Textbook Notes (363,314)
Canada (158,331)
Psychology (1,390)
PSYC 213 (154)
Chapter 5

CHAPTER 5 check!.docx

11 Pages
Unlock Document

McGill University
PSYC 213
Jelena Ristic

CHAPTER 5: MEMORY TRACES AND MEMORY SCHEMAS 5.1 – Schema Theories of Memory  Memory traces are like replicas of previous experiences. o Like a recording device. o An event can be replayed back from memory traces an unlimited amount of times. o After a while, there might be decay in the quality of playback. o This model only works if it is true that recall of previous experiences is accurate.  Mystic Writing Pad: A model of memory based on a children‟s toy writing tablet that allows new messages to be written on one level, while fragments of old messages accumulate on another level. o It‟s made up of a plastic layer that covers a layer of wax. When you write on the plastic, it remains on the wax but disappears from the plastic. o Memories are similar to what remains on the wax after we lift the plastic. o Thus, memories are after-effects of perception, but they tend to run into one another. o After writing on the pad a lot of times, you will see numerous overlapping lines. o You need to make inferences and reconstruct what you see on the wax and this is very prone to errors.  Reappearance Hypothesis: The hypothesis that memory is a re-experiencing of the past. o So memories are not altered.  If memory is schematic, then it relies on fragments to make new constructions. 5.1.1 – Flashbulb Memories  Flashbulb Memories: Vivid, detailed memories of significant events. o This is evidence for the pure trace memory. o Assassinations of important people are good to study this.  Kennedy‟s Assassination – people tend to report the following:  Their location when they found out about it  What they were doing  Who told them  How they felt (affect)  Aftermath – what they did afterwards.  Finding: the more consequential the event was rated, the more often it had been rehearsed (discussed with others).  Now Print Theory: The theory that a specific process, similar to xerography, lays down in memory copes of especially significant experiences. o This can produce flashbulb memories. o Info is processed in the following sequence: rd o The focus of this theory is on the 3 stage = producing the memory. o It‟s like we can save a copy of the experience the same way a photocopier copies a page. o Flashbulb memories are an example of highly detailed memory traces. o This Now Print mechanism may be a primitive for of memory, which would have been useful when there were no records or events in books/other mediums. o The evolution of memory would be towards memory schemas and away from memory traces because of memory aids. 5.1.2 – Is There a Flashbulb Memory Mechanism?  Natural Experiment: The Challenger space shuttle explosion o Participants were given questionnaires 3 days and 9 months after the event. o The 2 accounts weren‟t always consistent. o The 9-month account was more general. But it was inconsistent in the same ways that ordinary memories (not flashbulb) are usually inconsistent. o This means that some missing info was filled though inferences and guesswork. o Conclusion: flashbulb memories can have inaccuracies if info cannot be retrieved from memory. This would be due to inferences and guesswork. o McCloskey‟s suggestion: we remember the details of a flashbulb event because those details are the links between our own histories and the history of the world.  Other similar experiments show that both flashbulb and everyday memories show a decline in consistency and an increase in inconsistency. o However, we believe that our flashbulb memories are more accurate than our ordinary memories (even though they‟re not). 5.2 – Are Memory Traces Permanent?  Consolidation (strengthening) theory: The theory that memory traces of an event are not fully formed immediately after that event, but take some time to become complete. o This is a classical approach to memory traces. o This process of consolidation can be disrupted by events that occur afterwards, and this is called retroactive interference.  It is the decline in the recall of one thing experienced as a result of later experiencing something else. o Rest from other events allows for full consolidation of the traces. Mental work at this time can weaken the memory traces. o Even if the intervening study material is not related to the original learning, the new learning draws on a limited pool of resources that may have otherwise been available to consolidate the original learning.  This is one explanation of why cramming isn‟t as effective even if the same amount of time is spent learning the material. Info gets all mixed up and confusing because we haven‟t given our brains enough time to consolidate (or “digest”) the info. (This might not be true… it‟s not from the book).  Hippocampus: A site in the brain crucial for the consolidation of memory traces. o Converts immediate memories into long-term ones. o Greek = “sea horse” because it looks like one.  They used to think that once consolidation is complete, then the memory is permanent. o Now they know that when the trace is re-activated, it can change.  Reconsolidation: The hypothetical process whereby a memory trace is revised and undergoes consolidation again.  Memories are constrictive and always changing! 5.2.1 – Bartlett‟s Remembering (a book written by Bartlett)  Method of Repeated Reproduction: One participant is given multiple opportunities to recall something over time.  Method of Serial Reproduction: Participant A is given something to remember. A writes down what they can recall and A‟s version if given to the next participant B. B reads it and tries to recall it. B‟s version is given to C…. and so on. o This leads to many omissions and the story becomes simplified. o The omissions reflect a process of rationalization: the attempt to make memory as coherent and sensible as possible.  In one experiment, unfamiliar material was transformed over time into increasingly familiar material.  Schema (Bartlett): An active mass of organized past reactions that provides a setting that guides our behavior. o It‟s a standard that can be adjusted to fit changing circumstances. A flexible organization 5.2.2 – Phantom Limbs and the Body Schema  Body Schema: One‟s schematic representation of one‟s body. Aka Body Image.  Phantom Limbs: After a sudden loss of a body part, the feeling that it is still there. o It is a vivid but false memory. o 70% of amputees experience phantom limb pain for as long as 25 years. o This occurs as a consequence of the way the body schema represents parts of our bodies and their relationships. o If the loss of a body part occurs slowly then it‟s less likely to experience a phantom limb.  Penfield Homunculus: A part of the brain that maps the parts of the sensory cortex that represent the various parts of the body. o The hands are represented in an area that‟s next to the face.  A man with an amputated arm developed a phantom limb. When his face was stimulated with a Q-tip he felt parts of his missing hand stimulated!  This is because sensory input from the face now invades the adjacent vacated territory that corresponds to the missing hand.  The body schema is plastic (flexible) and not fixed.  Some people with a phantom hand feel like their hand is clenched and their nails are digging into their skin. o Solution!  the mirror image of the existing hand is shown in a way that creates the illusion that the missing hand has returned. o If the person unclenches his real hand, he also experiences his phantom hand as unclenched and the pain goes away!  Normal person can experience something similar: o Get a plastic hand or a glove. o Put your left hand on your lap and right hand hidden from sight on the table. o Put the fake hand on the table and have someone repeatedly tap and stroke your hidden hand and at the same time (and in perfect synchrony) tap and stroke the visible fake hand. o After a while, you will feel as if YOU are being touched on the dummy hand! 5.3 – Research Based on Schema Theory  Most schema theories assume that memory is best described in terms of the following 4 processes: selection; abstraction; interpretation; integration. 5.3.1 – Selection  Selection: The hypothesis that we select information both as we receive it and as we recall it.  Experiment: a description of a house if given to participants. Some were asked to read it from the point of view of a burglar and others from that of prospective homebuyer. o People recalled more of the info that was related to their view point. o Then they were asked to switch their viewpoint and recall the house description. o Now they were able to recall info that they weren‟t able to recall before switching their perspective. o This suggests that the process of selection can occur when people try to remember what they have read. o Implication: the active schema may not determine all the info that one ends up being able to remember. o The schema not only organizes material at the time of encounter (encoding) but also reorganized previously encountered material into new structures and new retrievals. 5.3.2 – Abstraction  Abstraction: The hypothesis that we tend to remember only the gist and not particulars of what we experience.  We remember the meaning but forget the actual wording.  Experiment: participants heard a story and given a list of sentences. They were asked to identify which were identical to those in the story. o Results: memory for the original sentence was quite good if the original sentence had come at the end of the story = they could remember the exact wording.  They were able to correctly detect any change in the meaning.  Even scientists tend of remember only the gist of scientific literature and lose important details. 5.3.3 – Interpretation  Interpretation: The hypothesis that we interpret info by making inferences, and then remember the inferences as part of the original info.  If you are told that Tom was in New York and later that he was in Toronto, then you may infer that he moved from New York to Toronto. o Then you may end up thinking that someone told you that Tom actually moved (even though no one did and it was just an inference).  Experiment: participants were shown a clock with roman numerals. The 4 looked like this: IIII and not IV. o Most incorrectly drew the clock later with IV even when they were told before seeing the clock that they woul
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 213

Log In


Don't have an account?

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.