The document reviews key concepts in memory, highlighting models such as the multi-store model and the working memory model, while citing empirical research on short-term and long-term memory, schema effects, and the cognitive interview. It discusses factors influencing eyewitness testimony, including the impact of anxiety and leading questions, and examines strategies for memory improvement like organization, elaborative rehearsal, and mnemonics. The text underscores evidence of various memory capacities and durations while critiquing oversimplifications in existing models.

1. MEMORY

2. THE MULTI STORE MODEL
 Considerable evidence of different stores
 Clive Wearing- STM but no new LTM, but can recall some LTM
 Glanzer & Cunitz- primacy and recency effect
 Bekerian and Baddeley- people didn’t notice a change in radio wavelength (e.g. 95.8
changed to 96.7) despite rehearsal of seeing/hearing it regularly
 Over-simplified- assumes a single STM and LTM, but it is proven that there are
different stores within both STM and LTM

3. SHORT TERM MEMORY
• Capacity
– Baddeley- 5 words; set of one-syllable words and set of multi-syllable words
– Whatever can be articulated in 2 seconds, more short words recalled than long
words
– Miller 1956- people have a digit span of 7+/- 2
• Duration
– Peterson & Peterson 1959- shown trigrams then asked to count backwards to
prevent rehearsal
– 80% of trigrams were recalled after 3 seconds, but less than 10% after 18
seconds
• Encoding
– Baddeley 1966- participants in four groups; acoustically similar, acoustically
dissimilar, semantically similar, semantically dissimilar
– 55% of acoustically similar words recalled, 75% of acoustically dissimilar words
recalled
– Semantics did not affect the results that much

4. LONG TERM MEMORY
• Capacity- potentially unlimited
• Duration
– Bahrick 1975- 392 graduates shown yearbook photos after 47 years
– One group recalled names from memory (recall) and other matched
names to faces (recognition)
– Recall group had less than 20% accuracy
– Recognition group had 60% accuracy
• Encoding
– Baddeley 1966- participants in four groups; acoustically similar,
acoustically dissimilar, semantically similar, semantically dissimilar
– After 20 minutes they were given another task before recalling words
– 55% accuracy for semantically similar words, and 85% accuracy for
semantically dissimilar words
– Acoustics did not affect the results that much

5. THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL
 Farah- patient was good at spatial
tasks but not ones involving visual
imagery
 Word length effect- short words
recalled better than long words,
supporting articulatory loop having
limited time-based capacity
 If we do two tasks simultaneously
that need the same systems, we
struggle
 Not enough research into central
executive, which is the most
important component
 Not clear how working memory
and LTM work together

6. ANXIETY & EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY
• Effect- narrows focus of attention so recall is better, but too much
anxiety can have negative effects on EWT
• Research
– Christianson & Hubinette- 110 bank robbery witnesses
– Victims of the crime had more accurate recall and bystanders had less
accurate recall
– Loftus 1979- participants heard a discussion in a nearby room
– Condition 1- man enters with a pen and grease on hands
– Condition 2- man enters with knife covered in blood
– 49% of condition 1 were accurate in identifying the face from 50 photos,
but only 33% from condition 2 were accurate, disproving Christianson &
Hubinette but supporting the fact that too much anxiety causes
inaccurate recall

7. SCHEMAS & EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY
• Effect
– Low schema expectancy = ignored
– False information remembered (high schema expectancy)
• Research
– Brewer & Treyens 1981- 30 people wait in office for 35
seconds
– Unexpected recall test- 61 items (some typical office items,
some random/incompatible items)
– People remembered typical items with high schema
expectancy, and recalled false items due to a high
expectancy

8. AGE & EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY
• Effect- children are inferior to adults because they
lack schemas, have inferior capability, and memory
capacity increases with age
• Research
– Ceci & Bruck 1993
– Leading questions confuse children
– Preschool children provide relevant eye witness
testimony

9. MISLEADING INFORMATION & EYE
WITNESS TESTIMONY
• Effect
– Words used/leading questions- influence answers
– Information given after the event in leading questions may
replace the actual information
• Research
– Loftus 1975- group shown car accident film and asked
questions using different words for each individual group e.g.
‘smashed’, ‘bumped’
– People stated that the speed of the car before the crash was
much faster in the ‘smashed’ group than in the ‘bumped’
group

10. THE COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
• Context reinstatement- does not involve revisiting the
scene of the crime, but to recall wider scenes; the
weather, your thoughts/feelings, preceding events
• Report everything- recall every detail, even if the
relevance is questionable
• Recall from changed perspective- attempt to describe
the incident from the perspective of someone else at
the scene
• Recall in reverse order- report incident in reverse order

11. MEMORY IMPROVEMENT
• The role of attention
– Ericsson & Chase- person who could memorise up to 80 things (2 year
practice- 1 hour a day) proves that rehearsal and attention improve
memory (multi-store)
• Elaborative rehearsal
– Craik & Watkins
– Maintenance rehearsal; repeat information, only stays in STM for a few
seconds
– Elaborate; needed to transfer to LTM, link to previous knowledge, easier
to recall because there are several paths to reach it
• Encoding
– Tulving & Osler- two weakly linked words; recall vs. recognition
– Recognition- greater overlap with the information originally encoded

12. MEMORY IMPROVEMENT
• Organisation
– Bower- list of words, either randomly or in a hierarchy
– Organised group- 65% correctly remembered
– Control group- 19% correctly remembered
– Bower & Clark- either random or presented in a story
– Organised group- over 90% correctly remembered
– Control group- 10% correctly remembered
• Mnemonics
– Effective retrieval cues
– Method of loci- associate with places
– Peg-word- one=bun, two=shoe, etc. associate words with these
– Bellezza- peg-words are more flexible and effective than method of loci