Study Guides (248,645)
Canada (121,656)
Psychology (952)
PSYC 2650 (71)

midterm 2 notes

14 Pages

Course Code
PSYC 2650
Anneke Olthof

This preview shows pages 1,2,3. Sign up to view the full 14 pages of the document.
nd Cognitive Psychology 2 Midterm Chapter 5 One way to frame learning and memory: -acquisition -storage -retrieval *analogy: creating, storing, opening a computer file Problematic: -new learning is grounded in previously learned stored knowledge -effective learning depends on how info will be later retrieved Modal Model -info processing: complex mental events involve a number of discrete components which receive input from, and send input to one another -makes a distinction between 2 kinds of memory: -STM: holds the info currently in use -LTM: all of the info one can remember -WM: more recent term for short-term memory, emphasizing its function Experiments supporting modal model: -participants hear a long series of words, position of an item in the presentation list is its serial position, task is to repeat back as many words as they can in any order; free- recall procedure Primacy effect – with free recall, participants are likely to remember the first few items in the list, based in long-term memory, first few items receive the most memory rehearsal and are transferred from WM to LTM Recency effect – with free recall, participants are likely to remember the last few items in the list, based in WM, words presented at end of the list are usually first reported -30 seconds of filled delay displaces the last few items from working memory – this eliminates the recen/,98o;`cy effect, but 30 seconds of unfilled delay does not change the recency effect -slowing down the presentation of the list allows for more rehearsal of items, which improves all parts of the curve that reflect LTM, i.e. all items expect for the last few Neuroimaging data – memory for items at the beginning of the list (but not the end) is associated with activity in the hippocampus Working Memory -all mental activities require WM – reading, goal-driven behavior, etc. – some require more WM resources than others, individual differences in WM capacity predict cognitive abilities Digit-span task – used to determine an individual’s WMC, participant hears a series of digits and repeats them back, longest list length that can be reliably repeated back is their digit span, WMC is typically 7 plus or minus 2 minutes Chunking – repacking of the info held in WM, series of letters can be chunked as smaller pairs, can hold 7 +/-2 chucks of info, effort and attention resources are required, does not increase size of WM -loading dock: mechanically transfers input to and from LTM -librarian: actively categorizes, catalogs, and cross-references new material (better metaphor) Reading span – measure that captures active nature of WM, participant reads a series of sentences and must remember last word in each, number of sentence-final words that can be remembered is the operation span Operation span – another measure that captures the active nature of WM, participant determines whether an equation is true/false, must remember a word paired with each equation, number of words that can be remembered determines the operation span -reading span and operation span correlate more strongly with test performance, reasoning, and reading ability than does the digit span WM is divided into 3 components: Central executive – makes decisions, plans responses, and coordinates helper components Visuospatial buffer – helper component that deals with visual material and imagery Articulatory rehearsal loop – helper component that deals with verbal material Executive control – refers to processes that are needed control the sequences of our thought and action, select and launch responses, plan and set goals, and resist falling into habit or routine -prefrontal cortex is particularly important to executive control Goal neglect – relying on habitual responses that are contrary to the goals of a particular task Perseveration – the tendency to produce the same response over and over when the task requires a change in response *Modal Model continues to explain basic contrasts between WM and LTM: -WM stores information currently being thought about; LTM stores all information one knows -WM limited in capacity; LTM great in capacity -WM easily loaded and accessed; LTM less easily -WM fragile and easily displaced; LTM more enduring Entering Long-Term Storage Two Types of Rehearsal Maintenance rehearsal – thinking about the material in a rote, mechanical way; repetition Relational or elaborative rehearsal – thinking about the material in terms of meaning, relating the items to each other and to what one already knows – superior to maintenance rehearsal for establishing info in LTM – even repeated exposure to info does not guarantee encoding in LTM -activity in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex predicts later retention if you compare brain activity for remembered and forgotten items at the time of encoding Shallow processing – engaging the information in a relatively superficial way i.e. making a decision about a typeface Deep processing – engaging the information in a more meaningful way i.e. thinking about meaning Incidental learning – learning in the absence of any intention to learn Intentional learning – learning with the intention to learn -look at chapter 5 table 5.1 and slides 29-31 Elaborate Encoding -depth of processing promotes recall by facilitating later retrieval i.e cataloging a book doesn’t ground it more firmly in the building but makes it easier to find later -consider learning as a way to establish indexing, a path to the information -connections between to-be-remembered items facilitates retrieval -Craik & Tulving – showed words appearing in more elaborate sentences are better remembered than the same word in simple sentences -benefit for words encoded in elaborate sentences may be result of richer retrieval paths – paths that guide one’s thoughts towards content to be remembered – greater elaborative encoding creates more retrieval paths -Katona argued key to creating connects with material we want to remember is organization Organizing and Memorizing Mnemonics – strategies used to improve memory by providing an organizational framework, downside is not finding a richer understanding of the material by relating it to things already known Peg-word systems: items are “hung” on a system of already well known “pegs” First-letter mnemonics – Roy G. Biv and King Phillip Crossed the Ocean to Find Gold and Silver -ambiguous passages are understood and remembered better if they are given a clarifying title -ambiguous pictures are understood and remembered better if they are identified -Memory for digits is enhanced if patterns can be discovered Links among Acquisition, Storage, and Retrieval -memory is facilitated by organizing and understanding the materials, not by mere exposure, what the memorizer was doing at the time of exposure matters and the background knowledge of the memorizer matters -acquisition, storage, and retrieval are not easily separable: new learning is grounded in previously learned (stored) knowledge and effective learning depends on how the information will be later retrieved Chapter 6 Learning as Prep for Retrieval State-dependent learning – new material is most likely to be recalled when a person is in the same mental, emotional, or biological state as when the material was learned Context reinstatement – recreating the context that was present during learning will improve memory performance i.e. Fisher & Craik – presented particpaints with word paris and asked them to remember the seond word – first word served as context -word pairs were either semantically related or rhymed: during texting, prime words were presented as cues or hints… two effects were oberseved: Depth of processing effect – thinking about meaning at the time of encoding provides an advantage, compared to thinking about rhyming at encoding. Context reinstatement effect – having the same kind of context during learning and retrieval provides an advantage, compared to different kinds of contexts. Encoding Specificity -tendency when memorizing to place in memory both the materials to be learned as well as the context of those materials – materials will be recognized as familiar later on only in they appear again in a similar context -explains why memory for having seen as ambiguous figure depends on the interpretation being the same at encoding retrieval Different forms of Memory testing Recall- must generate the studied items, often in response to a contextual cue, requires a search through memory and depends heavily on whether retrieval paths are available Recognition – studied items are presented, participant decides whether they were encountered before: source memory makes it similar to recall – other cases response is based on familiarity -source memory and familiarity are also distinguishable neuroanatomically -activation in the rhinal cortex during encoding predicts later feelings of familiarity and “know” response -activation in the hippocampus during encoding predicts later source memory and a “remember” response Implicit Memory -indirect method of testing memory, expose participants to an event, later re-expose them to the same event, and assess whether the responses on the second encounter is different from those on the first -Lexical-decision task – used in such an experiment to demonstrate repetition priming: more efficient processing for repeated presentation of the same stimulus – observed even if the participant doesn’t remember seeing the item before Word-stem completion – another example of repetition priming, string of letters are given and asked to produce a work beginning with this string, if you have encountered one of these words recently you are more likely to provide it as a response – even if you don’t consciously remember seeing that word -identification of perceptually degraded images is easier to make out if you have previously seen the intact images Explicit memory -revealed by direct memory testing, such as recall or recognition and accompanied by the conviction that one is remembering a specific prior episode Implicit memory - revealed by indirect memory testing, such as a priming task and no realization that one is being influenced by past experiences. False Fame Study – Jacoby et al. -asked to read aloud a list of fictitious names, sometime later, asked to rate another list of names in terms of how famous each person was, list included real famous people as well as fictitious names that had been read earlier – some conditions, participants rated fictitious names as famous: familiarity of name as misattributed Illusion of Truth – effect of implicit memory in which claims that are familiar end up seeming more plausible -study where participants read a series of statements and were told that some of them were false, later they saw the sentences again and had to judge whether they were true, statements that were heard before were later judged to be more credible than sentences never heard before -another misattribution of familiarity effect can be observed in frequently misspelled words Source confusion – where a bit of info was learned or where a particular stimulus was last encountered is misremembered, eyewitness may select someone from a photo based only on familiarity Theoretical Treatments of Implicit Memory -in all of these cases we have seen people being influenced by memories that they are not aware of, in some cases, participants realize that a stimulus is familiar but have no memory of the encounter that produced the familiarity, in other cases, they do not even have the sense of familiarity, but they are nevertheless still influenced by the previous encounter with the stimulus -one way to think about implicit memory is in terms of processing fluency – an improvement in the speed or ease of processing that results from prior practice in using those same processing steps – may underlie the feeling of familiarity for stimuli that we have previously encountered Amnesia -disruption of memory due to brain damage -distinction between explicit and implicit memory is also supported by evidence from cases of brain damage -Retrograde amnesia – inability to remember events that occurred before the event that triggered the memory disruption -Anterograde amnesia – inability to remember experiences after the event that triggered the memory disruption: limited to explicit memory, implicit memory is preserved, people with this also demonstrate improvements in procedural learning, which is another kind of implicit memory -H.M, patient with amnesia, as last resort to treating his case of epilepsy, portions of his brain that caused seizures were removed, after this he has serve anterograde amnesia, and was unable to recall anything that took place after his surgery as if nothing could get into his LTM -Korsakoff’s syndrome – anterograde amnesia, disorder caused by deficiency of thiamine (vitamin B1) in the diet and is associated with alcoholism -both H.M and Korsakoff patients have damage to the hippocampus and surrounding brain regions – but note damage to the hippocampus does not disrupt memories that are already established -Swiss neurologist Édouard Claparède performed an informal experiment with a Korsakoff-syndrome patien, when introducing himself to the patient, he hid a pin in his hand, which pricked the patient, later the patient could not explicitly remember Claparède but refused to shake his hand, vaguely saying “sometimes pins are hidden in people’s hands. -other examples of amnesic patients demonstrating preserved implicit memories: -knowing the answer to a trivia question the second time around, even though not remembering being asked it before and given the answer -preferring a musical melody that they had been exposed to before, even though not remembering having heard it before -double dissociation – finding data supporting both impaired explicit memory and preserved implicit memory in two groups of patients -example of a double dissociation between explicit and implicit memory: patient had damage to the hippocampus but an intact amygdala, while the other patient had damage to the amygdala and an intact hippocampus. -in the experiment, a blue light was followed by a loud boat horn, while other colors were not, the learned association between the blue light and the horn was probed both explicitly (with a question) and implicitly (by looking at conditioned fear) -hippocampus damage disrupted the ability to report explicitly which light was associated with the horn, but this patient still demonstrated an implicit fear response to the blue light -amygdala damage disrupted the implicit fear response to the blue light, but this patient could still report explicitly which light was associated with the horn -the nature of a disruption in the acquisition of new memories, depends on how the memories will be used or retrieved later on Chapter 7 Memory Errors -researchers interviewed 200 people in Amsterdam several months after a plane crash in the city, when asked if they had seen footage over half of the participants reported they had, however, there is no such film, in later follow-ups many participants confidently provided details about the crash -Brewer & Treyens: found that participants who had been asked to wait in an office recalled seeing books and other typical office items, even though they weren’t present Hypothesis regarding memory errors: -memory connections link each bit of knowledge in memory to other bits of knowledge -there are no clear boundaries separating the contents of one memory from others -this organization plays a helpful role during memory retrieval -however, it can be difficult to separate memory for a particular episode with associated knowledge in memory Intrusion Errors – errors in which other knowledge intrudes into the remembered event – supports the hypothesis i.e. when reading a story we may believe that propositions we inferred while reading the story were actually presented in the story DRM procedure – also used to demonstrate intrusion errors: if a list such as “bed, rest, awake, tried…” is presented, participants are very likely to recall having studied the word “sleep” even though it was not on the list Schematic knowledge – refers to knowledge that describes what is typical or frequent in a given situation – schemata can help us remember an event and can cause us to make errors when remembering an event -Frederick Bartlett: stories taken from native American folklore were presented to British participants, gifs of the stories were recalled correctly, but details were altered in memory, details that did not make sense from the British perspective were left out or supplemented to make the story fit better Misinformation effect – participant experiences an event and is exposed to misleading info about how it unfolded, some time allowed to pass, on later memory test, a substantial number of participants have incorporated the misleading info another example: hit – 34 mph, smashed – 41 mph. Yes to broken class hit, – 14%, smashed – 32% Autobiographical – memories can be implanted such as participants believing they had become ill eating egg salad as children - in some cases entire events can be planted into someone’s me
More Less
Unlock Document

Only pages 1,2,3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.