The psychology of memory is a subject that has been widely examined in psychological research. Although numerous advancements have been made toward understanding the processes involved in the development of memory, research demonstrates that there is still a considerable amount of information that remains unknown. However, researchers continue to explore and develop specific methods that can be used to better understand the process of memory. Have the writers at Paper Masters custom write you research on any aspect of memory you need studied.
Throughout the course of the 20th century psychologists have spent a considerable amount of time and energy seeking to understand how human beings store information. Through this process, a number of contracts have been created to facilitate a better understanding of how memory takes place in the human mind. The following are concepts that have been developed with the intent of providing a more integral understanding of how information is stored in the human brain:
- Short-term memory
- Long-term memory
Using these constructs, a clear pathway for understanding the process of memory can be easily understood.
Exploring the specific mechanisms that facilitate the loss of information in short-term memory, researchers have noted that both decay and interference can impact how much an individual can remember. Decay simply refers to the loss of information over time. Information stored in the short term memory will simply be forgotten as time passes. Interference, on the other hand, can come from one of two sources: proactive and retroactive. When new information is acquired, old information stored in the short term memory is replaced. This process of "looking back" or retroactive memory replaces older information in the short-term memory with newer information. When interference arises the older information interferes with the new information. Proactive interference occurs when information stored in the short-term memory makes it difficult to store new information. This process involves information stored later in the short term memory. This information interferes with new information making it difficult for the individual to store new information.
Long-term memory follows the rationale of short-term memory in that similar mechanisms are utilized for storing information. However, in long-term memory is specific constraints placed on information storage are different. As a direct result information can be stored much longer in this context than in the short term memory. Although some scholars view short and long-term memory as different aspects of the human mind, many researchers argue that these two areas of memory are often synthesized to create what is known as working memory. A clear understanding of working memory provides a salient framework for explicating a more practical view of how memory works in practice.
Although working memory is often more closely to short-term memory, the use of this term as opposed to short-term memory allows some expansion on what is considered specific to the properties of short-term memory. Short-term memory is viewed as both finite and of limited duration. However, working memory, is viewed as somewhat longer in duration and with more capability than that which is typically seen in short-term memory. As such, the process of working memory is one that is integral to understanding how most individuals store and recall information in day-to-day activities. Using this as a theoretical basis for the development of understanding in this area, this research is an exploration of working memory and its ability to provide the individual with the specific tools necessary to carry out simple memory tasks.
Bower, Clark, Lesgold and Winzenz (1969) examined the impact of organization all in recall. In their investigation random and organize lists of words were given to subjects who were subsequently asked to recall the words presented on the lists. Results of the research indicates that information presented in organize lists is more highly recalled than that which is presented in a random manner. Further Bower and coworkers found that in subsequent attempts at recall more words from both random and organized lists. To test these hypotheses, his investigation employs a modified version of power and coworkers research. The results demonstrate that the mean percent of words recalled from organize lists is indeed higher than those recalled from random lists. In addition, more words from both lists are recalled in subsequent trials. Problems with intrusion were noted for organized word lists, however, Reasons for this anomaly are discussed.