PSYC 221 Chapter Notes - Chapter 7: Memory Consolidation, Free Recall, Endel Tulving

12 views7 pages
17 Feb 2016
Department
Course
Professor
Chapter 7: Long-Term Memory: Encoding, Retrieval, and Consolidation
Coding- the form in which info is represented
Encoding- the process used to get info into LTM
Retrieval- the process of transferring info from LTM to working memory
Encoding: Getting Info into LTM
Maintenance rehearsal
oRepeating it over and over
oTypically results in poor memory
Elaborative rehearsal
oRelating it to something meaningful
oTypically results in better memory
Levels of Processing Theory
oCraik and Lockhart (1972)
oMemory depends on the depth of processing that an item receives
Shallow processing-
Little attention to meaning or focus on physical features
Deep processing-
Close attention to detail, focus on meaning and relating it to something else
oLevels of Processing Theory Experiment- Craik and Tulving (1975)
Presented words to subjects and asked them 3 different types of questions:
About the physical features
About rhyming
A fill-in-the-blanks question
Memory test revealed that deeper processing (fill-in-the-blanks question) is associated with better memory
Problems
Difficult to define exactly what depth of processing is
Circular reasoning
oDefining a procedure as deeper because it results in better memory and then using that
procedure to show that deeper processing results in better memory
Doesn’t really prove anything
It is still accepted that memory retrieval is affected by how items are encoded
6 Encoding Procedures that Affect Retrieval (close relationship btwn encoding & retrieval)
Forming visual images
oBower and Winzenz (1970)
oTested whether visual imagery can create connections that enhance memory
oPaired-associate learning-
A list of word pairs is presented
Later the subject must remember the word it was paired with
o15 pairs of nouns for 5 seconds each
One group told to silently repeat the pairs
Another group was told to form a mental picture in which the two items were interacting
Remembered twice as many words
Linking words to yourself
oSelf-reference effect-
Memory is better if you are asked to relate a word to yourself
oRogers Experiment (1977)
Same 3 questions as Craik and Tulving used
4th question of “Describes you?”
Subjects were more likely to remember answers they rated as describing themselves
Generating information
oSlameka and Graf (1978)
oGeneration effect-
Generating material yourself, rather than passively receiving it, enhances learning and retention
oRead group: read pairs of related words
oGenerate group: filled in the blank with a word related to the first word
oSubjects presented with the first word and had to indicate the second word
Subjects who had generated the second word in each pair were able to reproduce 28% more words
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 7 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
Organizing information
oSubjects spontaneously organize items as they recall them
oRemembering words in a particular category may serve as a retrieval cue-
A word or stimulus that helps a person remember info stored in memory
oBower (1969)
Presented material to be learned in an organizational tree
Organized words according to categories
4 trees for 1 minute each
Subjects tended to recall in the same way the trees were organized
Recalled 73% of words from all 4 trees
Subjects presented with randomized trees
Only remembered 21% of words from all trees
oPresenting info so organization is difficult results in poor memory
oProviding a mental framework before the information makes it easier to remember
Relating words to survival value
oNairne (2010)
oWe can understand how memory works by considering its function
Through evolution, memory has been shaped to increase the ability to survive
oTested whether counting the number of vowels or rating an item’s survival value resulted in better memory
Linking words to survival value created better memory
Also better than forming visual images, linking words to oneself, and generating information
Retrieval practice
oRoediger and Karpicke (2006)
oTesting effect-
Testing following learning results in better memory than rereading material after learning
oCollege students read prose passages for 7 minutes, followed by a 2 min break of math problems
Testing group was given 7 minutes to recall as much as they could remember
Rereading group was given 7 minutes to reread the material
oRecall test given after 5 minutes, 2 days, and 1 week
Little difference after 5 minutes (rereading group slightly better)
After 2 days and 1 week, the testing group was much better
Retrieval: Getting Info Out of Memory
Retrieval Cues
2 types of recall procedures
oFree recall
A subject is simply asked to recall stimuli
oCued recall
The subject is presented with retrieval cues to aid in recall of the previously experiences stimuli
Typically phrases
Tulving and Pearlstone’s experiment (1966)
oPresented subjects with lists of words to remember
oDrawn from specific categories (like birds, professions)
oFree recall group were asked to recall as many words as they could
oCued recall group were provided with the names of the categories and then asked to recall as many words as they could
oResults
Free recall group recalled 40%
Cued recall group recalled 75%
Retrieval cues aid memory
Mantyla (1986)
oRetrieval cues are significantly more effective when they are created by the person whose memory is being tested
Presented subjects with a list of 504 nouns
Subjects presented with 3 words they had generated for half the nouns and 3 words someone else had generated
for the other half
Remembered 91% when self-generated retrieval cues present
Only 55% when other retrieval cues present
Matching Conditions of Encoding and Retrieval
Retrieval can be increased by matching the conditions at retrieval to the conditions that existed at encoding
Encoding specificity-
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 7 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get OneClass Notes+

Unlimited access to class notes and textbook notes.

YearlyBest Value
75% OFF
$8 USD/m
Monthly
$30 USD/m
You will be charged $96 USD upfront and auto renewed at the end of each cycle. You may cancel anytime under Payment Settings. For more information, see our Terms and Privacy.
Payments are encrypted using 256-bit SSL. Powered by Stripe.