100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Summary A* Evaluation AO3 points - MEMORY - AQA A-Level Psychology Paper 1 £7.49
Add to cart

Summary

Summary A* Evaluation AO3 points - MEMORY - AQA A-Level Psychology Paper 1

 8 views  0 purchase
  • Institution
  • AQA

A* grade evaluation points for memory in AQA A-Level Psychology Paper 1. Learn these short, summarised evaluation points to prepare you for any essay or evaluation question that could come up in the exam. The document is laid out in a table to make it easy to memorise and comes with a blank version...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 12  pages

  • August 25, 2023
  • 12
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary
All documents for this subject (458)
avatar-seller
FranMarsz
AQA A-Level Psychology Paper 1
MEMORY
Evaluation Points

+ -
Coding Findings led to development of MSM Artificial stimuli, lacks mundane realism

Capacity Poor control, Jacob’s, 1887 Miller overestimated capacity - COWAN
CA: been replicated by BOPP 2005 COWAN reviewed research, found capacity is 5 + or - 1, so the
lower end of Miller’s estimate is more accurate

Duration High ecological validity - BAHRICK et al. Peterson + Peterson - Low ecological validity - artificial stimuli
SHEPARD, reviewed studies on LTM, found recall with meaningless
pictures was lower BAHRICK et al. - low control - ppts still in contact/look at yr book


Multi-Store + -
Model

Research support - Baddeley, Peterson + Peterson CA: artificial stimuli, doesn’t reflect real life using memory

Research support - HM (Scoville and Milner) More than 1 type of STM: SHALLICE + WARRINGTON = KF
HM had epilepsy, his hippocampus was removed during surgery Amnesia patient KF, recall worse when words read to him, better
LTM was damaged (read same magazine every day, couldn’t recall when read himself
what he had eaten) Other model - WMM is better
STM intact, performed well on tests of immediate memory

Bygone model - more types of LTM - TULVING
More than 1 type of LTM - episodic, procedural + semantic

Elaborative rehearsal not prolonged rehearsal - CRAIK +
WATKINS


Types of + -
Long-Term
Memory

, Research support - HM + Clive Wearing CA: no control and case studies
Both had damaged episodic memories but semantic was fine, HM Don’t know their memory capacity before, can’t measure extent of
couldn’t remember stroking a dog but did know what one was change
Had fine procedural memory - both could walk and talk, Clive was a
pro musician + could still play piano and read music

Real life application - BELLEVILLE No agreement on where types of LTM are
Knowing types of LTM, can develop treatments to help people BUCKNER + PETERSON episodic is right prefrontal cortex,
BELLEVILLE: created intervention improving episodic memory in semantic is left prefrontal cortex (PFC)
alzheimer patients, trained patients performed better on episodic TULVING: ENCODING episodic is left PFC, episodic retrieval is right
memory test than control ppts (not trained) PFC

Separate semantic/episodic stores?
TULVING believes episodic is just specialised store of semantic -
argued you can’t have damaged semantic and normal episodic
But, HODGES + PATTERSON: alzheimer patients can form new
episodic memories and not semantic


Working + -
Memory Model

Clinical evidence - KF - SHALLICE + WARRINGTON CA: case studies, lack control, not generalisable
Visuo-spatial sketchpad was fine, but phonological loop damaged, KF in motorcycle accident, trauma could have affected his cognitive
good recall when read digits himself, bad when read to him ability

Dual-task performance studies - BADDELEY CA: low ecological validity
Performance was better when doing visual task and verbal task at
same time (and separately) vs when they were both visual/verbal
tasks - low competition for the separate stores = more efficient at
processing

Central Executive is too vague
BADDELEY: ‘CE is most important but least understood part’
Cognitive psychologists believe it needs to be described as more
than just attention
Some think it has many subcomponents
= damages integrity

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller FranMarsz. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £7.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

52510 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now

Start selling
£7.49
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added