The Psych Diaries

Revisiting the Multistore Model

Atkinson & Shiffrin’s Multistore Model

• Proposes three distinct memory stores:
  • Sensory memory: Briefly holds incoming sensory information.
  • Short-term memory (STM): Temporarily maintains information.
  • Long-term memory (LTM): Stores information over extended periods.
• Information moves through the stores in a linear sequence.

Original model:

Sensory Memory

Attention

Short-Term Memory

Rehearsal

Long-Term Memory

Major Criticisms

1. Focuses on structure rather than processes

• Treats memory as separate, static storage systems.
• Does not adequately explain how information is encoded, maintained or retrieved.
• Fails to explain why some information is remembered better than other information.

2. Memory stores are not unitary

• STM is not one uniform system.
  • Working memory contains components such as the phonological loop and central executive.
• LTM contains different types of memory.

Types of LTM:

Type	Definition	Example
Episodic	Memory of personal events tied to time and place	First day at university
Semantic	General facts and knowledge	Knowing Canberra is Australia’s capital
Procedural	Memory for skills and actions	Riding a bicycle

• Episodic and semantic memory are forms of declarative memory.
• Procedural memory is a separate form of LTM.

3. STM is not necessarily a gateway to LTM

• The model assumes information must pass through STM before entering LTM.
• Evidence from patients with STM impairments challenges this assumption.

Clinical evidence – Patient KF

• Condition: Impaired short-term memory.
• Finding: Could still form new long-term memories.
• Conclusion: STM and LTM are not completely dependent on one another.

4. Overlooks encoding and retrieval

• Does not adequately explain the processes responsible for memory formation and access.
• Encouraged development of process-oriented approaches, focusing on how memory operates rather than simply where it is stored.

Key takeaway: Memory cannot be fully explained by separate storage systems. Encoding, retrieval and different memory systems must also be considered.

Memory Processes, Encoding

Basic Memory Processes

• Encoding: Transforming information into a form suitable for storage.
• Storage: Maintaining encoded information over time.
• Retrieval: Accessing stored information when needed.
• Episodic memory: Memory of specific events, including when and where they occurred.

Levels-of-Processing Framework

Craik & Lockhart (1972)

• Proposes that memory retention depends on the depth of processing during encoding.
• Shallow processing focuses on surface characteristics.
• Deep processing focuses on meaning.
• Deeper processing generally produces stronger long-term retention of verbal information.
• Emphasises the quality of processing rather than simply the amount of rehearsal.

Three levels of processing

Level	What is processed?	Example orienting task	Expected retention
Visual	Physical appearance	Is the word in CAPITALS?	Lowest
Phonological	Sound	Does it rhyme with TRAIN?	Moderate
Semantic	Meaning	Does it fit this sentence?	Highest

Orienting tasks

• Tasks designed to direct participants towards a particular type of processing.
• Researchers compare subsequent memory performance across these tasks.
• Semantic orienting tasks typically produce the highest recall or recognition.

Incidental vs intentional encoding

• Incidental encoding: Participants process information without expecting a memory test.
• Intentional encoding: Participants deliberately try to remember information.
• Levels-of-processing experiments generally use incidental encoding.
  • Allows researchers to control how participants process information.
  • Reduces variation caused by individual memorisation strategies.

Elaboration and Spread of Processing

• Elaboration: Forming rich, meaningful and distinctive connections during encoding.
• Memory strength depends not only on processing depth but also on the amount and quality of elaboration.
• More elaborate encoding creates more distinctive memory representations.

Example: Simple vs complex sentences

• Simple: “He dropped the ___.” (WATCH)
  • Requires basic semantic processing.
  • Produces relatively few associations.
• Complex: “The old man picked up the valuable ___ from the mahogany table.” (WATCH)
  • Encourages detailed imagery and meaningful associations.
  • Produces stronger memory retention.

YES vs NO responses

• In sentence-fit tasks, participants decide whether a target word meaningfully completes a sentence.
• Example: “Near her bed she kept a ___”
  • CLOCK → YES.
  • CLOUD → NO.
• YES responses generally produce better memory because participants integrate the word into the sentence’s meaning.
• NO responses often involve rejecting the word without developing as many associations.

Graph interpretation – Page 16

• Visual and phonological processing show relatively small YES/NO differences.
• Semantic processing shows a larger difference.
• The strongest memory performance occurs for semantic YES responses.
• Demonstrates that elaboration influences memory beyond processing depth alone.

Limitations of Levels-of-Processing Theory

• Deep semantic processing does not benefit every type of stimulus equally.
• Effects are generally stronger for verbal information than nonverbal information.
• Processing meaning may not be the most effective strategy for remembering visual stimuli.

Study 1: Baddeley & Hitch (2017)

Aim: Investigate whether levels-of-processing effects generalise across verbal and nonverbal stimuli.

Method:

• Participants processed different types of stimuli:
  • Pictures of doors.
  • Pictures of clocks.
  • Verbal menu descriptions.
• Compared shallow and deep processing.
• Deep processing included semantic judgments such as pleasantness.

Findings:

• Verbal menu descriptions showed a substantial memory advantage following deep processing.
• Pictures of doors and clocks showed much smaller differences between shallow and deep processing.

Graph interpretation – Page 19

• Doors: Small improvement with deep processing.
• Clocks: Small improvement with deep processing.
• Menus: Much larger improvement with deep processing.

Conclusion:

• Levels-of-processing effects are particularly strong for verbal material.
• Semantic processing does not necessarily produce equivalent benefits for nonverbal stimuli.
• Encoding strategies should be adapted to the type of information being learned.

Generative vs Non-Generative Note-Taking

• Generative processing: Transforming information into your own words, summarising and paraphrasing.
• Non-generative processing: Copying information verbatim without substantial transformation.
• Generative processing encourages deeper encoding and conceptual understanding.

Study 2: Mueller & Oppenheimer (2014)

Aim: Examine how handwritten and laptop note-taking influence learning.

Method:

1. Participants randomly assigned to handwritten or laptop note-taking.
2. Watched TED Talks covering unfamiliar topics.
3. Researchers analysed notes for verbatim overlap with the lectures.
4. Participants completed:
   • Factual questions: Specific information, names and dates.
   • Conceptual questions: Explanations, comparisons and understanding.

Findings:

• Laptop users produced more word-for-word transcription.
• Handwriters produced more paraphrasing and summarising.
• Handwritten note-taking produced better performance on conceptual questions.
• Factual question performance was similar across conditions.

Graph interpretation – Page 26

• Factual performance: Little difference between note-taking methods.
• Conceptual performance: Handwritten notes showed an advantage.

Conclusion:

• Generative processing during note-taking can improve conceptual understanding.
• The benefit is attributed to deeper encoding rather than handwriting itself being inherently superior.

Exam note: The study does not establish that handwriting is always better for every kind of learning. The key mechanism discussed is generative processing.

Memory Processes, Retrieval

What Is Retrieval?

• Retrieval involves accessing previously stored information.
• Successful retrieval depends on both the stored memory and the availability of appropriate cues.
• Retrieval failure does not necessarily mean the information was never encoded or has disappeared.

Types of Memory Tests

Test	Definition	Example	Key feature
Free recall	Remember items in any order	List studied words	Minimal external cues
Serial recall	Remember items in their original order	Repeat a number sequence	Requires order information
Cued recall	Remember information using a prompt	CAT → DOG	External retrieval cue
Recognition	Identify previously encountered information	Multiple-choice test	Target is presented

Important distinctions

• Free recall requires participants to generate their own retrieval cues.
• Serial recall requires memory for both the items and their order.
• Cued recall uses associations formed during encoding.
• Recognition generally produces better performance because the target information is available as a cue.

Encoding Specificity Principle

• Successful retrieval depends on the overlap between conditions at encoding and retrieval.
• Cues present during learning can become associated with the memory.
• Reinstating these cues can improve subsequent retrieval.

Three types of context

1. Semantic or linguistic context

• Meaning and surrounding words influence encoding and retrieval.
• Example:
  • Strawberry jam.
  • Traffic jam.
• The word “jam” has different meanings depending on its context.
• Changing the semantic context between encoding and retrieval can reduce recall.

2. Environmental context

• Physical surroundings can serve as retrieval cues.
• Returning to the learning environment may improve memory.
• Examples include the same room or studying environment.

3. Emotional context

• Emotional state during encoding can act as a retrieval cue.
• Mood-dependent memory: Retrieval may improve when mood at testing matches mood during learning.
• Emotional context effects are sometimes less reliable than semantic or environmental effects.

Study 3, Godden & Baddeley: Diver Experiment

Aim: Investigate how environmental context influences memory retrieval.

Method:

• Divers learned word lists in one of two environments:
  • On land (dry).
  • Underwater (wet).
• Later tested in either the same or different environment.
• Compared free recall and recognition.

Four experimental conditions

Encoding	Retrieval	Context
Land	Land	Matching
Land	Water	Mismatching
Water	Water	Matching
Water	Land	Mismatching

Findings: Free recall

• Participants recalled more words when learning and testing environments matched.
• Land–land produced better recall than land–water.
• Water–water produced better recall than water–land.

Graph pattern: Page 37

Encoded on landEncoded underwater

01234Test on landTest underwater

Schematic illustration of the crossover pattern; values are not reported study scores.

• The crossover interaction shows that neither environment is universally better.
• Memory improves when the retrieval environment matches the original learning environment.

Findings: Recognition

• Changing environments produced little to no effect on recognition.
• Recognition performance remained relatively similar across matching and mismatching contexts.

Why does context affect recall more than recognition?

• Free recall requires self-generated cues.
• Matching environmental context provides additional retrieval cues.
• Recognition already presents the target items, reducing reliance on environmental cues.

Conclusion:

• Supports the encoding specificity principle.
• Context-dependent memory effects depend partly on the type of retrieval task.

Exam note: Environmental context has a strong effect on free recall but a much weaker effect on recognition.

Implicit Memory Tests

Explicit vs Implicit Memory Tests

Explicit memory tests

• Require conscious recollection or recognition of previously learned information.
• Directly refer to an earlier learning experience.
• Examples:
  • Free recall.
  • Cued recall.
  • Recognition.

Implicit memory tests

• Measure how previous experiences influence performance without requiring conscious recollection.
• Do not explicitly instruct participants to remember the learning episode.
• Previous exposure can influence responses even when participants cannot consciously remember it.

Repetition Priming

• Repetition priming: Previous exposure to a stimulus makes it easier to process or identify later.
• Can occur without conscious awareness of the earlier exposure.
• Commonly measured through word and picture identification tasks.

Types of implicit memory tests

1. Word fragment completion

• Participants complete a word containing missing letters.
• Example: _ys_e_y → MYSTERY.
• Previous exposure to “mystery” increases the likelihood of completing the fragment with that word.

2. Word stem completion

• Participants are given the beginning of a word.
• Example: STR → STRING.
• Prior exposure to “string” increases the likelihood of generating that response.

3. Picture identification

• Participants identify ambiguous or fragmented pictures.
• Previously seeing the complete image improves later identification.
• Example: Recognising a Dalmatian in a fragmented black-and-white picture.

4. Everyday repetition priming

• Hearing a joke for the second time may change how funny it seems, even without consciously remembering hearing it before.
• Demonstrates that previous experience can influence reactions without explicit recollection.

Incidental Encoding vs Implicit Retrieval

Incidental encoding	Implicit retrieval
Occurs during learning	Occurs during testing
Person does not expect a memory test	Test does not require conscious recollection
Example: Judging word meanings	Example: Completing word fragments

• These concepts describe different stages of memory.
• Incidental encoding can be followed by either explicit or implicit testing.
• An implicit test does not necessarily mean that encoding was incidental.

Study 4: Graf, Squire & Mandler (1984)

Aim: Compare explicit and implicit memory performance in amnesic patients and healthy controls.

Method:

• Two participant groups:
  • Amnesic patients.
  • Memory-intact controls.
• Compared performance across:
  • Free recall.
  • Cued recall.
  • Recognition.
  • Word completion.

Findings:

• Amnesic patients performed worse on explicit memory tests.
• The impairment was evident in free recall, cued recall and recognition.
• On implicit word completion, amnesic patients performed similarly to controls.

Conclusion:

• Explicit and implicit memory can be dissociated.
• Amnesia does not necessarily eliminate the influence of previous learning.
• Implicit memory can remain preserved despite substantial explicit memory impairment.

Key concept: Dissociation

• A dissociation occurs when a condition affects one cognitive function more than another.
• Here, explicit memory is impaired while implicit memory is relatively preserved.
• Supports the idea that memory is not one uniform system.

Amnesia, Memory Binding and the Brain

What Is Amnesia?

• Amnesia: A disorder involving significant memory impairment, particularly episodic memory.
• Can arise from neurological damage, illness or injury.
• Does not necessarily involve losing all memories or personal identity.

Common causes

• Brain injury, including concussion or stroke.
• Alzheimer’s disease.
• Chronic alcoholism leading to Korsakoff’s syndrome.
• Encephalitis.
• Damage to or surgical removal of hippocampal structures.

Anterograde vs Retrograde Amnesia

Feature	Anterograde	Retrograde
Main impairment	Forming new memories	Retrieving memories from before onset
Affected period	After injury or illness	Before injury or illness
Example	Forgetting a conversation minutes later	Forgetting events before an accident
Important feature	STM and skill learning may be intact	Older memories often better preserved

Anterograde amnesia

• Difficulty forming new long-term episodic memories.
• Individuals may remember information while actively attending to it but forget it later.
• STM can remain intact.
• Procedural learning, such as mirror tracing or touch typing, may also remain intact.
• A hallmark of organic amnesia.

Retrograde amnesia

• Loss of previously formed memories.
• Often affects recent memories more severely than distant memories.
• Childhood memories may remain relatively preserved.
• Memory loss may be patchy rather than complete.

Pure vs mixed amnesia

• Pure amnesia: Memory impairment with relatively few other cognitive deficits.
• Rare in clinical practice.
• Mixed amnesia: Memory problems accompanied by other impairments, such as difficulties with attention or reasoning.
• Most real-world cases involve more than an isolated memory impairment.

Clinical Examples

Patient HM

• Underwent surgery involving removal of medial temporal structures, including hippocampal tissue.
• Developed severe anterograde amnesia.
• Demonstrates the importance of these structures in forming new episodic memories.
• Presented in the module as an example of relatively pure amnesia.

Jimmy G – Korsakoff’s Syndrome

• Clinical case described in Oliver Sacks’ The Lost Mariner.
• Associated with chronic alcoholism.
• Demonstrates profound difficulty retaining new episodic experiences.
• Illustrates how severe memory impairment can disrupt everyday functioning.

Memory Binding

• Memory binding: Linking an item with its contextual details during memory formation.
• Context includes:
  • Where something occurred.
  • When it occurred.
  • How it was encountered.
  • Other associated details, such as the speaker’s voice.
• Essential for creating rich episodic memories.

Example

• Item: A person you recognise.
• Context: Where you met them and what you discussed.
• Successful binding allows you to remember both the person and the circumstances.

Memory binding deficits in amnesia

• Patients may retain information about an item.
• However, they struggle to associate it with its original context.
• Can result in familiarity without detailed recollection.

Familiarity vs Recollection

Familiarity

• A sense that something has been encountered previously.
• Does not require retrieval of specific contextual details.
• Example: Recognising a face without knowing where you met the person.
• Associated with the perirhinal cortex.

Recollection

• Retrieval of specific contextual information about an experience.
• Example: Remembering where you met someone and what you discussed.
• Generally requires more attention and is slower than familiarity.
• Depends strongly on hippocampal binding processes.

In amnesia:

• Familiarity can remain relatively intact.
• Recollection is often impaired.
• Patients may know that an item is familiar but not remember when or where they encountered it.

Study 5: Schacter, Church & Bolton (1995)

Aim: Investigate whether amnesic patients can bind words to the voices in which they were originally heard.

Method:

• Participants included amnesic patients and healthy controls.
• During encoding, words were spoken by six different speakers.
• Later completed an implicit spoken-word identification task using muffled words.

Three conditions:

Condition	Description
Same voice	Previously heard word presented in its original speaker’s voice
Re-paired voice	Previously heard word presented in a different studied speaker’s voice
New word	Word not previously presented

Findings:

• Both groups demonstrated repetition priming.
  • Previously encountered words were identified better than new words.
• Healthy controls performed better in the same-voice condition than in the re-paired condition.
• Amnesic patients showed no additional benefit from matching the original voice.

Graph interpretation – Page 64

• Controls: Same voice produces the highest identification performance.
• Amnesic patients: Similar performance for same and re-paired voices.
• Both groups benefit from previous exposure to the words.

Conclusion:

• Amnesic patients retain repetition priming for individual words.
• However, they struggle to bind words with contextual information such as speaker identity.
• Supports the memory-binding deficit explanation of amnesia.

Exam distinction: The impairment is not simply failure to remember the word. It is difficulty remembering the association between the word and its original voice.

Study 6: Huppert & Piercy (1976)

Aim: Investigate whether amnesic patients can remember the temporal context of previously encountered pictures.

Method:

• Amnesic patients and healthy controls viewed pictures across two different days.
• Recognition tested under different instructions.

Condition 1 – Day-specific recognition

• Participants asked to respond only to pictures presented on Day 2.
• Required distinguishing pictures shown on Day 1 from pictures shown on Day 2.

Findings:

• Controls could distinguish which day the pictures were presented.
• Amnesic patients struggled to reject familiar pictures from the incorrect day.

Condition 2 – General recognition

• Participants asked whether pictures had been seen previously, regardless of day.
• Did not require remembering the temporal context.

Findings:

– Amnesic patients and controls performed similarly.

Graph interpretation – Pages 65–66

• Day-specific test: Large group difference, especially for Day 1 pictures that needed to be rejected.
• General recognition test: Both groups showed strong recognition of previously seen pictures.

Conclusion:

• Amnesic patients can retain familiarity for pictures.
• Their impairment becomes apparent when the task requires remembering when the pictures were encountered.
• Supports impaired temporal-context binding rather than complete loss of item memory.

Study 7: Diana et al. (2007): Neural Basis of Memory Binding

Focus: Identifying brain regions involved in processing items, contexts and their associations.

Key brain structures

Brain region	Function
Perirhinal cortex	Processes information about items (WHAT)
Parahippocampal cortex	Processes contextual information (WHERE)
Hippocampus	Binds item and context information together

Memory binding pathway

Perirhinal Cortex

Item information – WHAT

Parahippocampal Cortex

Context information – WHERE

Hippocampus

Binds items and contexts together

Episodic Recollection

Remembering what happened, where and when

Findings and implications

• Different medial temporal brain regions contribute specialised information to episodic memory.
• The hippocampus integrates item and contextual information.
• Hippocampal damage disrupts binding and detailed recollection.
• Familiarity may remain relatively preserved because item information can still be processed.

Conclusion:

• Episodic memory depends on interactions between specialised brain regions.
• Hippocampal binding is particularly important for forming context-rich memories.