After drawing some conclusions from these two tests and how the data shown match up to each theories’ own prediction, in my opinion, it would make more sense for the Dual Process Model to be the better model among the two. Take the fMRI test as an instance. For the radioactive substance to be detected by the scanner in some area of the brain during certain activity while the others remain rather dormant is indeed a very good way to see which part of the brain is active during recollection and/or familiarity. The experiment nailed the Dual Process Model’s prediction very accurately, in which a considerable activity was recorded in the hippocampus during events of recollection and a the same happened in the perirhinal cortex during events of The ROC study barely touched the topic of familiarity, which is a crucial aspect of both theories and of recognition memory overall. Instead, it focuses on the strength of the memory in correlation with recollection and accuracy as well as level of confidence in answering. I think it is true that if one is confident, it would generally mean that one knows more or remembers more. Therefore, it does make sense that the more confident one is, the stronger his or her memories are. As the confidence level was indeed linear to the recollection and accuracy ratio, which was 67.1%, this may mean that recollection may not consist of all “strong” memories after all. Instead, what makes it 67.1% may be because familiarity affected one’s memories. In this case, it is possible that both familiarity and recollection play a part in building strong memories (though there should be an explained threshold as to what is regarded as “strong memory” and “weak memory”), but then again, familiarity was barely talked about in Starns’ article which is why no solid conclusion could be drawn from the said
Roediger III, H. L., Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., & Gallo, D. A. (2001). Factors that determine false recall: A multiple regression analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(3), 385-407.
Over the years, memory have been researched and debated, however there are two theories that have explained extensively and are highly recognised by psychologist in the cognitive field of psychology and scientist alike, on how we process experiences and turn them into memories. These theories include the Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) Multi-store Model of Memory and Baddeley and Hitch (1974) Phonological Loop Model of Memory. This essay aims to compare, contrast and evaluate these models of memory, with supporting evidence and empirical research.
Human memory is flexible and prone to suggestion. “Human memory, while remarkable in many ways, does not operate like a video camera” (Walker, 2013). In fact, human memory is quite the opposite of a video camera; it can be greatly influenced and even often distorted by interactions with its surroundings (Walker, 2013). Memory is separated into three different phases. The first phase is acquisition, which is when information is first entered into memory or the perception of an event (Samaha, 2011). The next phase is retention. Retention is the process of storing information during the period of time between the event and the recollection of a piece of information from that event (Samaha, 2011). The last stage is retrieval. Retrieval is recalling stored information about an event with the purpose of making an identification of a person in that event (Samaha, 2011).
This essay will firstly briefly describe the theories and important facts about the original multi-store model of memory (MSM) and the working memory model (WMM).
In conclusion, Baddeley and Hitch (1974) developed the working memory in response to the multi store model and introduced four mechanisms involved; the phonological loop, visual-spaital sketchpad, episodic buffer and the central executive. The four components are also largely supported by a good wealth of evidence (in Smith, 2007).
Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2011). Dual Processes in Decision Making and Developmental Neuroscience: A Fuzzy-Trace Model. Developmental Review, 180-206. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.004
The Effects of Levels of Processing on Memory PB1: Identify the aim of the research and state the experimental/alternative hypothesis/es. (credited in the report mark scheme) To show how different levels of processing affects the memory. “People who process information deeply (i.e. semantic processing) tend to remember more than those who process information shallowly (i.e. visual processing). ” PB2: Explain why a directional or non-directional experimental/alternative hypothesis/es has been selected. (I mark) I have used a directional experimental hypothesis because past research, such as that by Craik and Tulving (1975) has proved this. PB3:
Historically, cognitive psychology was unified by an approach based on an resemblance between the mind and a computer, (Eysenck and Keane, 2010). Cognitive neuroscientists argue convincingly that we need to study the brain while people engage in cognitive tasks. Clearly, the internal processes involved in human cognition occur in the brain, and several sophisticated ways of studying the brain in action, including various imaging techniques, now exist, (Sternberg and Wagner, 1999, page 34).Neuroscience studies how the activity of the brain is correlated with cognitive operations, (Eysenck and Keane, 2010). On the other hand, cognitive neuropsychologists believe that we can draw general conclusions about the way in which the intact mind and brain work from mainly studying the behaviour of neurological patients rather than their physiology, (McCarthy and Warrington, 1990).
In the article, “The Critical Importance of Retrieval For Learning” the researchers were studying human learning and memory by presenting people with information to be learned in a study period and testing them on the information that they were told to learn in order to see what they were able to retain. They also pointed out that retrieval of information in a test, is considered a neutral event because it does not produce learning. Researchers were trying to find a correlation between the speed of something being learned and the rate at which it is forgotten
Caramazza, A., & Coltheart, M. (2006). Cognitive Neuropsychology twenty years on. Cognitive Neuropsychology, Vol. 23, pp. 3-12.
.... Serial Position Effect for Repeated Free Recall: Negative Recency or Positive Primacy? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96(1), 10-16. doi:10.1037/h0033479
Keil, F. C. and Wilson, R. A. (1999) The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England: The MIT Press
This is the type of memory that allows people to realize that what they are currently experiencing was experienced before (Cleary, 2008) and false recognition in this is what leads us to experience déjà vu. Recognition memory has been experimented using dual process theory, with recollection and familiarity as the processes. Recollection refers to bringing to mind a prior instance in which the current situation previously occurred and familiarity refers to experiencing inly a feeling if familiarity with the current situation. So, the key difference is that with recollection you know where the instance previously occurred, and with familiarity you cannot identify why it feels
Memory is the tool we use to learn and think. We all use memory in our everyday lives. Memory is the mental faculty of retaining and recalling past experiences. We all reassure ourselves that our memories are accurate and precise. Many people believe that they would be able to remember anything from the event and the different features of the situation. Yet, people don’t realize the fact that the more you think about a situation the more likely the story will change. Our memories are not a camcorder or a camera. Our memory tends to be very selective and reconstructive.
Wheeler, M. A., Stuss, D, t., & Tulving, D. (1997). Toward a theory of episodic memory: The frontal lobes and autonoetic consciousness: Psychological Bulletin, 121, 331-354