Short term memory and long term memory.

Features of
each store: coding, capacity and duration
Research on coding:

Once information enters the memory system, it is stored in different formats depending on the
memory store. The process of converting information from one form to another is known as coding.
Alan Baddeley, 1996a 1966b, gave different lists to four groups of participants to remember.

● Group 1 - acoustically similar words - words sounding similar (i.e. cab, cat, can)
● Group 2 - acoustically dissimilar words - words sounding different (i.e. pit, few, cow)
● Group 3 - semantically similar words - words with similar meanings (i.e. great, large, big)
● Group 4 - semantically dissimilar words - words with different meanings (i.e. good, huge, hot)

Participants were shown the original words and asked to recall them in the correct order. When they
had to recall the words immediately (STM recall test) they tended to do worse with acoustically
similar words. When testing recall after 20 minutes (LTM test), they did worse with semantically
similar words, showing that the LTM is coded semantically.

Evaluation:

Artificial Stimuli -

A criticism is that Baddeley used artificial stimuli rather than meaningful material. The word lists had
no personal meaning to the participants meaning we should be cautious when generalising the
findings to different kinds of memory task. for example, when processing more meaningful
information even the STM may code semantically. This suggests the findings may have limited
applications.

Research on Capacity:

Digit Span -

Joseph Jacobs 1887 developed a technique to measure digit span. the researcher gives, for
example, 4 digits and then the participant has to repeat them in the correct order out loud. if correct,
the researcher reads out 5 digits and so on until the participant cannot recollect the order correctly.
This determines the individual`s digit span. Jacobs found the mean span for digits across all
participants was 9.3, while the mean span for letters was 7.3.

Span of Memory and Chunking -

Miller 1956 made observations of everyday practise and noticed things come in sevens: there are
seven days of the week, seven deadly sins etc. this suggests that the span of the STM is about 7
items (plus or minus 2). However, he also noticed that people can recall 5 words as well as they can
recall 5 letters. they do this using chunking - grouping sets of digits or letters in units and chunks.

Evaluation:
Lacking Validity -

one limitation of Jacobs`s study was that it was conducted a long time ago. early research in
psychology often lacked adequate control - for example, some participants may have been
distracted while they were being tested so they didn't perform as well as they might. This could mean
that some results may have been the result of confounding variables. However, the results of the
study have been confirmed in other research, supporting its validity.

Not so many chunks -

one limitation of Miller`s research is that he may have overestimated the capacity of the STM.
Cowan 2001 reviewed other research and concluded the capacity of the STM was only about 4
chunks. This suggests that the lower end of Miller`s estimate was accurate rather than seven items.

Research on Duration:

Duration of STM -

Duration is the defining feature of the STM. Peterson and Peterson1959 tested 24 undergraduate
students - giving them three letters to remember and a three digit number. They were told to go
backwards from the three digit number out loud until told to stop to prevent mental rehearsal of three
letters. on each trial they were told to stop after a different amount of time counting - 3, 6, 9, 12, 15
and 18 seconds (known as the retention interval). The longer time spent counting, the lower the
number of people able to remember their letters - indicating that the STM has a very short duration
unless rehearsal is used.

Duration of LTM -

Bahrick et al 1975, studied 392 participants from the American state of Ohio who were aged
between 17 and 74. Their high school yearbooks were obtained and recall was tested in two ways -
1) photo recognition test - they had to identify which of the photographs were from their yearbook /
face recognition, 2) free recall test where they recalled the names of everyone in their graduating
class. Participants tested within 15 years of graduation were approximately 90% accurate in photo
recognition. after 48 years the number declined to about 70%. Free recall was not as good - after 15
years this was about 60% accurate - dropping to 30% after 48 years.

Evaluation -

Meaningless stimuli in STM study:

a limitation of the Peterson and Peterson study was the stimulus material was artificial. trying to
memorise consonant syllables does not accurately reflect real life situations where we try and
memorize something meaningful. therefore it can be argued this study lacked external validity.
However, the study is not totally irrelevant as we do try to remember some meaningless things, such
as phone numbers;

High external validity:

one strength of Bahrick et al`s study was that it has high external validity - real life meaningful
memories were being studied. In cases such as Shephard 1967, where participants were supposed
to remember meaningless photos, recall rates have been lower. however, a limitation of using
meaningful memories is that confounding variables have not been accounted for - for example,
some of the participants may have looked at their yearbook photos over the years and rehearsed
their memories.