Textbook Notes (368,089)
Canada (161,636)
Psychology (3,337)
PSYC 2650 (228)
Chapter

PSYC*2650 Ch 6.doc

14 Pages
131 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC 2650
Professor
Anneke Olthof
Semester
Winter

Description
Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 Chapter 6: Interconnections Between Acquisition and Retrieval - will examine the interactions between how exactly a bit of information was learned and how it is retrieved later on - familiarity will be addressed, what causes this - influence of unconscious memories - what “optimal” learning might be Learning as Preparation for Recall - when you are learning, you’re making connections between the newly acquired materi- al and other representations already in your memory - the connections serve as retrieval paths which have a starting point and an ending point - you may not be trying to reach that end point or you may not be close to the beginning point, so this path may not help you State-Dependent Learning - Godden and Baddelay asked scuba divers to learn materials in the water and on land - the context influences what thoughts come to mind for the divers, which will influence the connections they make - divers who learn material while underwater remember material best if tested underwa- ter because this will increase the chance that they will be able to use the memory con- nections the established earlier - divers who learn on land perform best when tested on land - related results have been obtained with odors present or absent during learning - memory is best if the olfactory environment is the same during memory retrieval as it was during initial learning - also shown with noisy and quiet settings as well as with different rooms - there is an interesting twist, in one procedure, participants learned materials in one term and were tested in a different room but just before testing, they were urged tot think about the room in which they had learned and they performed better - what seems to matter is not the physical context but the psychological context Changes in One’s Approach to the Memory Materials - recall is best if someone’s state (internal or external) at the time of testing matches his state at the time of learning Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 Context Reinstatement - improved memory if we recreate the context that was in place during learning - the context has its effect only because it influences how the person thinks about the material to be remembered - not the physical environment - Fisher and Craik presented their participants with a series word pairs, they were in- structed to learn the second word and only use the first word as an aid - for half of the pairs, the “context word” was semantically associated with the target word (cat and dog), this would encourage them to think about the words’ meanings - for the other pairs, the context word was one that rights (cat and hat), this would en- courage participants to think about the target word’s sound - when the time came for the test, participants were given either a hunt concerning meaning or a hint concerning sound - thinking about meaning led to better memory than thinking about sound - if participants thought about meaning at the time of learning, they did considerably bet- ter in the test if the cues concerned meaning - if they thought about sound at the time of learning, they did better with sound cues - the table shows an advantage for thinking about meaning and an advantage for matched learning and test conditions - the match effect wins over the levels-of-processing effect Encoding Specificity - when you learn a list of words, what goes into your memory is not just a record of those words, what’s in your memory is the words plus some record of what you were thinking about in response to the words - this extra material can influence your search for the target information - it can also change the meaning of what is remembered which can have profound con- sequences for how you remember the past - consider experiments on Encoding Specificity Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 - participants read target words (piano) in either of 2 context: (1) the man lifted the pi- ano, or (2) the man tuned the piano - the sentences led the participants to think about the target word in a specific way and it was this thought that was encoded into memory - the idea was not just piano, it was either “piano as something heavy” or “piano as mu- sical instrument” - during recall, if they have seen the “lifted” sentence, they were likely to recall the target word if given the hint “something heavy” - the hint “something with a nice sound” was much less effective - reversed happened for the “tuned” sentence - Endel Tulving demonstrated this in many forms - it is called encoding specificity because what is encoded (placed into memory) is spe- cific (to the stimulus and its context) - results with nonverbal stimuli show a similar pattern e.g. the vase/2 faces - in learning new material, you establish a memory that can be retrieved in a certain way, from a certain perspective - if the perspective changes then the original memory cannot be retrieved - perhaps we cannot speak of “good learning”, instead what counts as good learning may depend on later events (where and how you will be tested) Different Forms of Memory Testing - similar conclusions emerge when we consider the nature of the memory test - when we want to Recall information we encountered earlier, we’re presented with some cue that broadly identifies the information that we seek but we need to come up with new information on our own - in contrast, in memory tests that hinge on Recognition we must decide whether it’s the sought-after information or not (“I’ll recognize the street when we get there”) - recall and recognition are fundamentally different from each other - recall requires memory search, because you have to come up with the item on your own, you need to locate it within memory - recall depends heavily on memory connections (serving as retrieval paths) - forms of learning that promote connections are useful for recall testing - recall is much more likely if during the original learning you thought about relationships between the materials to be remembers and other things you already know, or between other aspects of the learning environment - recognition is something of a hybrid Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 - you may make a recognition response because you recall an earlier episode - this sort of recognition follows the same rules as recall, so it if more likely if you formed the relevant connections during learning - sometimes recognition works differently Source Memory - you do not have any recollection of the source of your current knowl- edge, but you do have a strong sense of Familiarity, and you’re willing to make an infer- ence about where that familiarity came from - you attribute the familiarity to the earlier encounter, and thanks to this Attribution, you will probably respond yes on the recognition test Familiarity and Source Memory - need a 2-part theory of recognition, with it sometimes depending on familiarity and sometimes on source memory - it is possible to have either one without the other - familiarity without source memory example: you turn on the television and see a famil- iar face but you don’t know who it is or why it is familiar - source memory without familiarity example: capgras syndrome, the patient has de- tailed memories of the past but no familiarity of faces - source memory and familiarity are also distinguishable biologically - participants asked during a recognition test to make a “remember/know” distinction - pressing one button to indicate remember if they actually recall the episode of encoun- tering an item and pressing a different button to indicate they don’t recall the encounter but just have the broad feeling that the item must have been on the test - can use fMRI scans to monitor brain activity while taking recognition tests - “remember” and “know” judgments depend on different brain areas - scans show heightened activity in the hippocampus when people indicate they “re- member” a test item, suggesting this brain structure is crucial for source memory - “know” responses are associated with activity in the anterior parahippocampus, this implies this brain site is crucial for familiarity - familiarity and source memory can also be distinguished during learning - if certain brain areas (e.g. rhinal cortex) are especially active during learning, then the stimulus is likely to seem familiar later on (trigger a “know” response”) - if other brain areas (e.g. hippocampal region) are active during learning, theres a high probability that the person will offer a “remember” response - what’s going on in these areas to create relevant memories? Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 - activity in the hippocampus is presumably helping to create the memory connections that promote source memory by linking a memory item to other thoughts - for familiarity sheer exposure to a stimulus or rote rehearsal seems to be enough, but what does it accomplish, what “record” does it leave in memory? Implicit Memory - what leads to this sense of familiarity? - we begin with cases in which stimuli are familiar but don’t feel familiar Memory Without Awareness - how can we find out if someone remembers a previous event? - One way is to ask a specific question about it - another way is to expose someone to an event then later reexpose them to the same event and assess if the response on the second encounter differed from the first - ask whether the first encounter primed the person for the second - in a study, participants are asked to read through a list and not told their memories are test (e.g. told to check for spelling errors) - later they are given a Lexical-Decision Task - shown a series of letter strings and must indicate whether the string is a an english word or not - some of the letter strings are duplicates of the words seen in the first part - results are that lexical decisions are appreciably quicker if the person has recently seen the test word - repetition priming - this priming is observed even when participants have no recollection for having en- countered the stimulus words before - can show participants a list of words and then test them in 2 different ways: (1) assess memory directly and use a standard recognition procedure, (2) indirect and relies on lex- ical decision - the direct memory test is likely to show that the participants have completely forgotten the words presented earlier, their performance is random - during the lexical-decision, they still remember the word perfectly well and show a priming effect - they have no conscious memory of having seen the stimulus words but are influenced by the earlier experience - “memory without awareness” - one last example draws on a task called Word-Stem Completion - people are given 3 or 4 letters and must produce a word with this beginning e.g. CLA = class, clam - the question of interest is which of these the person produces - people are more likely to offer a specific word if they’ve encountered it recently Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 - this priming effect is observed even if participants show no conscious memory of their recent encounter with that word - psychologists distinguish 2 types of memory: explicit and implicit Explicit Memories - those that are usually revealed by Direct Memory Testing (recall) - testing that specifically urges you to remember the past Implicit Memories - typically revealed by Indirect Memory Testing and are often man- ifested as priming effect, your current behaviour is demonstrably influenced by a prior event, but you may be quite unaware of it False Fame - participants were given a list of names to read allowed and not told about a memory test, told the concern was pronunciation - later they were shown a new list of names and asked to rate each person according to how famous each was - some names were real, some very famous people and some not-so-famous people - some of the names had occurred on the prior and some were new names - for some participants the famous list was presented right after the pronunciation list, for others there was a 24-hour delay - for the group that had the famous list right after, they would recognize that the name is familiar because they just saw it on the previous list, they would not be persuaded that the name belongs to someone famous - for the 24-hour delay group, they may not recall seeing the name before but it will seem very familiar so you may think that person is famous - when the 2 lists are presented a day apart, the participants are likely to rate the made- up names as being famous - the false judgments of fame come from the way the participants interpreted the feeling of familiarity and what conclusions they drew from it - participants in the 24-hour delay forgot the real source of familiarity and filled in bogus source - this misattribution is possibly only because the feeling of familiarity produced by these fames was relatively vague and open to interpretation - the suggestion is that implicit memories may leave people only with a broad sense that a stimulus is somehow distinctive (rings a bell) Implicit Memory and the “Illusion of Truth” - how broad is the potential for misinterpreting an implicit memory? Sunday, Feb 17, 2013 - participants heard a series of statements and had to judge how interesting each state- ment was - after the participants were presented some more sentences but now had to judge the credibility of them - some of the sentences in the second test were repeats from the earlier presentation - how is sentence credibility influenced by sentence familiarity? - sentences heard before were more likely to be accepted as true - familiarity increased credibility - this effect emerged even when participants were warned in advance not to believe the sentences on the first list - in one procedure, participants were told that half of the statements had been told by men and half by women, the women’s statements were always true and the mens were always false (half were told the reverse) - then they rated how interesting the sentences were and later had to judge truth - sentences initially identified as false - if someone explicitly remembers the sentence, they should judge it as false - someone without this explicit memory doesn’t remember whether the assertion came from a man o
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 2650

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