Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Transfer-Encoding: chunked Memory Multi-store model Atkinson and Shiffrin * 3 separate unitary stores * Information processing system * Sensory, short-term, long-term * Sensory - Decays rapidly unless paid attention ? STM ? linear way * capacity of STM is just 7 +/- 2 - Information at this stage is typically encoded acoustically * rehearsal within STM ? passed to LTM ? unlimited capacity * Support from neurophysiological case studies ?Clive Wearing ? STM can function normally while transfer to and retrieval of LTM is impossible ? KF had normal LTM but impaired STM * Laboratory experiments have provided support for the existence of two separate stores, STM and LTM ? Glanzer and Cuntiz * Overemphasises the role of rehearsal in forming LTM ? not the only way ? craik and lockhart Sperling ? Capacity * Chart, P?s asked to recall letters * P?S recall single rows when tones where heard * P?s could recall 4/5 in first stage * P?s could recall 3 in second stage * Image of each item fades during the time it takes to recall back * High levels of control ? lab experiment * Lack of ecological validity, external validity Peterson and Peterson ? Duration * Showed consonant trigram * Count backwards ? prevents rehearsal * Recall 80% with 3 second intervals * Got worse as intervals lengthened * Information decays rapidly without rehearsal * High levels of control ? lab experiment * Confused with other Trigrams * Low ecological validity Bahrick et al ? duration - LTM * Graduates from high school ? memory tests ? matching pictures to names * Good at 34 years * Dip at 47 years * loss of memory over time Conrad ? encoding of STM * showed random sequences of six consonants * 1 ? acoustically similar * 2 ? acoustically dissimilar * Had to write them in serial order * P?s made errors by substituting letters that sounded the same rather than looked the same * Letters are encoded by ...read more.

Middle

* Low population validity * Low internal validity ? one relationship ? cannot base on whole attachment ? Mundane realism Cultural differences Individualistic ? encouraged to be independent Collectivist ? reliant on each other Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg * Meta-analysis ? lots of information 32 studies 8 countries * Strange situation * 2000 babies (large sample) Type B ? most common in all cultures * Highest in GB and Sweden * Lowest in China * 70% of mothers work Type A * most common in Germany and other western counties * rare in Israel and japan * working mothers are rare encouraged Independence Type C * highest in china and japan * lowest in Scandinavian countries * children brought up in kibbuteim (closed community ? don?t see strangers) AO2 * large sample ? generalise * no direct ethical issues * half in USA ? population validity * Strange situation developed in USA may not be suited to other cultures Privation - no attachment made Koluchova ? Czech Twin boys * Twin boys, starved, beaten care 18m-7yrs * No speech and malnourished * Adopted by two sisters * Had average intelligence , happy and had emotional bonds * Damage was repaired * Against Bowlby * Unique data * Had each other to form the attachment * Small sample - Cannot generalise Skuze ? two sisters, Louise and Mary * Privation by mother * Kept in small room ? tied to the bed * Prevented talking * Put into care * No speech, little evidence of play * Louise ? normal language at school at 5 * Mary ? autistic school * Louise was older and could have formed the bond with mother before Mary was born * Cannot generalise ? small sample Institutions Tizard & Hodges * 65 children in a institution before 4m * No attachments ? 24 carers by the age of 2 * 25 returned to original family * 33 adopted * 7 stayed in care * Follow up at 8 and ...read more.

Conclusion

informal * Interviewer effects * Social desirability * High levels of training * Time consuming and expensive * Hard to analyse qualitative data Questionnaires * Set of questions used to collect data from large samples * Large samples, quick and cheap * Large amounts of data * Time efficient * Reduced investigator effects * Data easy analysed * Social desirability/lack of honesty ? low validity * Postal surveys ? low response * Cannot explain confusing questions (ambiguous) * Closed questions limit depth of response * Questions open ? difficult to analyse Surveys * Open questions * Respondent can write their own answers ? qualitative data * Rich detailed data * More realistic * Hard to analyse * Closed questions * Choses answer from predetermined responses * Quantitative data ? easy to analyse * Not realistic * Losses richness and detail * Cannot be clear if respondent understood Case Study * In depth study of an individual or group of people * Rich data * Ecological validity * Suggest new hypothesis for further research * Investigate topics which would be impractical/unethical to investigate experimentally * Hard to replicate * Hard to generalise * Researcher could be biased Measures of central tendency Mean * Statistical average * Most sensitive, takes all scores into account * Distorted by extreme values ? unrepresentative of the data Median * Middle scores after data is ordered * Unaffected by extreme values * Doesn?t take all the values into account Mode * Most frequently occurring score * Unaffected by extreme values * Affected by change in one score making in unrepresented Measures of dispersion Range * difference between highest and lowest * Easy to calculate * Distorted by extreme values Standard deviation * indicates the spread or dispersion of the data around central value * All score into account * Sensitive measure * Hard to calculate * Large ? variation around the mean * Small ? data is closely clustered around the mean * Zero ? all values were the same ...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Physiological Psychology section.