1 / 9

Duration – STM & LTM

Duration – STM & LTM. Clearly, LTM can store information for a much longer time than LTM Some researchers have tried to measure their durations exactly: Peterson & Peterson (1959) – STM Bahrick et al (1975) – LTM These are key studies so make sure you learn APFCC. www.psychlotron.org.uk.

Sophia
Download Presentation

Duration – STM & LTM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Duration – STM & LTM • Clearly, LTM can store information for a much longer time than LTM • Some researchers have tried to measure their durations exactly: • Peterson & Peterson (1959) – STM • Bahrick et al (1975) – LTM • These are key studies so make sure you learn APFCC www.psychlotron.org.uk

  2. Duration – STM • Peterson & Peterson (1959) • PPs presented with ‘trigrams’ (CVC nonsense syllables) and asked to recall them (accurately & in order) • Between exposure & recall there was a delay in which they did an interference task • The length of the delay was varied • Results obtained by plotting recall against length of delay www.psychlotron.org.uk

  3. Duration - STM % recall www.psychlotron.org.uk 3 6 9 12 15 18 Length of delay (s)

  4. Duration - STM • Recall declined steadily with time • After 3s 80% correct • After 6s less than 50% • After 18s less than 10% • Information is lost rapidly from STM, which seems to have a duration of about 20s if nothing is done to maintain the info (i.e. rehearsal) www.psychlotron.org.uk

  5. Duration - STM • The experiment lacked realism • Nonsense trigrams were used to eliminate the effect of meaningfulness • However, this is unlike the info that people typically deal with • The use of interference task is a problem • We cannot tell if the info decayed (as the Petersons claim) or was displaced by the task www.psychlotron.org.uk

  6. Duration - LTM • Bahrick et al (1975) • Test of VLTM using naturalistic materials • 392 US PPs who had left high school 1-48 years previously tested for recall of classmates • Free recall • Recognition of photos • Name recognition & photo matching www.psychlotron.org.uk

  7. Picture recognition Name recognition Free recall Duration - LTM % recall www.psychlotron.org.uk Years since leaving High School

  8. Duration - LTM • Recall was remarkably high • 80% accuracy for name recognition at 48yrs • 30% accuracy for free recall at 30yrs • Supports the idea that LTM can store some types of info for very long time • Free recall becomes more difficult over time, but recognition does not diminish much www.psychlotron.org.uk

  9. Duration - LTM • Ecological validity was high • The study used a naturally occurring form of info so avoided the artificiality often present in memory studies • The type of info used was very specific • Classmates may have high emotional significance, and there is usually great opportunity for rehearsal • Conclusions not generalisable to other types of information www.psychlotron.org.uk

More Related