New Page 1

LA GRAMMATICA DI ENGLISH GRATIS IN VERSIONE MOBILE   INFORMATIVA PRIVACY

  NUOVA SEZIONE ELINGUE

 

Selettore risorse   

   

 

                                         IL Metodo  |  Grammatica  |  RISPOSTE GRAMMATICALI  |  Multiblog  |  INSEGNARE AGLI ADULTI  |  INSEGNARE AI BAMBINI  |  AudioBooks  |  RISORSE SFiziosE  |  Articoli  |  Tips  | testi pAralleli  |  VIDEO SOTTOTITOLATI
                                                                                         ESERCIZI :   Serie 1 - 2 - 3  - 4 - 5  SERVIZI:   Pronunciatore di inglese - Dizionario - Convertitore IPA/UK - IPA/US - Convertitore di valute in lire ed euro                                              

 

 

WIKIBOOKS
DISPONIBILI
?????????

ART
- Great Painters
BUSINESS&LAW
- Accounting
- Fundamentals of Law
- Marketing
- Shorthand
CARS
- Concept Cars
GAMES&SPORT
- Videogames
- The World of Sports

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
- Blogs
- Free Software
- Google
- My Computer

- PHP Language and Applications
- Wikipedia
- Windows Vista

EDUCATION
- Education
LITERATURE
- Masterpieces of English Literature
LINGUISTICS
- American English

- English Dictionaries
- The English Language

MEDICINE
- Medical Emergencies
- The Theory of Memory
MUSIC&DANCE
- The Beatles
- Dances
- Microphones
- Musical Notation
- Music Instruments
SCIENCE
- Batteries
- Nanotechnology
LIFESTYLE
- Cosmetics
- Diets
- Vegetarianism and Veganism
TRADITIONS
- Christmas Traditions
NATURE
- Animals

- Fruits And Vegetables



ARTICLES IN THE BOOK

  1. Active recall
  2. Alzheimer's disease
  3. Amnesia
  4. Anamonic
  5. Anterograde amnesia
  6. Atkinson-Shiffrin memory model
  7. Attention versus memory in prefrontal cortex
  8. Baddeley's Model of Working Memory
  9. Barnes maze
  10. Binding problem
  11. Body memory
  12. Cellular memory
  13. Choice-supportive bias
  14. Chunking
  15. Clive Wearing
  16. Commentarii
  17. Confabulation
  18. Cue-dependent forgetting
  19. Decay theory
  20. Declarative memory
  21. Eidetic memory
  22. Electracy
  23. Emotion and memory
  24. Encoding
  25. Engram
  26. Episodic memory
  27. Executive system
  28. Exosomatic memory
  29. Explicit memory
  30. Exposure effect
  31. Eyewitness memory reconstruction
  32. False memory
  33. False Memory Syndrome Foundation
  34. Flashbulb memory
  35. Forgetting
  36. Forgetting curve
  37. Functional fixedness
  38. Hindsight bias
  39. HM
  40. Human memory process
  41. Hyperthymesia
  42. Iconic memory
  43. Interference theory
  44. Involuntary memory
  45. Korsakoff's syndrome
  46. Lacunar amnesia
  47. Limbic system
  48. Linkword
  49. List of memory biases
  50. Long-term memory
  51. Long-term potentiation
  52. Lost in the mall technique
  53. Memory
  54. Memory and aging
  55. MemoryArchive
  56. Memory consolidation
  57. Memory distrust syndrome
  58. Memory inhibition
  59. Memory span
  60. Method of loci
  61. Mind map
  62. Mnemonic
  63. Mnemonic acronym system
  64. Mnemonic dominic system
  65. Mnemonic link system
  66. Mnemonic major system
  67. Mnemonic peg system
  68. Mnemonic room system
  69. Mnemonic verses
  70. Mnemonist
  71. Philip Staufen
  72. Phonological loop
  73. Picture superiority effect
  74. Piphilology
  75. Positivity effect
  76. Procedural memory
  77. Prospective memory
  78. Recollection
  79. Repressed memory
  80. Retrograde amnesia
  81. Retrospective memory
  82. Rosy retrospection
  83. Self-referential encoding
  84. Sensory memory
  85. Seven Meta Patterns
  86. Shass pollak
  87. Short-term memory
  88. Source amnesia
  89. Spaced repetition
  90. SuperMemo
  91. Synthetic memory
  92. Tally sticks
  93. Testing effect
  94. Tetris effect
  95. The Courage to Heal
  96. The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two
  97. Tip of the tongue
  98. Visual memory
  99. Visual short term memory
  100. Visuospatial sketchpad
  101. VTrain
  102. Working memory


 

 
CONDIZIONI DI USO DI QUESTO SITO
L'utente può utilizzare il nostro sito solo se comprende e accetta quanto segue:

  • Le risorse linguistiche gratuite presentate in questo sito si possono utilizzare esclusivamente per uso personale e non commerciale con tassativa esclusione di ogni condivisione comunque effettuata. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. La riproduzione anche parziale è vietata senza autorizzazione scritta.
  • Il nome del sito EnglishGratis è esclusivamente un marchio e un nome di dominio internet che fa riferimento alla disponibilità sul sito di un numero molto elevato di risorse gratuite e non implica dunque alcuna promessa di gratuità relativamente a prodotti e servizi nostri o di terze parti pubblicizzati a mezzo banner e link, o contrassegnati chiaramente come prodotti a pagamento (anche ma non solo con la menzione "Annuncio pubblicitario"), o comunque menzionati nelle pagine del sito ma non disponibili sulle pagine pubbliche, non protette da password, del sito stesso.
  • La pubblicità di terze parti è in questo momento affidata al servizio Google AdSense che sceglie secondo automatismi di carattere algoritmico gli annunci di terze parti che compariranno sul nostro sito e sui quali non abbiamo alcun modo di influire. Non siamo quindi responsabili del contenuto di questi annunci e delle eventuali affermazioni o promesse che in essi vengono fatte!
  • L'utente, inoltre, accetta di tenerci indenni da qualsiasi tipo di responsabilità per l'uso - ed eventuali conseguenze di esso - degli esercizi e delle informazioni linguistiche e grammaticali contenute sul siti. Le risposte grammaticali sono infatti improntate ad un criterio di praticità e pragmaticità più che ad una completezza ed esaustività che finirebbe per frastornare, per l'eccesso di informazione fornita, il nostro utente. La segnalazione di eventuali errori è gradita e darà luogo ad una immediata rettifica.

     

    ENGLISHGRATIS.COM è un sito personale di
    Roberto Casiraghi e Crystal Jones
    email: robertocasiraghi at iol punto it

    Roberto Casiraghi           
    INFORMATIVA SULLA PRIVACY              Crystal Jones


    Siti amici:  Lonweb Daisy Stories English4Life Scuolitalia
    Sito segnalato da INGLESE.IT

 
 



THE THEORY OF MEMORY
This article is from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_memory_reconstruction

All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License 

Eyewitness memory reconstruction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Eyewitness memory reconstruction is an eyewitness's account of an event and in today's world, is thought of as concrete information. It is commonly believed that one will experience an event which is then placed into the long-term memory. Subsequently, when asked a question about that particular event, one will quickly recall that intact memory back out of the long-term memory and report it exactly as is.

However, through the study of cognitive psychology, psychologists have began to question the accuracy of these eyewitness accounts. One such psychologist, named Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington, has espoused a new theory regarding the accuracy of eyewitness accounts due to a series of experiments she completed. Loftus argues that the memory of an event is placed into long-term memory and is then reconstructed after the fact due to instances such as verbalization of the event, pictures, discussion, other life events that may be a reminder of that specific event, or even the nature of a question asked about the event that may suggest nonexistent occurrences. After this particular memory is reconstructed, if asked to recall the event, one then pulls that new reconstructed memory from the long-term memory and it is then used as a factual recollection.

This reconstruction is usually subtle and harmless, unless, of course, a person is in a situation where his or her recollection could change the fate of another person’s life due to their account of an event. Because of this potential threat to our current judicial system, Loftus constructed a four-part experiment in order to support and accurately construct her present theory. The purpose of these experiments were to measure the power of questions and to find whether or not the way a question is asked leads to the false reconstruction of memory. Loftus hypothesized that the power of a question is significant regarding the long-term reconstruction of an event.

A good example of how memory may be constructed based on the nature of the question, according to the hypothesis of Loftus's experiment, is this: If you are driving to work one day and a car crash takes place in front of you, later, while in court as an eyewitness, a defense attorney may ask, "How many people were in the car when they ran the red light which ultimately led to this accident?" Because the subject of the question concerns the amount of people, the eyewitness may subconsciously accept the claim that the car did in fact run the red light. Then, when asked later whether or not the car ran a red light before crashing, that person's response is more likely to be, "Yes, the car did in fact run the red light."


 

The Experiment(s)

Experiment I

The purpose of Experiment 1 was to find whether or not the nature of a question could make one more likely to be confident that they saw something that may not have been there in actuality.

For Experiment 1, 150 students were presented a short viewing of a five-car pileup after one car runs a stop-sign into oncoming traffic. The accident takes place within four seconds, the entirety of the movie lasting less than a minute. Shortly following the video, the students were all given a 10 question survey. These surveys were split into two groups in which the only difference is the first question. For the first group, question number one contained the question, "How fast was Car A (the car that ran the stop sign) going when it ran the stop sign?" However, for the second group of surveys, the question was "How fast was Car A going when it turned right?" The next eight questions were considered "filler" questions, then for the tenth collective question the survey asked, "Did you see a stop sign for Car A?"

The results of this experiment were that out of all the people who took the first set of surveys, when asked whether or not there was a stop sign, 40 answered that they did see a stop sign for Car A, whereas out of the people in the second group, only 26 answered that they did not see one. That is 53% vs. 35%, a significant enough difference to infer that the nature of the question could in fact reconstruct ones memory.

Experiment 2

The purpose of Experiment 2 was to find whether or not the surveys would have a persisting effect on the correct recollection of an event. For Experiment 2, there were 40 subjects presented with a clip (length: 3 minutes), from the film Diary of a Student Revolution. In this clip, 8 demonstrators interrupted a classroom. The 40 subjects, shortly after viewing the film, were given a survey to take which included 20 questions. Again, the surveys were split into two groups in which question number one for the first group reads, "Was the leader of the 4 demonstrators who entered the classroom a male?" and question number one for the second group reads, "Was the leader of the 12 demonstrators who entered the classroom a male?" The other nineteen questions were filler questions, used to deter the focus of the number of demonstrators to see whether or not the false number in the question would alter the subject's memory. The experimenter then left the subjects alone for one week, later asking them, "How many demonstrators did you see entering the classroom?"

The first group, on average recalled that they had seen 8.85 demonstrators whereas the second group recalled an average number of 6.40 demonstrators. After the fact, very few recalled the actual number of demonstrators, therefore proving that one question that assumed a false number caused the subjects to reconstruct their recollection of that particular three minute clip of a film.

Experiment 3

The purpose of Experiment 3 was to find whether or not a question could cause a person to construct an object or action that was not even an original part of the event. Experiment 3 consisted of 150 university students used as subjects, presented with a video consisting of an accident involving a white sports car followed by a 10 question survey. Again, these surveys were split into two different groups, one question being "How fast was the white sports car going when it passed the barn while traveling along the country road?" while the other was, "How fast was the white sports car going while traveling along the country road?"

As you can see, the question in Group A mentioned the presence a barn while the actual event did not take place within sight of one. Again, the next eight questions were "filler questions, and the tenth question was the same for both groups asking, "Did you see a barn?" Interestingly enough, 13 people, or 17% of Group A recalled there having been a barn whereas only 2, or 2.7% of Group B responded in the same way.

Experiment 4

Experiment 4 elaborated on the effects of all of the previous experiments, also adding a new aspect to the study. Loftus wanted to find out whether or not somebody, after being asked a question with an imaginary object or aspect, is more likely to remember that object or aspect as having happened after a certain amount of time has passed since the event. There were 3 groups: D, F, and C, each with 50 subjects. These three groups were given varying packets containing different questions about an event that was played for the people. The event was a camera inside of a car, colliding with a man pushing a baby carriage.

Group D was given a packet of 40 "filler" questions in addition to the following questions:

  • "Did you see a school bus in the film?"
  • "Did you see a truck in the beginning of the film?"
  • "Did you see a center line on the country road?"
  • "Did you see a woman pushing the carriage?" and
  • "Did you see a barn in the film?"

Group F was given a packet with the same 40 questions in addition to the following questions:

  • "Did you see the children getting on the school bus?"
  • "At the beginning of the film, was the truck parked beside the car?"
  • "Did another car cross the center line on the country road?"
  • "Did the woman pushing the carriage cross into the road?" and
  • "Did you see a station wagon parked in front of the barn?".

Finally, group C was given only those same 40 questions because it was the control group. The three groups were then given one week before the subjects came back to answer 20 more questions about the event. Group D's packet remained exactly the same while the other Group’s questions changed.

The results of the study were that the percentages of people who replied, "yes" to these questions after one week were as follows: Group C (8.4%), Group D (15.6%), and Group F (29.2%). All of the people who answered "yes" to these questions were wrong in their recollection of the event, meaning that their memory had in fact been reconstructed significantly as a result of the experiment.

Reflection

While these four experiments cannot prove that, in all cases, people reconstruct their memory falsely, there is significant evidence in all cases which enables cognitive psychologists to infer, or at least look into, the fact that perhaps Loftus has a solid and valid point that there were a sufficient amount of people in her experiment who reconstruct their memories falsely due to outside influence. Therefore, this experiment implores psychologists to reevaluate their basic principles about memory and urges cognitive psychologists to elaborate on the sparse research implemented regarding the accuracy of eyewitness accounts.

See also

  • Emotion and memory
  • Weapon focus

see also: Accuracy of eyewitness memory for persons encountered during exposure to highly intense stress. CA Morgan III, Gary Hazlett, Anthony Doran, Stephan Garrett, Gary Hoyt, Paul Thomas, Madelon Baranoski, Steven Southwick. Int. Journal of Law and Psychiatry 27 (2004) 265-279.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_memory_reconstruction"