1

Revision Theories and studies of Memory

Theory of Memory: Multi-store model
Atkinson and Shiffren 1968 said that memory is separated into 3
stores
Sensory memory holds information from our senses for the briefest period of time.
If we pay attention to it is passes to STM
STM holds around 7 items for 1 minute if we rehearse this information is passes to
LTM
LTM can hold an unlimited amount of information and this lasts a lifetime. We
forget either because the information is no longer available to us, or no longer
accessible.


Key Study: Murdock 1962
Aim: To provide evidence to support the MSM of memory
Method: Participants (Ppts) were shown a list of words,
one at a time for 2 seconds. Ppts then had to recall the
words.
Results: words at the beginning of the list and end of the
list were remembered.
Conclusion: Murdock said words at the start of the list
were in LTM as they had been rehearsed and words at the
end of the list were still in STM



2

Evaluation:
Strength
This study is reliable as it has been repeated many times and the same results have
been found e.g. Glanzer and Cunitz
Weaknesses
Remembering a list of words is not an everyday task so the study lacks ecological
validity
Sometimes we remember things without rehearsal and this study cannot explain
why
Theory of Memory: Reconstructive Memory
Bartlett said that memory is not a complete copy of events but that we change memories to
fit in with what we already know. Memory is a reconstruction of events. In this way
memory is a distortion of what has actually happened
Key Study: Bartlett (1932) War of the Ghosts
Aim: To see if people when remembering would alter the information given to them.
Method: Participants were read a Native American
Story called The War of the Ghosts. They then had to
retell the story several times over the next few weeks
Results: The story changed in many ways. It became
shorter and some of the facts became distorted. For
example canoes became boats.
Conclusion: Bartlett said that memory is influenced by our previous experience and what
we already know
Evaluation:
Strength
This is a more valid way of testing memory as it is a story, not a list of words
Weaknesses
It is difficult to use a reliable scoring measure to get how accurate the stories are
Wyn and Logie showed that memories for events do not change over time so this
contradicts Bartletts findings
Theory of Memory: Levels of Processing Theory
Craik and Lockheart, 1972 showed that memory is not about rehearsal, but about how
deeply the information has been processed

3

There are 3 levels of processing
Structural by what the information looks like
Phonetic by what the information sounds like
Semantic by what the information means
You are more likely to remember information with semantic processing
Key Study: Craik and Tulving 1975 Levels of Processing Experiment
Aim: To see if the type of question asked about words
will affect the number of words recalled
Method: Participants had to answer a Yes or No question
about words they were presented with. Either was it
written in capital letters (structural), does it rhyme with
another word (phonetic) or does it fit in with a sentence
(semantic)
Results: 70% of the semantic words were remembered,
35% of the phonetic and 15% of the structural
Conclusion: Deeper processing leads to greater remembrance.
Evaluation:
Strength
The study is reliable as it has been repeated many times and the same results found.
Also as it was a lab experiment the variables were controlled so that the only thing
different was the type of processing used
Weaknesses
The study lacks ecological validity as memorising a list of words is not an everyday
task
Deeper processing takes longer so it could be the length of time rather than the
depth of processing
Revision Theories and Studies of Forgetting
Theory of Forgetting: Interference Theory
If you had asked psychologists during the 1930s, 1940s, or 1950s what caused forgetting you
would probably have received the answer "Interference". It was assumed that memory can
be disrupted or interfered with by what we have previously learned or by what we will learn
in the future. This idea suggests that information in long term memory may become
confused or combined with other information during encoding thus distorting or disrupting
memories.

4

There are two ways in which interference can cause forgetting:
1. Proactive interference (pro=forward) occurs when you cannot learn a new task
because of an old task that had been learnt. When what we already know interferes
with what we are currently learning where old memories disrupt new memories.
2. Retroactive interference (retro=backward) occurs when you forget a previously
learnt task due to the learning of a new task. In other words, later learning interferes
with earlier learning - where new memories disrupt old memories.
Proactive and retroactive Interference is thought to be more likely to occur where the
memories are similar, for example: confusing old and new telephone numbers. Chandler
(1989) stated that students who study similar subjects at the same time often experience
interference.

Key Study: Underwood and Postman (1960)
Aim: To investigate how retroactive interference affects learning.
Method: A lab experiment was used. Participants were split into two groups. Both groups
had to remember a list of paired words e.g. cat - tree, jelly - moss, book - tractor. Group A
also had to learn another list of words where the second paired word is different e.g. cat
glass, jelly- time, book revolver. Group B were not given the second list. All participants
were asked to recall the words on the first list.
Results: The recall of the Group B was more accurate than that of Group A.
Conclusion: This suggests that learning items in the second list interfered with participants
ability to recall the first list.



5

Evaluation:
Strengths
The study is it is reliable. Both groups had the same amount of time to learn the
word lists.
The findings can be used to help students develop better study habits. For example
they should not learn two similar subjects on the same night as they may interfere
with each other.
Weakness
It lacks ecological validity. Memorising lists of word pairs is not something we would
do in everyday life so the study is not a true reflection of how memory works.
Practical application of interference: See second strength above

Theory of Forgetting: Context Dependent Forgetting
You forget information when the context in which you learn and recall is different. The
context refers to the environmental cues that are present at the time of encoding and recall.
This can be the location, but can also refer to sounds and smells.
Key Study: Godden and Baddeley (1975)
Aim: To see whether or not people who learn and recall in the same environment will
remember more than people who learn and recall in a different environment
Method: The participants were 18 divers on a diving holiday in Oban, Scotland. They were
split into 4 groups and they were all asked to memorise 36 words. Group 1 had to learn and
recall the words underwater. Group 2 had to learn the words underwater and recall on the
shore. Group 3 had to learn and recall the words on the shore. Group 4 had to learn the
words on the shore and recall underwater.
Results: Groups 1 and 3 (the ones where they
learned and recalled in the same environment)
recalled 40% more words than the other groups
Conclusion: If the context of learning and recall is
the same you will be able to remember more
Evaluation:
Strength
It is reliable because each group learned
and recalled their words at the same time
of day.


6

Weaknesses
The two environments were so different (land and water) that this does not reflect
everyday life so lacks ecological validity
The participants had to learn lists of words which again lacks validity as in real life
memory is not used in this way
Practical application of context dependent forgetting: You should make your learning
environment at home as similar to the place you will be tested. So you should learn at a
desk rather than sat on a bed.
Brain damage and Forgetting
Brain damage can occur from the result of an illness, such as
a stroke, brain surgery or a head injury. It can lead to
memory loss.
Some people suffer from brain damage and are unable to
remember information from before the brain damage
occurred. This is known as retrograde amnesia.
Other people suffer from brain damage and cannot learn any
new information. This is known as anterograde amnesia.
Case studies of patients with amnesia
Miller (1968) reported about a person known as HM who had an operation to
remove part of his hippocampus in the hope that it would cure his eplipsy. After the
operation he was shown to have anterograde amnesia as he was unable to learn
new information.
Russell and Nathan (1946) described a 22 year old patient who had retrograde
amnesia following a head injury from a motorcycle accident. He could not
remember any information from 2 years before the accident.
Evaluation
The case studies are valid because the participants were studied in depth using a
variety of research methods such as questionnaires and experiments
It is not possible to generalise from case studies as they are only carried out on one
or a small number of people






7

How accurate are eyewitness testimonies?
Two factors effecting EWT:
Leading Questions:
Name: Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Aim: To see if leading questions affect the accuracy of EWT
Method: Ppts were shown films of car accidents and asked questions about it. One
question was about the speed of the car. Some were asked How fast was it going when it
smashed into the other car? some were asked How fast
was it going when it contacted the other car.
Results: Ppts with the word smashed guessed higher
speeds than those with contacted
Conclusion: Police should be careful with the questions
they ask as this can distort a witnesses memory
Evaluation:
Strength
The study is reliable. Only the word in the question was different and all other
variables were controlled
Weaknesses
It lacks ecological validity. In real life we are not prepared to witness a crash, we are
taken by surprise
A real life study of a crime where a shooting took place in Canada showed that the
participants were not confused by leading questions

Context
Name: Geiselman et al (1985)
Aim: To see if reinstating the context helps improve EWT
Method: Ppts were shown footage of a violent crime. 2 days later half of the ppts were
interviewed about the crime where the context of the crime was recreated, the other half
had a standard police interview.
Results: The ppts who had the context recreated remembered more accurate facts than the
other group
Conclusion: Using a cognitive interview improves the quality of EWT


8

Practical Applications of EWT research:
Loftus and Palmer helped police be aware of the questions they ask witnesses to
ensure that their testimony is not affected by cues given to them by the police
Geiselman et al showed police that the context in which EWT recall affects what they
say. Therefore taking witnesses back to the scene of the crime or getting them to
imagine the scene of the crime when recallin can be helpful.