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 one 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 STM); 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 memory. 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 were 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 describing 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 language (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 that 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 answer. (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 processing 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
processing, 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/explanations 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) procedural 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 for 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 distinctiveness 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 store. 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 questions:
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/acoustic
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 (max 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 (1998)
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/refute 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 what 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 three 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
goal 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 used, 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
Jenkins 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 of
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
answer. (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 to 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.
Evaluation 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 long-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 definition 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 short-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 is 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 type 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/orthographic/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 the 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
emphasis 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 information 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 exam 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 stem, 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 List 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 List 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 marks)
[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 disadvantage 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 participant
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 quite 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 empirical 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/articulatory 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
model 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 (1968), 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/accurately 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.
This 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 which 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. There 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 answer. 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/orthographical
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 accessibility 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 explanation 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
(1977), 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 references 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 explanations 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 the 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 automatic 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 retroactive 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 retrieval 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 studies 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), Baddeley 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 dual 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 store, 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 diagram.
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. Evaluation 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 Memory 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 were 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/
knowing 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 information; 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 marks 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 ‘unconscious.’
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 Tulving (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 quite 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 processing 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 because 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 your 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: 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. 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 relevant 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 from 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 biological 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 conditions.
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]
Independent 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 marks)
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.
Likely 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 express 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)
Question 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 unable 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 correct 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 model 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 explanations. 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 concussed
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 explanations 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 reporting 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 of 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’
or 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 permanently 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 were 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)
Question 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 forgetting 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 identifying 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 the 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 unrelated
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 forms 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 erroneous
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/ levels –
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 works 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 evidence.
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 evidence 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 attempts 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.