The Essence of Context Dependent Memory

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Aim
Hypothesis
Method
Results
Discussion
References

Introduction

In psychology, the influence of environment on the ability of human beings to recall events and things had been a huge area of study for the better part of the 20^th century (Eich1980, p. 345). Cognitive psychologists have focused on the mental processes that are critical in the memory of an individual (Marian & Neisser 2000, p. 328). Researchers have shown that the environment and the context that human beings interact with are important in enhancing or reducing their ability to recall. To that end, it is important to understand that memory refers to the ability of a person or animal to store information in their mental faculties and retrieve it when need arises. In an attempt to explicate the importance of context in an individual memory processes, Smith (1979, pp. 1-56) conducted an experiment that sought to elaborate on the influence of environment on cognitive and mental processes. In addition, Godden & Baddeley (1975, p. 65) found that different specific contexts are critical for recalling the information stored at that time. They explicated that a deep-sea diver can recall more information gathered in the sea when in the context of deep waters.

Aim

This report seeks to provide insights on eyewitness memory and its reliability given that it has become a contentious issue especially in legal contexts. The rationale is that eyewitnesses of events and sounds may not be accurate when reporting the actual occurrence to other people due to influences of such factors as prejudice and context among many others.

Hypothesis

The results ought to show that the context in which eyewitnesses observed an event is important in the recall memory of the participants. Particularly, the study should reveal that different witnesses of the same event could have different interpretations due to the context they find themselves in when asked to report their observations.

Method

Design

During the research, the use of observation was an important aspect of the research. The design entails that the participants would witness an event as first hand witnesses and report their observations in different contexts. While we consider the need for a control group, some participants will report their observation from the actual point of occurrences. The independent variables would be the number of participants, the event to report and their ages. Time and the contexts in which the participants would report their observation are subject to alteration making them the dependent variables. The research design also emphasizes on the need to uphold ethics when reporting the occurrence and the choice of the actual event that they would witness. This implies that the research design considers the religious, ethnic, gender and other backgrounds that are specific to the participants (Lewis & Critchley 2003, pp. 23-213).

Participants

There were seven participants in the research of relatively similar age. Their age category was between 20 to 25 years. Although gender was not a significant factor in the study, both males and females were equally represented in the study. The participants came from random sampling to reduce bias and enhance the testability and reliability of the results. With no prior knowledge of the experiment, the participants would provide objective report that is devoid of prejudice and prior information.

Procedure

All the seven participants received a form of consent at the onset of the experiment to show their commitment to the success of the experiment. They were introduced to a context in which an old woman was engaging in a confrontation with a young man. The simulation of the event was unknown to the participants who were to report on the actual event upon request through a questionnaire. The old woman had been the cause of the confrontation that lasted for about 20 minutes. At the end of the confrontation, two of the participants reported the confrontation from the context that it took place. Two of the participants gave their eyewitnesses’ reports outside the environment that it happened while the rest of the participants made their observation one day after the actual simulation. One of them provided the eyewitness report at the actual environment and the other one made the eyewitness report outside the context it happened. Nonetheless, one participant declined to participate further after the actual simulation.

Results

At the end of the experiment, the first two participants who made their report at the scene of confrontation immediately after witnessing it remembered the actual confrontation and said that the old woman had led to the ugly scene. They also reported that the young lad had contributed substantially to the escalation of the confrontation. Indeed, the two participants who filled the questionnaire answered 8 out of 10 questions correctly. The two who answered the questionnaire outside the environment that the simulation happened answered an average of 6.5 questions out of 10. The participant who came back at the scene where the confrontation had occurred answered seven questions correctly. Finally, the last participant who filled the questionnaire on the actual occurrence of the confrontation after one day and outside the environment it happened was only able to answer 4 questions correctly. It is important to note that all participants blamed the confrontation on the young man who they thought had led to the escalation of the bitter scene.

Discussion

The research above shows how memory depends on the context and real life situations. Cardwell & Meldrum (2012, pp. 65-156) say that eyewitnesses testimonies were not hundred percent accurate although significant variations were apparent among the participants who witnessed the same event. At the outset, it is critical to consider that the context in which an event occurs is a huge cue that facilitates the retrieval of information from the mind (Grant 1998, p.617; Bouton 2002, p. 983). The participants who filled questionnaire in the context of the event were undoubtedly more accurate than the rest who made reports on the same even outside the context that it happened. In addition, time is a factor that has a direct correlation with the ability of the eyewitnesses to make objective and accurate testimony on what happened (Godden & Baddeley 1975, p. 327). The participant who made the testimony one day after and outside the context it happened fared poorly.

This research has been able to reveal the unreliability of the eyewitnesses’ testimony as a source of making major decisions in courts and other areas that require eyewitness’ testimony. In line with Baddeley & Anderson (2009, p. 29) proposition of schema theory, human beings develop systematic packages of information regarding life. As such, life and socialization processes facilitate the production of attitudes, prejudices, values and beliefs that shape individual memory. It is therefore unsurprising to note that different eyewitnesses’ may give testimonies that reflect their values and testimonies. All participants thought that the young person in the experiment had indeed provoked the old woman. This was despite witnessing the entire confrontation. Values and beliefs inhibit the ability of an individual to provide precise information leading to the unreliability of eyewitness testimony (Smith & Vela 2001, p. 220; Marian & Fausey 2006, p. 1047). The rationale is that all human beings have similar schemas that may insinuate their inability to provide accurate and precise testimonies of an event.

Further, the context in which the event happened is an important tool aspect that increases the ability of an individual to recall. Despite the inaccuracies of the eyewitnesses’ testimonies, the witnesses would enhance their ability to recall the actual event when allowed to make their reports in the environment that the event happened (Smith1988, p. 56). In essence, the context increases the ability of an individual to make more accurate deductions than when outside the environment. It is therefore important to note that the actual environment in which an event occurs can heighten the reliability of an eyewitness’ testimony in the legal context (Crombag & Shaham 2002, p. 170).

References

Baddeley, A & Anderson, M 2009, Memory, Psychology Press, New York.

Bouton, M 2002, “Context, ambiguity, and unlearning: sources of relapse after behavioral extinction” Biological Psychiatry, vol. 52 no. 10, pp. 976–986.

Cardwell, C & Meldrum, T 2012, Psychology, Psychology Publisher, London.

Crombag, H & Shaham, Y 2002, “Renewal of drug seeking by contextual cues after prolonged extinction in rats”, Behavioral Neuroscience, vol. 116 no. 1, pp. 169–173.

Eich, J 1980, The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retrieval: Memory & Cognition, Blackwell Publishers, Boston.

Godden, D & Baddeley, A 1975, “Context dependent memory in two natural environments”, British Journal of Psychology, vol. 66 no. 3, pp. 325–331.

Godden, D & Baddeley, A 1980, “When does context influence recognition memory?”, British Journal of Psychology, vol. 71 no. 7, pp. 99–104.

Grant, E 1998, “Context-dependent memory for meaningful material: Information for students”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, vol. 12 no. 4, pp. 617–623.

Lewis, P & Critchley, H 2003, Mood-dependent memory: Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Irwin, McGraw Publishers, New York.

Marian, V & Fausey, C 2006, “Language-dependent memory in bilingual learning”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, vol. 20 no. 8, pp. 1025–1047.

Marian, V & Neisser, U 2000, “Language-dependent recall of autobiographical memories”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 129 no.3, pp. 361–368.

Smith, S & Vela, E 2001, “Environmental context-dependent memory: A review and meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 8 no. 2, pp. 221-220.

Smith, S 1988, Environmental context-dependent memory, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, New York.

Click Here To Order Now!