Cognitive Psychology Revision Lesson

Legal or Illegal Questions?  Task: If it’s not on the specification, it will NOT be asked. Look at the specification on your handout and then decide if the 10 questions below are legal or illegal questions… Question Legal/Illegal Question? 1. Outline two strengths of the multi-store model (4 marks) 2. Outline & evaluate research into how misleading information affects the accuracy of EWT(12) 3. Outline the findings of dual task studies? (2) 4. Outline what Loftus & Palmers (1979) study showed? (4) 3. Outline was is meant by encoding in memory research? (1) 6. Identify a difference in long term and short term memory (2) 7. Outline and evaluate techniques used to improve the accuracy of EWT (12) 8. Outline the main functions of the phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad (2)

Question Legal/Illegal Question? 1. Outline two strengths of the multi-store model (4 marks) 2. Outline & evaluate research into how misleading information affects the accuracy of EWT(12) 3. Outline the findings of dual task studies? (2) 4. Outline what Loftus & Palmers (1979) study showed? (4) 3. Outline was is meant by encoding in memory research? (1) 6. Identify a difference in long term and short term memory (2) 7. Outline and evaluate techniques used to improve the accuracy of EWT (12) 8. Outline the main functions of the phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad (2) Legal Illegal Legal

Psychological Language  It’s important to understand the language that AQA uses. Consider the following two questions: What is the difference between these two questions? How would you answer both of these questions?  Outline how one research study has investigated the effects of anxiety on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony (EWT).  Outline what researchers have found in relation to the effects of anxiety on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony (EWT).  Although these questions are similar, what you include in your answers is very different.  How = method  What = results

Psychological Language – Studies & Theories  Question: What does AQA mean when they say ‘research’?  Studies & Theories!  Question: How do you evaluate studies? What key terms might you use?  Ecological validity  Researcher bias  Social desirability  Demand characteristics  Sampling issues These are all methodological issues, which can be used to evaluate studies.

Psychological Language – Evaluating Theories  Question: How do you evaluate theories (i.e. the Multi-Store Model of Memory)?  Bring in a study that supports the theory?  “The theory is supported by … study”  Further evaluation…  “However, we should be cautious when using this study to support the theory because there are problems with the study. For example…”

Psychological Language – Finally…  Don’t use – ‘Prove’  Nothing is ever proven in psychology!  Instead say:  This suggests…  This supports…  However, there are problems with the study…  There may have been demand characteristics/researcher bias…  This reduces the chances of demand characteristics/researcher bias…

Flash Cards - Revision  Learn your key theories and studies…

The Multi-Store Model  Task 1: Complete the diagram of the Multi-Store Model of Memory. Add labels to the components (boxes) and processes (arrows). 3 Minutes

Sensory Memory (SM) Short Term Memory (STM) Long Term Memory (LTM) Information Attention Rehearsal Transfer Retrieval Forgetting The Multi-Store Model – The Answers

Capacity, Duration and Coding  Question: What is meant by the following terms? Capacity Duration Coding Space - The amount of information that can be stored. Time - How long the information can be stored for. Format – The way in which information is changed and stored.

The Multi-Store Model  Task 2: Complete the table on your handout, detailing the capacity, duration and coding for sensory memory, STM and LTM. If possible, also write the name of any researchers that support these ideas. SENSORY MEMORY SHORT-TERM MEMORY LONG-TERM MEMORY CAPACITY DURATION CODING 3 Minutes

The Multi-Store Model SENSORY MEMORY SHORT-TERM MEMORY LONG-TERM MEMORY CAPACITY Very large Limited (7+/-2 ‘chunks’ of information) Miller (1956) Unlimited DURATION Very limited (1-2 seconds) Limited (20 seconds) Peterson & Peterson (1959) Lifetime/Years Bahrick et al., (1975) CODING Raw/Unprocessed information (From ALL 5 Senses) Acoustic (Sound)Semantic (Meaning)

The Multi-Store Model SENSORY MEMORY SHORT-TERM MEMORY LONG-TERM MEMORY CAPACITY Very large Limited (7+/-2 ‘chunks’ of information) Miller (1956) Unlimited DURATION Very limited (1-2 seconds) Limited (20 seconds) Peterson & Peterson (1959) Lifetime/Years Bahrick et al., (1975) CODING Raw/Unprocessed information (From ALL 5 Senses) Acoustic (Sound)Semantic (Meaning)

SM : Capacity: Very large Duration: Very limited period (1-2 secs) Encoding: Raw/Unprocessed (all 5 senses) LTM Capacity: Unlimited Duration: Lifetime/Years Encoding: Semantic (Meaning) Sensory Memory (SM) Short Term Memory (STM) Long Term Memory (LTM) Information Attention Rehearsal Transfer Retrieval Forgetting STM : Capacity: Limited (about 7+- 2) Duration: Very limited (20 secs) Encoding: Acoustic (sound)

Evaluating the MSM  Task 3: Using the key ‘information’ below, write three evaluation points for the Multi-Store Model. Hint: Are the following points, strengths or weaknesses of the model? Clive WearingBrain Scans Research Evidence Peterson & Peterson (1959) Bahrick (1975) Miller (1956)

The Working Memory Model  Task 4: Complete the diagram of the Working Memory Model. Then complete the table, outlining the different components of the model. 3 Minutes

The Central Executive Articulatory Control System Phonological Store Inner Scribe Visual Cache Phonological Loop Episodic Buffer Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad

Central Executive The Phonological Loop The Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad Episodic Buffer The boss of the WMM; Controls attention and directs information to the two slave systems; Limited capacity. Articulatory Control Process (Inner Voice) Sub vocal repetition of items in the phonological store. The ‘Inner Eye’ of the WMM; Stores visual and spatial information; Manipulates mental images; Limited capacity. It integrates (binds together) information from the LTM and other components. Phonological Store (Inner Ear) Stores acoustic items (speech based sounds) for short periods of time. Limited capacity. v v v v

Central Executive The Phonological Loop The Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad Episodic Buffer The boss of the WMM; Controls attention and directs information to the two slave systems; Limited capacity. Articulatory Control Process (Inner Voice) Sub vocal repetition of items in the phonological store. The ‘Inner Eye’ of the WMM; Stores visual and spatial information; Manipulates mental images; Limited capacity. It integrates (binds together) information from the LTM and other components. Phonological Store (Inner Ear) Stores acoustic items (speech based sounds) for short periods of time. Limited capacity.

Evaluating the WMM  Task 5: Using the key ‘information’ below, write three evaluation points for the Working Memory Model. Hint: Are the following points, strengths or weaknesses of the model? Case Study - KF Dual Task Studies Only STM? What about Sensory Memory and LTM?

Eyewitness Testimony Anxiety, Misleading Information & Post Event Discussion

Eye Witness Testimony  Task 6: Below are the key points from the method and result sections for the following studies:  Loftus (1979) / Johnson & Scott (1976)  Loftus & Palmer (1974)  Gabbert et al. (2003)  Use these key points to complete your notes on these studies, using the tables below.  Participants waited in a reception area and were exposed to: 1 High anxiety condition – man with knife runs past. 2 Low anxiety condition – man with pen walks past.  The sample consisted of 45 American students.  The sample consisted of 60 students from Aberdeen and 60 older adults.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by misleading questions.  Each participant watched 7 videos of car traffic accidents.  Participants had to identify the man from 50 photos.  They were then asked misleading questions, using different verbs, e.g. smashed, hit, bumped, contacted or collided.  The verb smashed generated an average speed of 40.8 mph.  Those in the pen condition were correct 49% of the time. Those in the knife condition were correct 33% of the time.  The verb contacted generated an average speed of 31.8 mph.  71% of witnesses recalled information they had not seen. 60% said they saw the girl stealing money, when they hadn’t.  Each participant watched a video of girl stealing money from a wallet, but from different perspectives.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by post- event discussion.  Johnson & Scott concluded that the knife created higher levels of anxiety, so that the witnesses focused their attention on the weapon and not the face of the man (weapon focus effect), therefore reducing the accuracy of their EWT.

Loftus (1979) / Johnson & Scott (1976) Method:  Participants waited in a reception area and were exposed to: 1 High anxiety condition – man with knife runs past. 2 Low anxiety condition – man with pen walks past.  Participants had to identify the man from 50 photos. Results:  Those in the pen condition were correct 49% of the time. Those in the knife condition were correct 33% of the time.  Johnson & Scott concluded that the knife created higher levels of anxiety, so that the witnesses focused their attention on the weapon and not the face of the man (weapon focus effect), therefore reducing the accuracy of their EWT.

Loftus (1979) / Johnson & Scott (1976) Method:  Participants waited in a reception area and were exposed to: 1 High anxiety condition – man with knife runs past. 2 Low anxiety condition – man with pen walks past.  Participants had to identify the man from 50 photos. Results:  Those in the pen condition were correct 49% of the time. Those in the knife condition were correct 33% of the time.  Johnson & Scott concluded that the knife created higher levels of anxiety, so that the witnesses focused their attention on the weapon and not the face of the man (weapon focus effect), therefore reducing the accuracy of their EWT.

Loftus & Palmer (1974) Method:  The sample consisted of 45 American students.  Each participant watched 7 videos of car traffic accidents.  They were then asked misleading questions, using different verbs, e.g. smashed, hit, bumped, contacted or collided. Results:  The verb smashed generated an average speed of 40.8 mph.  The verb contacted generated an average speed of 31.8 mph.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by misleading questions.

Loftus & Palmer (1974) Method:  The sample consisted of 45 American students.  Each participant watched 7 videos of car traffic accidents.  They were then asked misleading questions, using different verbs, e.g. smashed, hit, bumped, contacted or collided. Results:  The verb smashed generated an average speed of 40.8 mph.  The verb contacted generated an average speed of 31.8 mph.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by misleading questions.

Gabbert et al. (2003) Method:  The sample consisted of 60 students from Aberdeen and 60 older adults.  Each participant watched a video of girl stealing money from a wallet, but from different perspectives.  Participants then discussed video before answering a series of questions. Results:  71% of witnesses recalled information they had not seen.  60% said they saw the girl stealing money, when they hadn’t.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by post-event discussion.

Gabbert et al. (2003) Method:  The sample consisted of 60 students from Aberdeen and 60 older adults.  Each participant watched a video of girl stealing money from a wallet, but from different perspectives.  Participants then discussed video before answering a series of questions. Results:  71% of witnesses recalled information they had not seen.  60% said they saw the girl stealing money, when they hadn’t.  These results suggest that the accuracy of EWT is affected by post-event discussion.

Evaluating EWT Research  Laboratory studies  often lack ecological validity. Why?  EWT research often lacks population validity  Gabbert et al.  UK sample – Why is this an issue?  Loftus & Palmer  US student sample – Why is this an issue?  However, laboratory research = highly controlled  high level of replication – Why is this a strength?  Ethical guidelines  Protection from harm  Loftus  Exposed to a man with a knife – Why is this an issue?  Lofts & Palmer  Watched a video – Why is this an issue?  Task 7: Add three of these evaluation points to your table, ensuring that you answer the underlined question. Evaluation (AO3)

The Cognitive Interview  Question: What do each of the following initials mean in relation to the Cognitive Interview? Context Reinstatement - mentally reinstate the context of the target event. For example, recalling the scene, the weather, thoughts, and feelings; Report Everything - report every detail you can, even those which seem trivial; Change Perspective - report the event from a different perspective (put yourself in someone else’s shoes) Reverse Order - report the event in the reverse order, from the endpoint to the start.

Geiselman (1985) & Fisher (1989)  Task 8: Read the two summaries of Geiselman (1985) and Fisher (1989) and then evaluate these two pieces of research, using the points on the last page of your handout to guide you. 15 Minutes

Evaluation AO3 Lacks Ecological ValidityLacks Population ValidityHighly Controlled = Replication One weakness of Geiselman (1985) is that his study lacks ecological validity. In his study participants watched a video of a simulated crime on a video screen and witnessed the incident from start to finish, which is unlike what would happen in the real world. This matters because the results do not apply to what happens in the real world and therefore we do not know if people involved in real crime (who would have a stronger emotional connect) would respond to the cognitive interview in the same way. A second weakness of Geiselman (1985) is that his study lacks population validity. His study examined 89 students and therefore his sample is biased. This matters because we are unable to generalise the results of this study to other populations and we do not know if non-student populations would respond to the cognitive interview in the same way. However, Geiselman’s (1985) study was highly controlled. His study was conducted in a laboratory and therefore there would have been a high degree of control for extraneous variables. This matters because it allows psychologist to easily replicate this study, to see if we would get the same results with different populations and it means that we can be more certain that our IV affected out DV.

Evaluation AO3 Lacks Ecological ValidityLacks Population ValidityHighly Controlled = Replication One weakness of Geiselman (1985) is that his study lacks ecological validity. In his study participants watched a video of a simulated crime on a video screen and witnessed the incident from start to finish, which is unlike what would happen in the real world. This matters because the results do not apply to what happens in the real world and therefore we do not know if people involved in real crime (who would have a stronger emotional connect) would respond to the cognitive interview in the same way. A second weakness of Geiselman (1985) is that his study lacks population validity. His study examined 89 students and therefore his sample is biased. This matters because we are unable to generalise the results of this study to other populations and we do not know if non-student populations would respond to the cognitive interview in the same way. However, Geiselman’s (1985) study was highly controlled. His study was conducted in a laboratory and therefore there would have been a high degree of control for extraneous variables. This matters because it allows psychologist to easily replicate this study, to see if we would get the same results with different populations and it means that we can be more certain that our IV affected out DV.

Any questions?