Cognitive Psychology Unit 2 PPQs, Mark scheme, ER

goldbashedΤεχνίτη Νοημοσύνη και Ρομποτική

15 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 9 μήνες)

122 εμφανίσεις

Miss Earl
:
PSYB2 Past paper questions, mark schemes, examiners reports

Last updated 03.01.12

Section B questions: Cognitive Psychology

January 2007

According to the multi
-
store model, there are differences between short
-
term and long
-
term memory.
Outline
o
ne
way in which short
-
term and long
-
term memory differ.
(2 marks)


[A01 = 2, A02 = 0]

1 mark for identifying (by name or description) plus 1 mark for relevant elaboration. Likely answers

include duration (1 plus 1 for ref to lifelong in LTM/20/30 seconds S
TM); capacity (1 +1 for ref to
7+/
-

2

in STM/ unlimited for LTM); coding (1 plus 1 for mainly acoustic STM/mainly semantic LTM);

cause/type/mechanism of forgetting/whether or not displacement occurs.

(b) Outline what is meant by
lack of consolidation
in me
mory. Illustrate your answer with an

example.
(3 marks)


[A01 = 2, A02 = 1]

2 marks for outline


credit any 2 points such as: a type of forgetting; in which a permanent trace in
longterm memory is not established; failure to modify neurons/establish cell
assemblies to encode
information; caused by a blow to the head /some drugs/toxins; reference to time needed for
consolidation/30 minutes/an hour.

1 mark for specific example which might be a study, eg someone forgetting an event in a game in
which they wer
e concussed, or Yarnell & Lynch, Drachman & Sahakian.


(c) Distinguish between semantic and procedural memory. Give
one
example of semantic memory

and
one
example of procedural memory.
(5 marks)


[A01 = 2, A02 = 3]

1 mark each for defining/accurately descr
ibing the two types of memory, plus 1 for explicitly making
distinction. Alternatively up to 3 marks for 3 valid distinction points. 1 mark each for specific
example of each.

Likely answer: semantic memory is memory for facts/general knowledge/rules of lan
guage (1)
procedural

memory is memory for information which cannot be inspected consciously/memory for a motor

skill/action (1).

The first is a type of ‘knowing that’/declarative, the second is ‘knowing how’/how to/non
-
declarative
(1).

For example, knowing

that krypton is a gas (semantic) (1), being able to ride a bicycle (procedural)
(1).

(d) Khalid, Richie and Ludmila each learned a list of words in a memory experiment. Afterwards,

Khalid said that he just visualised the shape of each word, Richie said th
at he imagined the sound

of each word and Ludmila said she made up a story connecting all the words. When tested,

Ludmila remembered the most words.

Describe and discuss the levels of processing model of memory. Refer to the description above in

your answe
r.
(10 marks)

[A01 = 5, A02 = 5]

AO1
Up to 5 marks. 1 mark for naming each level: structural/shallow/orthographic;

phonetic/phonemic/acoustic; semantic, plus 1 mark each for accurately describing each

level, and 1 for indicating that deeper level processin
g leads to better recall. 1 mark for

description of a study.

AO2
5 marks for:

Application of parts of the scenario to different levels in the model (up to 2 marks).

Evaluation, eg by explaining that there is no independent way of measuring the depth of

pro
cessing, and that the model works best for learning word lists; that elaboration and

distinctiveness might lead to better recall; that semantic processing does not always lead to

better recall.

Evaluation by valid comparisons with alternative models/explan
ations of

memory/forgetting.

Commenting on the implications for the model of evidence of studies.

Credit evaluation of studies only if it is relevant to evaluating the model.

Relevant studies include Craik & Tulving (1975), Hyde & Jenkins (1973), Morris et

al

(1977), Nelson & Vining (1978) and Eysenck & Eysenck (1980).

No appropriate reference to scenario
-

maximum 6 marks


June 2007

(b) Nadia bought a new car, and, even though she had not driven for over 20 years,

A
she still remembered how to change gear;

B
she still remembered what happened during her driving test;

C
she still remembered the number plate of her first car.

In your answer book, write down which statement (
A
,
B
or
C
) is an example of:

(i) episodic memory;

(ii) semantic memory;

(iii) procedur
al memory.
(3 marks)


[AO1 = 0, AO2 = 3]

(i) B

(ii) C

(iii) A

(c) Describe
one
study in which the effect of context on memory was investigated. Indicate

why the study was conducted, the method used, results obtained and conclusion drawn (5
marks)

[AO1 = 5,

AO2 = 0]

Likely studies include Abernethy (1940), Godden & Baddely (1975)

1 mark


why study was conducted (must go beyond the stem)

1 mark
-

information about the method

1 mark


indication of results

1 mark


indication of conclusion to be drawn

1 mark
-

additional or extra detail (accept evaluative points here only if they add to the

description of the study in some way).

(d) Describe and discuss the levels of processing model of memory. Explain how this model

could be applied to the task of preparing f
or an examination.
(10 marks)

[AO1 = 5, AO2 = 5]

AO1
Up to 5 marks. 1 mark for naming each level: structural/orthographic/shallow;
acoustic/auditory/phonetic; semantic/deep; 1 each for factual elaboration, and 1 for
indicating that deeper level processing
leads to better recall. I mark only for description of a
relevant study.

Likely studies include Craik & Tulving (1975), Morris et al (1977), Hyde & Jenkins

(1973), Nelson & Vining (1978).

AO2
Up to 5 marks for:

Evaluation of the model, including the use of

studies to support or refute the model.

Evaluations might refer to the problem that there is no independent way of measuring the
depth of processing, and that the model works best for learning word lists. Also to the idea
that elaboration and distinctiven
ess might lead to better recall.

Analysis of the implications of the model for exam preparation, eg the importance of
processing information semantically; recall as a by
-
product of processing.

The use of examples that specifically illustrate application of

the model to revision.

Evaluation of the model by comparison with others, eg the multistore model emphasis on
repetition rehearsal.

No application to task


maximum 6 marks



June 2008


(a) State what is meant by
procedural memory
. Illustrate your answer
with an example.

(2 marks)

[AO1 = 1, AO2 = 1]

Memory for motor skills/knowing how to do things (1 AO1) plus example such as how to ride
a

bicycle (1 AO2)



(b) The multi
-
store model of memory identifies a long
-
term memory store and a short
-
term
memory stor
e. Apart from duration, identify
two
differences between these memory stores
.

(2 marks)


[AO1 = 2]

1 mark each for: capacity; coding. Accept alternative wording for these concepts, and other

plausible answers e.g. about types of forgetting related to each
store.


(c) A researcher is investigating the levels of processing model of memory. He shows

participants words printed on cards. Each card has a different word, for example ‘SACK’,

‘fake’ and ‘bread’. After each word, he asks one of the following three qu
estions:

A
: “Can you eat it?”

B
: “Is it in capitals?”

C
: “Does it rhyme with ‘lake’?”

For each of the three questions (
A, B and C
), indicate which level of memory is most likely
to be used when participants respond.

(6 marks)


[AO1 = 3, AO2 = 3]

1 AO1 mark

each for identifying levels plus 1 AO2 mark each for correctly linking questions
with levels as follows:

“Can you eat it?”
-

Semantic/deep

“Is it in capitals?”
-

Structural/shallow/visual/orthographic

“Does it rhyme with ‘lake’?”
-

Phonetic/phonological/a
coustic

Note: if levels are correctly identified but not correctly linked, 1 mark for each level should be
awarded.


(d) Describe and discuss the influence of context and cues on forgetting. Refer to empirical

evidence in your answer (10 marks)


[AO1 = 5,
AO2 = 5]

AO1 marks: 5 marks.
Up to 3 marks for description of what is meant by context and cues
and the

influence of these on forgettingl. Candidates might include external and internal
context as cues.

Up to 3 marks for description of relevant studies (ma
x 2 for any one study).

Likely studies include: Abernathy (1940), Tulving & Pearlstone (1966), Godden & Baddeley
(1975),

Bower et al (1978), Smith (1979), Malpass & Devine (1981), Zechmeister & Nyberg (1982),

Jerabek & Standing (1992), Miles & Hardman (199
8)


AO2 marks: 5 marks for


Analysis of how absence of context/cues leads to retrieval failure/context/cues aids recall;.


Analysis of difference between retrieval failure (lack of accessibility) and lack of availability.


Use of evidence to support/ref
ute the influence of context/cues.


Evaluation of importance of influence in relation to other reasons for forgetting eg

interference.


Evaluation of evidence.

Maximum 6 marks if no evidence of studies


January 2009


LEGACY


(a) Using an example state w
hat is meant by the term
semantic memory
.
(2 marks)


[AO1 = 1, AO2 = 1]

AO1
One mark for definition of term: memory for facts/general knowledge.

AO2
One mark for example: such as knowing the make of your own car .


(b) The following statements illustrate t
hree different explanations of forgetting. In
each

case, write in your answer book whether the statement illustrates displacement,

retrieval failure or a lack of consolidation.

A Josh was knocked out during the hockey match and forgot about the winning

goa
l he had scored.

B Polly listed the ten things she wanted me to buy for her but by the time she had

finished speaking I had forgotten the first three.

C Usman usually sees Carol in meetings at work. When he unexpectedly saw her

at the airport, he could not

immediately recall her name.
(3 marks)



[AO2 = 3]

A = lack of consolidation

B = displacement

C = retrieval failure


(c) Describe
one
study in which interference as a cause of forgetting was investigated.

Indicate why the study was conducted, the method u
sed, results obtained and

conclusion drawn.
(5 marks)


[AO1 = 5]

Likely studies include those related to either retroactive (Learn A Learn B Recall A) or
proactive

interference (Learn A Learn B Recall B) Warr (1964) and Underwood and Ekstrand (1967) or

Jen
kins and Dallenbach (1924)


decay versus interference or Baddeley and Hitch (1977)


interference versus time elapsed. Schmidt (2000) again, retroactive interference.

1 mark: why study was conducted (must go beyond the stem), eg by referring to the type o
f

interference,

1 mark: information about the method

1 mark: indication of results

1 mark: indication of conclusion to be drawn

1 mark: additional or extra detail.


(d) Describe and discuss the working memory model. Refer to empirical evidence in your

answ
er.
(10 marks)


[AO1 = 5, AO2 = 5]

AO1
Up to 5 marks for identifying and describing components: central executive, articulatory

loop, primary acoustic store, visuo
-
spatial sketchpad. Also credit other features of the

model, eg not a unitary store, limited
capacity and duration, a development of shortterm

memory.

Credit description of evidence up to 2 marks.

Maximum of 3 marks for a list of components.

Up to 3 marks for an accurate diagram

AO2
Up to 5 marks as follows:

Application of knowledge of the model t
o examples, eg use of articulatory loop as

temporary store for short sequences of words or digits.

Analysis of how working memory functions, according to the model, eg the idea that

dual tasks are unimpaired if they rely on different slave components.

Eval
uation of the model.

Credit use of evidence.

Maximum 6 marks if no evidence.


June 2009
-

LEGACY

(a) According to the multi
-
store model, there are differences between short
-
term memory
and long
-
term memory. Outline
one
way in which short
-
term memory and lo
ng
-
term memory
differ.
(2 marks)


[AO1 = 2]

AO1
One mark for identifying (by name or description) one difference and a further mark for

relevant elaboration.

Likely answers:

Duration


lifelong in LTM/18/30 seconds STM;

Capacity


7+/
-

2 in STM/ unlimited
for LTM;

Coding


mainly acoustic in STM/mainly semantic LTM;

Types of forgetting.


(b) What is meant by
displacement
? State why displacement does
not
explain forgetting

from long
-
term memory.
(3 marks)


[AO1 = 2, AO2 = 1]

AO1
Up to 2 marks for accurate de
finition and/or elaboration of the term.

AO2
One mark for relating to statement

Likely answer:

Existing stored information is pushed out (or equivalent) by incoming information, when the

capacity of the store is reached/reference to limited capacity in sho
rt
-
term memory.

Explanation: the capacity of long
-
term memory is effectively unlimited, so incoming
information

will not push out existing information.


(c) Distinguish between semantic memory and procedural memory. Give
one
example of

semantic memory and
one
example of procedural memory. (5
marks)

[AO1 = 2, AO2 = 3]

AO1
One mark each for defining/accurately describing the two types of memory.

Likely answer: semantic memory is memory for facts/general knowledge/rules of

language, whereas procedural memory i
s memory for information which cannot be

inspected consciously/memory for a motor skill/action.

AO2
One mark only, for explicitly making a distinction.

Alternatively up to 3 marks for 3 valid distinction points.

One mark each for specific example of each t
ype of memory.

Likely answer: The first is a type of ‘knowing that’/declarative, the second is ‘knowing

how’/how to/non
-
declarative.

For example, knowing that neon is a gas (semantic), knowing how to drive a car

(procedural).


(d) Describe and discuss the
levels of processing model of memory. Explain how knowledge
of this model could be applied to the task of revising for an examination.
(10 marks)


[AO1 = 5, AO2 = 5]

AO1
Up to 5 marks for description with one mark for naming each level


structural/orthogr
aphic/shallow, acoustic/phonetic/intermediate; semantic/deep and one

mark for indicating that deeper level processing improves recall.

Credit description of relevant evidence up to 2 marks.

AO2
Up to 5 marks for:

Evaluation of the model, including the use
of studies to support or refute the model.

Evaluations might refer to the problem of measuring depth of processing. Also, that the

model works best for learning word lists


which might not be appropriate for all types of

examinations. The model stresses t
he importance of learning semantically. Recall is a

by
-
product of processing.

The use of examples up to 2 marks that illustrate application of the model to revision.

Evaluation of the model by comparison with others, eg the multi
-
store model with its

empha
sis on rehearsal/repetition.

Credit use of evidence.

Maximum of 7 marks if no reference to examination preparation







January 2009

3
(a) Outline what is meant by
retrieval failure
. Briefly explain how it might affect a student’s
ability to recall inform
ation in an examination room after learning the information while in
his bedroom.
(4 marks)


[AO1 = 2 AO2 = 2]

(AO1) Up to 2 marks for knowledge of retrieval failure (credit context dependent forgetting).

(AO2) Up to 2 marks for application to the example.

Possible answer:

Information is stored in LTM (1) but not accessible because the cues needed to access it are
not present. (1). Therefore in this case, the student learned while in a bedroom but this
context does not match his recall environment of the ex
am room (1). So he will not be able
to recall the information (1).

Accept other valid answers such as state cues.


(a) This was reasonably well answered. The major failing occurred when candidates did not
apply their knowledge of retrieval failure to the s
tem, especially not saying what the effect
would be for the student.



(b) In a study of the effect of interference on memory, a researcher tested participants in
one of two conditions.

In Condition 1 (no interference), a group of 10 participants learned L
ist A, then sat in silence
and finally recalled List A.

In Condition 2 (interference), a different group of 10 participants learned List A, then
learned List B, and finally recalled List A.

The results were as follows:

Table 1: Mean number of words from Li
st A recalled in Condition 1

(no interference) and Condition 2 (interference)


Condition 1 (no interference)
16.3
Condition 2 (interference)
8.5



(i) Explain whether or not the results in
Table 1
show that interference took place in

this
experiment.
(2 m
arks)

[AO3 = 2]

1 mark for stating that interference is shown.

1 mark for explanation.

Likely answers:

The results do seem to demonstrate interference, followed by an explanation which might
be

reference to the difference in the means or by explanation of
the term interference.

Accept other answers eg, the difference may have been caused by something other than

interference, there is no information about random allocation of participants.

(b) (i) This was well answered.


(ii) Explain
one
advantage and
one
d
isadvantage of using a different group of

participants in
Condition 2 of the experiment.
(4 marks)



[AO3 = 4]

Up to 2 marks for an advantage


likely points include: there will not be any order
effects/practice/fatigue, so procedural variables which could

affect the performance are
better controlled. Answers may focus on the fact that the study would be flawed if the same
lists of words were presented to the same participants twice.

Up to 2 marks for a disadvantage


likely points include: there might be p
articipant
differences so the differences in the results could be due to these and not interference.

Accept other valid explanations.


(b) (ii) Many candidates scored half marks for this question. They were able to identify the
advantage and disadvantage q
uite well, but failed to relate their answers to the possible
effects and the results. There were many responses of the ‘it wouldn’t be a fair test’ or ‘it
would make it fairer’ variety.


(c) Describe and evaluate the working memory model. Refer to empiric
al evidence in your

answer.
(10 marks)

[AO1 = 5 AO2 = 5]


AO1
Up to 5 marks for description with up to 3 marks for definition/description of features
of the model: a central executive with series of subsystems which are named/described:
articulatory loop/a
rticulatory control system/‘inner voice’; primary acoustic/phonological
store/‘inner ear’; visuo
-
spatial sketchpad/scratchpad/‘inner eye’; phonological loop; limited
capacity; episodic buffer; limited/short duration/ short term memory. Description of how
m
odel works, eg the central executive allocates data to slave systems, or the idea that dual
tasks are unimpaired if they rely on different subsystem/slave components.

Credit description of relevant studies up to 2 marks.


Likely studies include: Brooks (19
68), Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975),

Hoosain and Salili (1988), Hulme, Thomson, Muir and Lawrence (1984), Levey, Aldaz,

Watts and Coyle (1991), Paulesu et al (1993), Baddeley et al (1998).


AO2
Up to 5 marks.

Application of knowledge of the model to

examples, eg use of articulatory loop as
temporary store for short sequences of words or digits, use of VSS for navigation. Analysis of
the implication of studies. Evaluation of the model including support from studies and
practical application/relevance
and comparison with other models eg, the multistore model
view of

STM.


Credit use of relevant studies up to 2 marks


Maximum 6 marks


no evidence

(c) There were some very good answers to this question with many candidates describing

the functions of the
components accurately. Reference to research was often rather limited
and candidates did struggle to explain what the results of studies showed with relation to
the model. Evaluation of the model was often weak with abrupt reference to ecological
validity
or minor comments about how this model of STM did not explain LTM well.


June 2009

1 0
According to the multi
-
store model, there is a short
-
term memory store and a long
-
term

memory store. Identify
three
differences between these memory stores.
(3 marks)


1

mark for each difference.

Likely answers:

Duration (lifelong in LTM/20/30 seconds STM);

Capacity (7+/
-

2 in STM/ unlimited for LTM);

Coding (mainly acoustic STM/mainly semantic LTM);

Cause/type/mechanism of forgetting/whether or not displacement occurs.


This was well answered. The major failing occurred when candidates did not make the

difference explicit by reference to both STM and LTM.


Briefly explain what is meant by:

1 1
semantic memory
;
(2 marks)

[AO1 = 1, AO2 = 1]

AO1
1 mark for defining/accuratel
y describing semantic memory.

AO2
1 mark for explanation of semantic memory, which may be by example.

Likely answer: semantic memory is memory for facts/general knowledge. It is a type of

‘knowing that’/declarative memory, eg knowing that neon is a gas.


T
his was well answered.


1 2
procedural memory
.
(2 marks)

AO1
1 mark for defining/accurately describing procedural memory.

AO2
1 mark for explanation of procedural memory, which may be by example.

Likely answer: procedural memory is memory for information w
hich cannot be inspected

consciously/memory for a motor skill/action. It is ‘knowing how’/how to/non
-
declarative, eg

knowing how to ride a horse (procedural).


Many candidates failed to point out that procedural memory relates to memory for motor

skills. T
here were also many references to
unconscious
memory.


1 3
Psychologists were investigating the levels of processing model of memory. They

presented participants with a list of words. After each word, there was a question which

the participants had to answ
er. There were three types of questions:


A
questions about the meaning of the words;

B
questions about the sound of the words;

C
questions about the appearance of the words.


For
each
type of question,
A
,
B
and
C
above, write down the level of processing
that is

involved in answering the questions.
(3 marks)


[AO2 = 3]

1 mark each for correctly linking question type with levels as follows:

A


Semantic/deep

B


Phonetic/acoustic/phonemic/phonological/intermediate/auditory

C


Structural/shallow/visual/orth
ographical


The vast majority scored all 3 marks, although some confused levels of processing with
working memory components.


1 4
Discuss how interference
and
retrieval failure can be used to explain forgetting. Refer to

evidence in your answer.
(10 marks
)

[AO1 = 5, AO2 = 5]

AO1
Up to 5 marks for description of the concepts of interference and retrieval

failure.

Likely answers:

Interference


Retroactive, when new information distorts/is confused with existing, stored
information; or affects it; especially

with two similar types of information. Or
proactive,when old information interferes with access to new information (Max 3).

Retrieval failure


Information is still in store, but cannot be accessed; because of lack of

(retrieval) cues; such as absence of
familiar context, physical cues or state dependency

(Max 3).

Credit description of relevant studies up to 2 marks.

AO2
Up to 5 marks for:

Application of examples of the explanations, 1 mark for each explanation.

Candidates might contrast availability and a
ccessibility as elements of the two explanations.

Evaluation of the two explanations.

Interference is demonstrated in studies using artificial tasks learning word lists; in real life
the types of inference might be very different. The retrieval failure exp
lanation is well
supported by lots of evidence, especially when free recall is used.

Use of alternative explanations for forgetting Credit use of relevant evidence.


Likely studies: Godden & Baddeley (1975), Jenkins& Dallenbach (1924), Baddeley & Hitch

(19
77), Tulving and Pearlstone (1966), McGeoch and McDonald (1931) Schmidt et al (2000).

Maximum 6 marks


no evidence

Maximum 6 marks


only one explanation


Retrieval failure was often reported well. Interference theory was more confused with
frequent refer
ences to distraction and the inclusion of trigram studies where the description
only related to decay rather than interference.


January 2010

3
(a) Psychologists have suggested that forgetting can be explained in a number of ways.

Four possible explanation
s are listed below:

A
lack of consolidation;

B
displacement;

C
motivated forgetting;

D
decay.

In your answer book, identify which explanation,
A
,
B
,
C
or
D
, is most likely to be illustrated
by
each
of the following statements.


(i) Kim could not remember t
he numbers at the start of the telephone number she had

just looked up because there were 11 digits in total.
(1 mark)
B


(ii) Peter was knocked unconscious at the end of the ice
-
hockey game and could not

remember the goal that he had just scored.
(1 mark)

A


(a) This was generally well answered.


(b) Read the following conversation.

Debbie: “I have found it really difficult to remember my new e
-
mail address and I keep

putting in my old one instead.”

Dave: “I have a different problem. Since I have had an au
tomatic car, I can’t

remember how to drive my wife’s car with its manual gears.”

Use your knowledge of interference theory to explain Debbie’s
and
Dave’s memory

problems.
(4 marks)

[AO1 = 2, AO2 = 2]

AO1

Debbie has proactive interference (1).

Dave has retr
oactive interference (1).

AO2

1 mark for explaining Debbie has proactive interference because her earlier knowledge is
affecting retrieval of her new memory.

1 mark for explaining Dave has retroactive interference because his new information is
affecting r
etrieval of his previous knowledge.


(b) Several candidates confused proactive/retroactive interference with

anterograde/retrograde amnesia or applied each type of interference incorrectly to the

scenarios. Some candidates focused on whether or not Debbie
and Dave had

‘rehearsed’ the information.



(c) Describe
one
study in which the working memory model was investigated. Indicate why

the study was conducted, the method used, the results obtained and the conclusion drawn.

(4 marks)


[AO1 = 4]

AO1

Likely stu
dies include: Paulescu et al (1993), Logie et al (1989), Robbins et al (1996),

Hunt (1980), Brooks (1968), Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975), Hoosain and

Salili (1988), Hulme, Thomson, Muir and Lawrence (1984), Levey, Aldaz, Watts and

Coyle (1991), Bad
deley et al (1998).

1 mark


why the study was conducted (must go beyond the stem)

1 mark


information about the method

1 mark


indication of results

1 mark


indication of a conclusion to be drawn


Some candidates provided excellent answers describing d
ual task studies of working

memory with accuracy. Others gave a confused or partially incomplete description, or

provided descriptions that related to the multi
-
store model or levels of processing.


(d) Describe and evaluate the multi
-
store model of memory
. Refer to evidence in your

answer.
(10 marks)


[AO1 = 5, AO2 = 5]

AO1

Up to 5 marks for description of the model with 1 mark for naming
two
stores and 1

mark each for accurate information about the characteristics (duration, capacity and

coding) of each s
tore, linear/information processing model, related types of forgetting,

transfer from sensory to STM via attention, and for description of rehearsal loop. Up

to 3 of these marks can be credited for the same information conveyed by an

accurately labelled di
agram.

Credit description of evidence up to 2 marks

AO2
Up to 5 marks for:

Analysis which might include explanation of primacy and recency effects in serial

position studies, discussion of the nature of deficits in case studies of neurological

damage. Eval
uation is likely to include criticisms of aspects of the model by

comparison with later work, such as arguments that the STS and LTS are not unitary

stores, and that rehearsal is not a complete explanation of transfer to LTM.

Credit use of evidence.

Likely

studies include: Murdock (1962) Glanzer and Cunitz (1966), Peterson and

Peterson (1959) Craik and Watkins (1973) , Conrad (1963/4), Baddeley (1966), Milner

et al (1978), Blakemore (1988) Craik and Tulving (1975), Hyde and Jenkins (1973),

and Working Memor
y studies such as Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975),

Hoosain and Salili (1988) when used as evaluation of multi
-
store model.

Maximum 6 marks if no evidence


(d) Most candidates scored some marks here with very few writing about the wrong model.

There w
ere varying degrees of accuracy with regard to features of the model


coding,

capacity and duration. Evaluative comments tended to be weaker often only

commenting that the model is too simplistic; or a good basis for other models, or has lots

of research
to support it or making comparisons with other models but failing to use this

as evaluation of the multi
-
store model.


****upto here in terms of short ans qs****
June 2010

1 1
State what is meant by
procedural memory
and
autobiographical memory
. Explain
one

difference between these two types of memory.
(4 marks)


Question 11

[AO1 = 2, AO2 = 2]

AO1
1 mark each for a descriptive point about procedural memory and autobiographical

memory. Likely answers: Procedural memory


a motor or action
-
based memory/

knowin
g how to do something.

Autobiographical memory


(a special type of episodic) memory of events we have

experienced ourselves.

AO2
Up to 2 marks for explanation of a distinction point such as: content of the stores


they

hold different types of long term i
nformation; declarative/not


autobiographical is easy to

express in words, but procedural is not; whether the memory is conscious or not.

Differences may be illustrated by example.

1 mark for a weak attempt to distinguish between the types of memory.

2 ma
rks for a clear distinction.


Descriptions of procedural memory were often less accurate than descriptions of

autobiographical memory. Candidates found it quite difficult to express a distinction point

clearly and some referred to procedural memory as ‘unc
onscious.’




1 2
Describe
one
study in which psychologists investigated levels of processing. Indicate why
the study was conducted, the method used, the results obtained and the conclusion drawn.
(4 marks)


Question 12

[AO1 = 4]

Likely study


Craik and T
ulving (1975)

1 mark


why the study was conducted (must go beyond the stem)

1 mark


information about the method

1 mark


indication of results

1 mark


indication of a conclusion to be drawn


Descriptions of levels of processing studies were generally q
uite well done. Some candidates
suggested the participants were given a list of words ‘to learn’ rather than appreciating the
incidental learning of the words after answering different types of questions.




1 3
Explain
one
limitation of the levels of proc
essing theory.
(2 marks)


Question 13

[AO2 = 2]

Up to 2 marks for a limitation that is elaborated.

Possible answer: the definition of depth of processing is circular (1), deep processing is

assumed to have occurred (in the semantic condition) since/only be
cause recall was higher
for that condition (1).

Accept other valid answers such as there is an assumption that in the shallow condition
people did not process the words deeply.


This was quite poorly answered with many candidates discussing limitations of
the
study
they had described rather than the theory itself. Others were unable to state anything other
than ‘depth is difficult to measure’ or the theory is ‘simplistic.’





1 4
Describe and evaluate
two
explanations of forgetting. Refer to evidence in yo
ur answer.

(10 marks)


AO1
Up to 5 marks for identifying and elaborating
two
explanations. Likely explanations:

interference theory: pro
-

and retro
-
active inhibition; retrieval failure: lack of state/context

cues/organisation; lack of consolidation: interr
uption of the time period/physical

disruption; motivated forgetting: repression/inaccessible memory; trace decay: fading of

memory due to passage of time; displacement: limited capacity of STM. Credit

description of evidence up to 2 marks. Likely studies:
Jenkins and Dallenbach (1924),

Keppel and Underwood (1962), Schmidt et al (2000), Tulving and Pearlstone (1966),

Bower et al (1969), Godden and Baddeley (1975), Drachman and Sahakian (1979)

Yarnell and Lynch (1970), Waugh and Norman (1965), Glucksberg and
Lloyd (1967),

Williams (1994), Groome and Soureti (2004).


AO2
Up to 5 marks for analysis and evaluation of the two explanations. Likely points: why

memory is affected according to the explanation(s) chosen, evaluation of studies of

forgetting if made rele
vant to the explanations. Comparison of explanations. Credit use

of examples up to 1 mark for each explanation. Credit use of evidence.

Maximum 6 marks


only one explanation

Maximum 6 marks


no evidence


There were some very good answers to this question
; however, there was also evidence of
muddle in many essays. Candidates who chose to describe and evaluate interference often
confused retroactive and proactive interference. Lack of consolidation was often poorly
described as information failing to move f
rom STM to LTM. Candidates then found it difficult
to explain why the concussed football players had recalled information immediately but
were unable to recall the same information a few minutes later. Few recognised that this
explanation relates to biolog
ical disruption. Motivated forgetting was often described as
‘forgetting on purpose.’



January 2011


In a study of coding in short
-
term memory, participants were given lists of words to learn.

An independent groups design was used. There were two conditio
ns.

Condition A

The list contained words that sounded similar to each other (man, mad, cap, can, map…).

Condition B

The list contained words that sounded different from each other (pen, day, few, sup,

cow…).

After 20 seconds, the participants were required

to recall the words in the same order as on
the list. The mean number of words recalled in the correct order in each condition was
compared.


0 9
Identify the independent variable
and
the dependent variable in this study.
(2 marks)

Question 09

[AO3 = 2]

I
ndependent variable: whether the word list contained words of similar sounds or different
sounds. Answer must imply two lists or two types of word.

Dependent variable: the number of words recalled (in the correct order).


Although many candidates were able

to identify the independent and dependent variables
accurately, some assigned their answers incorrectly and therefore gained no marks. The
dependent variable was sometimes reported as the time allowed and the independent
variable as the conditions.



1 0
What is meant by an
independent groups design
?
(1 mark)

Question 10

[AO3 = 1]

An experimental design in which participants complete only one condition of the
study/different people in each condition/groups are randomly allocated/2 groups that have
not been

matched.

Accept other valid answers.


Understanding of the term independent groups was quite good although a significant
proportion of candidates confused this with repeated measures.



1 1
Outline
one
advantage of using an independent groups design.
(2 m
arks)


Question 11

[AO3= 2]

One mark for identifying an advantage of independent groups and one mark for explaining

why it is an advantage. Can also credit advantages of independent groups that do not apply

to this study eg can use the same materials.

Like
ly answers will focus on lack of order effects or naivety:

Possible answer:

There are no order effects so participants’ performances in one condition are not

affected/practiced/fatigued by performance in the other condition.


Candidates struggled to expres
s an advantage of using independent groups in research and
in general answers lacked precision and did not go beyond vague references to order
effects.




1 2
Use your knowledge of short
-
term memory to explain the likely outcome of this study.
(3
marks)

Qu
estion 12

[AO3 = 1, AO2 = 2]

AO3
1 mark for stating the likely outcome.

Likely answer:

More words will be recalled from the list containing words of different sounds,

Condition B word list. OR, fewer words would have been recalled from the list containing
words of similar sounds (Condition A list).

AO2
Up to 2 marks for explanation of these likely results based on knowledge of the short
term memory store including any of the following points.

In short
-
term tasks there is confusion with sound based material
(1) this suggests that

STM involves acoustic coding (1).

Credit reference to components of working memory.


This question exposed a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the basic features of the
short term memory store. The majority of candidates were un
able to predict the likely
results that recall of words that sounded different would be higher than that of the list of
similar sounding words. This would be the case because the short term memory codes
information acoustically so recall of words in the co
rrect order would be impaired.



1 3
Briefly explain
one
limitation of the multi
-
store model of memory.
(2 marks)

Question 13

[AO2 = 2]

Up to 2 marks for an explanation of one limitation. One mark for stating the limitation, one

further mark for expansion.

Possible limitations include the emphasis on rehearsal as a mechanism for transferring

information from STM to LTM when it is clear that long term memories can be stored
without the use of rehearsal, the process of rehearsal either rote or elaboration is
not made
clear, the storage systems are not fully described and explained


both STM and LTM seem
to be oversimplified.

Credit limitations based on comparisons with other models.


Although candidates were able to identify a limitation of the multi
-
store mo
del of memory,
their explanations of why the limitation was an issue were often quite weak. Many
suggested that the model was ‘simplified’ because it failed to explain how information
transferred from short to long term memory.



1 4
Describe and evaluate
two
explanations of forgetting. Refer to evidence in your answer.

(10 marks)


AO1
5 marks. Maximum of 3 marks for any one explanation

Likely explanations: interference theory: pro
-

and retro
-
active inhibition; retrieval

failure: lack of state/context cues/
organisation; lack of consolidation: interruption of

the time period/physical disruption; motivated forgetting: repression/inaccessible

memory; trace decay: fading of memory due to passage of time; displacement: limited

capacity of STM.

Credit description
of evidence up to 2 marks.


AO2
Up to 5 marks for analysis and evaluation of the two explanations. Likely points:

discussion of accessibility/availability factors, evaluation of studies of forgetting where

relevant to the explanation. Comparison of explana
tions. Analysis of distinction

between availability and accessibility. Use of alternative explanations. Reasons why

memory is affected according to the explanation(s) chosen. Credit use of examples

up to 2 marks, one mark for each different example.

Credit

use of evidence.


Likely studies: Jenkins and Dallenbach (1924), Keppel and Underwood (1962),

Schmidt et al (2000), Tulving and Pearlstone (1966), Bower et al (1969), Godden and

Baddeley (1975), Drachman and Sahakian (1979) Yarnell and Lynch (1970), Waugh

and Norman (1965), Glucksberg and Lloyd (1967), Williams (1994), Groome and

Soureti (2004).

Maximum 6 marks


no evidence

Maximum 6 marks


only one explanation


In this question candidates were able to choose any two explanations of forgetting and it
was

disappointing that answers were often quite limited and descriptions confused or
lacking accurate detail. Descriptions of lack of consolidation often failed to consider the
biological aspects of memory and some candidates seemed to think that the concusse
d
rugby players had been hit on the head on purpose. Retrieval failure was described as ‘old
interferes with new and new with old’ with no elaboration of what the terms ‘old’ and ‘new’
were a reference to and which information is not retrieved. In explanat
ions of motivated
forgetting people are reported as ‘pushing’ information into the unconscious rather than
this being an unconscious defence mechanism. Again, evaluation of the explanations was
often vague or unexpanded and there was an emphasis on reporti
ng the artificiality of tasks
without discussion of why this might impact on the explanation. Candidates often did not
seem to appreciate the use of nonsense trigrams as a means of eliminating the influence of
past experience in memory research.


June 2011


1 5
Outline the multi
-
store model of memory.
(3 marks)


Question 15

[AO1 = 3 marks]

AO1
Up to 3 marks for the following:

1 mark for naming of stores

1 mark for reference to rehearsal

1 mark for further feature of the model (capacity, duration or coding o
f stores).

Credit description using a detailed diagram.


Question 15

This was generally well
-
answered with many candidates gaining the full three marks for a

clear outline of the model. Lost marks were often explained by a failure to refer to
‘rehearsal’

o
r the existence of a ‘sensory store/memory’.



1 6
What is meant by
lack of consolidation
? Suggest
one
reason why lack of consolidation
might occur.
(2 marks)


Question 16

[AO1 = 1 mark, AO2 = 1 mark]

AO1
1 mark for reference to the memory not becoming per
manently fixed due to some

physical disruption. Failure to modify neurons/cell assemblies.

AO2
1 mark for a valid explanation such as: disruption of neurochemical activity, head

trauma, ECT, drugs.


Question 16

Although most candidates were able to access
a mark for explaining why ‘lack of

consolidation’ occurs (usually ‘head trauma/concussion’); very few made it clear that this

particular theory of forgetting explains loss of information as being due to physical
disruption.

Often, the definitions offered w
ere vague and did not adequately distinguish lack of

consolidation from other forms of forgetting; most notably, trace decay.




1 7
Outline the interference explanation of forgetting and briefly discuss
one
limitation of
this explanation.
(5 marks)

Questi
on 17

[AO1 = 3 marks, AO2 = 2 marks]

AO1
Up to 2 marks for a description of interference theory.

Likely points: Events that take place between learning and recall can disrupt memory,

proactive interference occurs when older learning/memories cause forgetti
ng of

newer information, retroactive interference occurs when newer learning causes

forgetting of older memories, interference more likely if competing memories are

similar.

1 mark for stating that interference can be proactive or retroactive.

1 mark for i
dentifying an appropriate limitation of the theory.

Likely limitations: Most of the research uses artificial tasks/lacks ecological validity.

There is a difficulty in separating the effects of interference and decay over time.

The theory does not explain t
he possible cognitive processes involved.

It does not adequately explain forgetting of semantic material.

AO2
Up to 2 marks for a brief discussion of the limitation identified.

Possible answer for lack of ecological validity: Using tasks like learning unre
lated

words and in a laboratory/highly controlled environment means that the results may

not reflect the processes that occur in everyday memory/ cannot be generalised to

normal memory use.

The discussion might be via use of evidence, for example: Jenkins
and Dallenbach

(1924) or counter argument.


Question 17

Many candidates gave an accurate outline of interference, usually by explaining the two

types: ‘proactive’ and ‘retroactive’. Some candidates confused interference with

displacement or more general fo
rms of ‘distraction’.

Lots of candidates could state a limitation but very few developed this into a coherent

discussion. As a consequence, there were very few five
-
mark responses. Those that did

gain full marks tended to focus on the artificial nature of
the evidence supporting the

explanation: that studies are often designed to deliberately induce interference by pairing

similar sorts of material within short time
-
frames.

A surprisingly high number of candidates gave limitations that were based on the err
oneous

assumption that interference only explains forgetting in long
-
term memory.




1 8
Describe and evaluate the levels of processing explanation of memory. Refer to evidence
in your answer.
(10 marks)


AO1
Up to 5 marks for description of the model/ lev
els


structural/orthographic/shallow/visual, acoustic/phonetic/intermediate/soundbased/

phonological; semantic/deep. The idea that deep processing leads to better

recall. Recall is a by
-
product of processing. Credit description of evidence up to 2

marks.

Maximum of 1 mark if the three levels are merely named.

Likely studies: Craik and Tulving (1975), Morris (1977)

AO2
Up to 5 marks for evaluation of the model. Evaluations might refer to the problem of

measuring depth of processing. Also, that the model wor
ks best for learning word

lists


which is unlikely to be appropriate for all types of learning. The model stresses

the importance of learning semantically. The model suggests that some memories

are retained without rehearsal. The importance of elaborative

rehearsal. Discussion

of the possible effects of effort. Criticisms have led to recent updating of the model

and attention to the importance of factors such as relevance to learning.

Credit the use of examples that illustrate application of the model for
example to

revision 1 mark only.

Evaluation of the model by comparison with others, eg the multi
-
store model with its

emphasis on rehearsal/repetition.

Only credit evaluation of methodology if made relevant to discussion of the model.

Credit use of evidenc
e.

Maximum of 6 marks


no evidence



Question 18

Most answers to this question scored well in terms of descriptive content. Though some

candidates’ outline of the model was little more than a list of the three different levels,
many

others gave clear and
elaborated summaries of these, as well as acknowledging the

important point, that depth of processing determines level of recall. Supporting studies

(usually Craik & Tulving) were also often well described, though candidates were less adept

at using such e
vidence effectively and failed to make clear links back to the central claims of

the model.

A fair number of responses confused levels of processing with types of long
-
term memory

(episodic, procedural and semantic) and others conflated the Craik & Tulving

study with

Baddeley’s research into coding.

Attempts to evaluate the model were mixed. Many candidates did little more than criticise

the Craik & Tulving study without making any evaluative points about the model in general.

There were some speculative at
tempts to compare levels of processing to alternative
models

but these often lacked sophistication, for example, ‘unlike the multi
-
store model, levels of

processing does not mention short
-
term memory’.

That said, other candidates produced well informed and

sophisticated analyses of the
model.

The difficulty


and tautology


involved in establishing a precise way of measuring depth of

processing was often discussed; as was the difference between maintenance and

elaborative rehearsal, alongside

application of the latter to real
-
life examples such as

revision.