IB Psychology @ RIS

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Extended Reading "It's Magic..."


  1. What is the relationship between memory and selfhood?
  2. What new discovery about memory do you find most interesting?
  3. How can some memories become indelible?
  4. How can amnesia and repression be explained?
  5. Explain the following statement: "Memory is more reconstructive than reproductive."
  6. What new paradigm of memory is now emerging?
  7. After reading this artice, what conclusions can you make about memory?

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Key Studies of the Cognitive Perspective and IA Possibilites


Find below a list of suggested IA topics provided by John Crane.

They are all key studies within the Cognitive Perspective which you need to study in depth.

A. Memory

  1. Memory and the serial position curve: Cunitz and Glanzer's study. Participants learn a long list of words and after a delay they have to recall as many as possible. The hypothesis is that people tend to remember the first and last words in a list due to the primacy and recency effects.
  2. Improving memory: Imagery vs. rehearsal: participants recall more words from a (20) word list when they use an imagery method (forming a vivid mental image and linking each item to the last in a dynamic fashion) than if they use either rehearsal (repeat each item until you hear the next) or no particular method (no prior instruction). Bower (1967); Paivio (1971).
  3. Memory and levels of processing: Craik and Lockhart hypothesize that the deeper and more meaningfully we process information the better subsequent recall will be. Participants are asked to process words either at a basic structural level like 'is the word in capitals?' or at a level requiring the comprehension of meaning e.g. 'is it something you can eat'? Participants would be expected to recall those words processed more deeply more successfully. Craik and Tulving (1975).
  4. Eye-witness reports: Loftus and Palmer (1974); Loftus and Zanni (1975). Participants asked how fast cars were going when they ‘smashed’ into each other, after viewing a car accident, report greater speeds than do participants asked the speed when they ‘hit’ each other. The former group are more likely to report seeing broken glass (when none is there) a week later.