repeatedly in the same situation the most.

However, some may argue that these studies are not reflective of real-life, that researchers create/choose situations that optimise the chance of interference. Eg. not everyone in the world plays rugby matches for a living, and not everyone conveniently gains two memories of synonyms.

Tulving and Pstoka also argue that interference can be overcome by cues, making it not a good explanation for forgetting

# data[].attributes.body
Loftus and Palmer- 45 participants watched video of car crash. Asked the leading question- 'how fast were the cars going when they "smashed" into each other?' Changed the verb in different groups and found the verb being changed influenced the answer given.
40.5 mph- smashed
31.8 mph- contacted

# data[].attributes.body
Gabbert- video of same crime but from different points of view. the participants talked about what they saw after with someone who saw a different video. they had to individually complete  a test of recall.
Found 71% of participants recalled aspects of the event which they didn't see before but was only told to them in the discussion. No discussion had 0% mistakes recalled.