Class Notes (837,548)
Canada (510,312)
Psychology (6,261)
Lecture 8

Psychology 3185F/G Lecture 8: Lecture8-summary -

4 Pages
29 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
Psychology 3185F/G
Professor
Patrick Brown
Semester
Winter

Description
Bottom-Up Attention Improves Working Memory Ravizza & Uitvlugt Previous studies: Schmit study: 6 colour shapes presented simultaneously – 1 item preceding by sudden onset cue -benefit in bottom-up attention in change detection task Predictive condition: cue indicated which item would be Pedale & Santangelo: objects with max sensory salience were reported @ earlier positions in list Overall, “big picture” issue: Bottom up attention in Working Memory Will one’s working memory be better for a cued stimulus and why? - provide boundaries on bottom-up in relation to benefiting WM -only benefit when items presented simultaneously (effect on encoding order - when / when it doesn’t enhance WM - also stringent test of primacy effect see what st rate item is being recalled in 1 position of list 2 competing hypotheses about how attention influences task performanceBottom-up attention: Hypothesis 1: effects of the order : ordering processing affec -Processes the cued stimulus first , before anything else -about order in which things processed NOT about resources devoted to the task for a better quality outputHypothesis 2: effects the quality of the process  quality processing affect. bottom-up attention works diff than vs top-down attention argumentTop-down attention : we already decided that it is task relevant and we will therefore devote our attention/resources to it. we are trying to understand what because task revelent Bottom-up attention: we are more drawn to it and is more noticeable, which may not be task relevant. -just because something caught our attention but not task oriented- if bottom-up processing is because something caught our attention, without much reference to our task we need top-down to decide if it is important, if not then kick it out of our mind Experiments 1A and 1Bresearch question-Replicating a previous study (Schmit)-past study was a change task (noticing change). -only visual, also verbal effect?- this experiment extends it to verbal stimulus, & concentratingon a memory task task : Working Memory Task: white fixation cross in center, grey background – always present 2000ms Fixation screen to draw attention to that screen ▯ Internal Interval (ITI) a)colored squares  6 randomly selected of: blue, brown, green, red, magenta, off-white & yellow b) verbal stimuli-letters (non-rhyming, distinguishable) -well within short term memory (avrg person min7) * since simultaneous encoding order undetermined  cued item should be remembered better whether or not it is predictive (bottom-up attention) Fixation 50ms – well within short term memory time Probe appears (letter or color), they answer if probe the same color/ letter as the thing presented (memory array item- color/letter) previously in the same location dependent variable: Amount of correctly recognizing whether the probe matches the stimulus or not. Accuracy :Should have been 50 %, lowest score approx. Because it is either 1 or 2, if guessing by chance - Looking for performance that are well above 50% independent variables Cued– the cue shows where the probed item will be vs non-cued- the cue is at a different location than where probed item will be within subject variable predictive vs. non-predictive cue -predictive (cue and probe in the same location most of the time ) - 2/3 of the time was predictive (probe @ cued location)- 1/3 of the time was non- predictive-non-predictive (cue and probe are not in the same position most of the time ) -1/6 of the time was predictive (probe @ cued location)-5/6 of the time was non-predictive (wrong)between subject variable *participants informed about probabilities b4 task design 2x2 ANOVA design (between groups variable) – used mixed factor analysis to analyze results Remove item that : Cued location has a certain color/ letter Then the probe is that color but shown in a diff lo Ex. For example cue top square, then blue is shown in top square Then during probing: blue is shown in bottom square You might accurately say that blue is not the color shown in the bottom square because you remember that it was in the top square, not because you actually remember what was on the bottom square inflate accuracy @ uncued location How they phrased it: for pure baseline: excluded trials in which the cued item was a probe in a different location (no-match trail) if cued item remembered better than uncued – participants better at knowing that the item was not presented at the location ResultsExperiment 1A : There is a main effect of cuing ( cued items were better remembered than uncued items in both predictive cued and non-predictive cues) but there is no effect of predictiveness  effect of the cue was slightly bigger in the predictive than the non-predictive -this is not reliable though because it’s due to lower accuracy for uncued items Experiment 1B : Same effect – superior effect of cued items comes at an expense of uncued items Why was the cuing effect in the predictive condition produced by lower accuracy for uncued items rather than higher accuracy for cued items? Because it doesn’t help you detect the uncued items.Whenever there is an interaction, you need to focus on the interaction, not in separate effects - Same effect on verbal & visual stimuli conclusionsBottom-up did have an effect on WM because it was there for both the predictive and non-predictive case. Bottom-up attention was present in both a visual display and verbal display. -bottom-up attention sufficient for enhancing WM What happens when the probe appears in the uncued location in the predicated group, they did worse on the uncued location because they give more attention to the cued location -more division effect than facilitation effect -it’s not that the predicated group did better at the cued, but more that they did worse at the uncued There is an effect of the bottom- up ▯ because in both predictive and non-predicative -uncueditems better remembered in unpredicted than predicted Experiment 2 :▯major purpose : how bottom-up enhances WM (like voluntary –
More Less

Related notes for Psychology 3185F/G

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit