PSY 341 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Implicit Memory, Recognition Memory, Implicit Learning
April 5, 2018
Criticism of Dissociation imply separate brain systems
• Recall vs Recognition
• List of high frequency words - Recall > Recognition
• List of low frequency words - Recognition > Recall
•Apparent double dissociation
• Not due to diff brain systems for recall & recognition
•Low frequency words harder to recall but less confusable with other words because they don’t seem very
familiar
• Case for separate Brian systems stronger w/ dissociation
Implicit Memory: Not tied WHERE BUT HOW you store and retrieve info
• Examples
•Tie shoes, ride bike, type
•Know how to do them
• Can’t easily expressed
• Faster recognition for recently seen word, even of you don’t consciously having seen word before
Evidence or Implicit Memory
• Memory / new learning inferred by facilities in performance
• Saving in relearning
• Priming effect (diagnostic of implicit learning)
•Developmental Dissociation
• Recognition memory increases with age
• Priming effect in 3 yrs olds = adults
• Explicit recall:
• PRIMACY kids < adults
• RECENCY kids = adults (still in working memory)
• Drug Dissociation: some drugs (eg alcohol) impair explicit recall but have not effect on pricing or recency
effects
Implicit / Explicit Retrieval Differences
• Levels of processing - no LoP difference in implicit tasks
• Modality changes (auditory vs visual
• No LoP differences on explicit tasks (conceptually driven)
• Huge LoP effects on implicit tasks (Perceptually driven)
•Time course
• Implicit < Explicit: receives on activation NOT conscious search
•Interference
• NO PI / RI for implicit memory task
•Interference derived from conceptual similarity
•Implicit memory more perceptual
Summary of Encoding Memory
•Despite dissociations, evidence for different memory systems in LTM is weak
• More likely explanation
Transfer A p p r o p r i a t e p r o c e s s e s
•2 Generalization btwn Retrieval Cues and Memory
•Retrieval depends on overall similarity btwn retrieval cue and info to be recalled
•Good retrieval cues are
• Similar to targets
• Dissimilar to non-targets
Transfer A p p r o p r e i a t e
•If you study in way that matches test conditions, retrieval likelihood increases
• Levels of processing effects are reduced / eliminated under cue-appo
State-Dependent Learning as example of TAPS
• Contexts for learning can apply retrieval cues
• P (remembering) best then encoding and retrieval conditions overlap
• Physical settings, Mood, Odors, Altered state of consciousness
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
List of high frequency words - recall > recognition. List of low frequency words - recognition > recall. Not due to diff brain systems for recall & recognition. Low frequency words harder to recall but less confusable with other words because they don"t seem very familiar. Case for separate brian systems stronger w/ dissociation. Implicit memory: not tied where but how you store and retrieve info. Faster recognition for recently seen word, even of you don"t consciously having seen word before. Drug dissociation: some drugs (eg alcohol) impair explicit recall but have not effect on pricing or recency effects. Memory / new learning inferred by facilities in performance. Priming effect in 3 yrs olds = adults. Recency kids = adults (still in working memory) No lop differences on explicit tasks (conceptually driven) Huge lop effects on implicit tasks (perceptually driven) Levels of processing - no lop difference in implicit tasks. No pi / ri for implicit memory task.
