Ebbinghaus’ work on memory performance contributed astonishing knowledge to the field of scientific psychology and enthralled several succeeding researchers and psychologists (Fuchs, 1997; Slamecka, 1985; Young, 1985). Ebbinghaus was precisely known for conducting memory experiments by using nonsense syllables, and from the results of those experiments, he postulated a unitary view of learning and memory. However, Endel Tulving, provided evidence from Ebbinghaus’ original research that there existed discernible kinds of learning and memory. Prior to his experiment, Tulving received some scathing criticism on his stance regarding Ebbinghaus’ research, but he averred that there was no intention to derogate its concept (Slamecka, 1985; Tulving, 1985). Rather, Tulving’s experiment emanated from Ebbinghaus’ original research to address implications that would supplement knowledge about the psychological science of memory.
Tulving’s proposition was that there was a dissociation of memory that could be extrapolated from Ebbinghaus’ research. In order to test his hypothesized dissociation of memory, Tulving conducted an experiment in which he posed “the Ebbinghaus experiment.” In the experiment, participants had to recite the alphabets backwards. Participants were subsequently apprised to learn and go through the alphabets on a card, from Z to A, in 10.4 seconds. All participants were tested individually through 12 trials.
The task was indeed difficult and became a failure as it fomented distress among a few of the participants whose performance gradually deteriorated. Of the 6 participants, only 1 came close to reaching the criteria of the experiment (i.e., reciting the alphabets backwards in a maximum time of 10.4 seconds), with a ti...
... middle of paper ...
...all, the lack of general knowledge of the non-words made the experiment a cumbersome process, especially during the experiment’s incipient stage. However, the process was worthwhile as I experienced firsthand the dissociation of learning and memory.
Works Cited
Fuchs, A.F. (1997). Ebbinghaus’s contributions to psychology after 1885. The American Journal of Psychology, 110, 621-633.
Slamecka, N. J. (1985). Ebbinghaus: Some associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 414-435. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.3.414
Tulving, E. (1985). Ebbinghaus’s memory: What did he learn and remember? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 485-490.
Young, R. K. (1985). Ebbinghaus: Some consequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 491-495. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.3.491
A former Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram, administered an experiment to test the obedience of "ordinary" people as explained in his article, "The Perils of Obedience". An unexpected outcome came from this experiment by watching the teacher administer shocks to the learner for not remembering sets of words. By executing greater shocks for every wrong answer created tremendous stress and a low comfort levels within the "teacher", the one being observed unknowingly, uncomfortable and feel the need to stop. However, with Milgram having the experimenter insisting that they must continue for the experiments purpose, many continued to shock the learner with much higher voltages.The participants were unaware of many objects of the experiment until
Roediger III, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating False Memories: Remembering Words Not Presented in Lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cogntion, 21, 803-814.
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.
Like Zimbardo, Milgram invited participants to take part in a memory study through a newspaper ad. When the participants arrived they were introduced to a supposed fellow participant who was in fact a plant and part of the experiment. Both were asked by a man in a white coat which of them would like to be the teacher, and which would like to be the learner. The participant would unknowingly always be chosen to be the teacher. The teacher was then made to strap the learner into an electric chair, then told by the man in the white coat to secure nodes to the learner’s body that would act as a conduit for electricity to flow from the teacher’s switch to the learner’s body. The teacher was then led into a separate room and was only allowed to communicate with the learner through an intercom system, preventing any visual communication or observation. The experiment called for the teacher to recite words to the learner in a specific order. The learner would then recite them back perfectly, or suffer the consequences of an electric shock with any mistake made. All would go well the first few rounds; the teacher reciting the words, the learner reciting them back, a rhythmic sort of contentment developing between them. Finally, however, the learner would inevitably make a mistake. This is
Definition of memory and it's functions is difficult to illustrate by a single sentence. Consequently we use several metaphors to describe memory implicitly. Our beliefs, perceptions and imagination influence memory. The fact gave rise to memory being described as a reconstructive process, explaining that memory is not an exact record of a particular experience. Instead we bring various components together and fill in the blanks with our predisposed schemas while recalling. The metaphor building "an entire dinosaur skeleton from fossils" is the indirect way to describe memory as cognitive reconstruction. Remembering includes using schemas which are the mental representations of a concept, person or an event.They rejuvenate an incomplete memory such that it is perceived to be an undiminished one. Of course there are errors experienced when recalling which supports the idea of imperfect memory. These can be errors of commission, adding details which were not a part of the experience and errors of omission, which is excluding some aspects of the experience. In this paper I will support the selected metaphor and will provide evidence approving it.
Eysenck, M.W., 2003. Psychology For AS Level 2nd ed., Hove & New York: Psychology Press.
1) Text: Rosenzweig, Leiman, and Breedlove. 2nd Edition. Biological Psychology: An Introduction to Behavioral, Cognitive, and Clinical Neuroscience. Sinauer Associates, Massachusetts, 1999.
...n looking at the results, they found out that the learning curve was exponential. The researchers assumed that learning occurs while people study and encode material into the brain.
In conclusion, the question posed was to "discuss the need for an explanation of human memory, which proposes that memory is a set of stages, rather than a single process". When trying to discuss this need it became apparent that the fact that memory is not a concrete article made it all the more important that it was explained as a set of stages. This may be because as a set of stages, the complex structure of memory is all the more understandable and the theories of memory put together a "story" of how the memory process may work. However, most if not all theories or models describe rather than explain the memory process (providing a guideline) therefore the empirical evidence is really the only key in explaining why memory is a set of stages rather than a single process and it is from these that the " need " is derived.
3) Gleitman, H., Fridlun, A., and Reisberg, D. Psychology. Fifth Edition. New York. W.W. Norton & Company. 1999
Similar studies were done to a different set of college students and they tended to have the same results. After giving as much detail about each memory, the students were interviewed about what they may have written done about what they had remembered. During the last part of the experiment, each of the students were debriefed and asked to guess which memory they believed was false.
Roediger, H. L. III, & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803-814
Weiner, I. Healy, A. Freedheim, D. Proctor,R.W., Schinka,J.A. (2003) Handbook of Psychology: Experimental psychology,18, pp 500
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Cognitive psychology (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers
Olson, M. H. & Hergenhahn, B. R. (2013). An introduction to theories of learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.