Transcript Cognitive Processes PSY 334

Cognitive Processes
PSY 334
Chapter 6 – Human Memory:
Encoding and Storage
Ebbinghaus
 First rigorous investigation of human
memory – 1885.
 Taught himself nonsense syllables

DAX, BUP, LOC
 Savings – the amount of time needed to
relearn a list after it has already been
learned and forgotten.
 Forgetting function – most forgetting
takes place right away.
Memory Models
 Atkinson & Shiffrin – proposed a three-
stage model including:



Sensory store – if attended goes to STM
Short-term memory (STM) – if rehearsed
goes to LTM
Long-term memory (LTM)
 No longer the current view of memory.

Still presented in some books.
The Three-Stage Model
Responses
Sensation/perception
Environment
Attention
Sensory store
retrieval
Short-term
(working) memory
Long-term memory
encoding
Executive control processes
Retention Times
retrieval
Environment
Sensory store
Short-term
(working) memory
Long-term memory
encoding
1-3 seconds
15-25 seconds
1 sec to a lifetime
Sensory Memory
 Holds info when it first comes in.
 Allows a person to extract meaning from
an image or series of sounds.
 Sperling’s partial report procedure:



A display of three rows of letters is
presented.
After it is taken away, a tone signals which
row to report.
Subjects were able to report most letters.
Sperling’s Partial Report
A medium tone
signals the subject
to report the letters
in this row
Sperling’s Results
Delay
Kinds of Sensory Stores
 Iconic memory – visual

Bright postexposure field wipes out
memory after 1 sec, dark after 5 sec.
 Echoic memory – auditory

Lasts up to 10 sec (measured by ERP)
 Located in the sensory cortexes.
Short Term Memory
 The original idea is that when info in
sensory memory is paid attention to, it
moves into short term memory.
 With rehearsal, it then moves into long
term memory.
 STM has limited capacity, called memory
span.


Miller’s magic number (7 ± 2)
New info pushes out older info (Shepard)
Shepard & Teghtsoonian’s
Results
Probability of recalling
the target item
Number of
intervening items
Criticisms of STM
 Rate of forgetting seemed to be quicker
than Ebbinghaus’s data, but is not really.
 Amount of rehearsal appeared to be
related to transfer to long-term memory.


Later it was found that the kind of
rehearsal matters, not the amount.
Passive rehearsal does little to achieve
long-term memory.
 Information can go directly to LTM.
Depth of Processing
 Craik & Lockhart – proposed that it is not
how long material is rehearsed but the
depth of processing that matters.
 Levels of processing demo.
Working Memory
 Baddeley – in working memory speed of
rehearsal determines memory span.
 Articulatory loop – stores whatever can
be processed in a given amount of time.




Word length effect: 4.5 one-syllable words
remembered compared to 2.6 long ones.
1.5 to 2 seconds material can be kept.
Visuospatial sketchpad – rehearses images
Central executive – controls other systems.
Word-Length Determines
Forgetting
Delayed Matching Task
 Delayed Matching to Sample – monkey
must recall where food was placed.


Monkeys with lesion to frontal cortex
cannot remember food location.
Human infants can’t do it until 1 year old.
 Regions of frontal cortex fire only during
the delay – keeping location in mind.

Different prefrontal regions are used to
remember different kinds of information.
Delayed Matching to Sample
Activation and Long-Term
Memory
 Activation – how available
information is to memory:
Probability of access – how likely you
are to remember something.
 Rate of access – how fast something
can be remembered.

 From moment to moment, items
differ in their degree of activation in
memory.
Anderson’s ACT Model
 ACT – Adaptive Control of Thought
 Subjects shown the word “flood” should
recall Noah but do not without “Bible,”
“animal” and “flood” together.

When given the word flood they think of
Mississippi or Johnstown but not Noah.
 Why? Recall is based on both baseline
and activation from associated concepts.

Moses and Jesus have higher baselines.
Moses Illusion
 How many animals of each species did
Moses bring onto the ark?

People respond 2 rather than none.
 This occurs because people do not focus
attention on who did it, and because
Moses and Noah are both Biblical
characters.
 This is a semantic illusion.
The ACT Model
Spreading Activation
 Activation spreads along the paths
of a propositional network.

Related items are faster to recall.
 Associative priming – involuntary
spread of activation to associated
items in memory.

Kaplan’s dissertation – cues to
solving riddles hidden in the
environment led to faster solutions.
Associative Priming
 Meyer & Schvaneveldt – spreading
activation affects how quickly words
are read.
Subjects judged whether pairs of
related & unrelated items were words.
 Judgments about related words were
faster.

Meyer and Schvaneveldt
Practice and Strength
 The amount of spreading activation
depends on the strength of a
memory.
 Memory strength increases with
practice.
 Greater memory strength increases
the likelihood of recall.
Power Function
 Each time we use a memory trace,
it gradually becomes a little
stronger.
 Power law of learning:
T = 1.40 P-0.24
 T is recognition time, P is days of
practice.
 Linear when plotted on log-log scale.

Learning Curves
Practicing Addition Problems
Long Term Potentiation (LTP)
 Neural changes may occur with
practice:
Long-term potentiation (LTP) in
hippocampus.
 Repeated electrical stimulation of
neurons leads to increased
sensitivity.

 LTP changes are a power function.
Neural Changes Mirror
Behavioral Changes
Neural Correlates of Encoding
 Better memory occurs for items with
stronger brain processing at the time of
study:



Words evoking higher ERP signals are
better remembered later.
Greater frontal activation with deeper
processing of verbal information.
Greater activation of hippocampus with
better long-term memory.
Activation in Prefrontal Cortex
Words activate left
prefrontal cortex
Pictures activate right
prefrontal cortex
Hemodynamic =
blow flow during
brain activity
Factors Influencing Memory
 Study alone does not improve memory –
what matters is how studying is done.


Shallow study results in little improvement.
Semantic associates (tulip-flower) better
remembered than rhymes (tower-flower),
81% vs 70%.
 Better retention occurs for more
meaningful elaboration.
Elaborative Processing
 Elaboration – embellishing an item with
additional information.
 Anderson & Bower – subjects added
details to simple sentences:


57% recall without elaboration
72% recall with made-up details added
 Self-generated elaborations are better
than experimenter-generated ones.
Self-Generated Elaborations
 Stein & Bransford – subjects were given
10 sentences. Four conditions:




Just the sentences alone – 4.2 adjectives
Subject generates an elaboration – 5.8
Experimenter-generated imprecise
elaboration – 2.2
Experimenter-generated precise
elaboration – 7.8
 Precision of detail (constraint) matters,
not who generates the elaboration.
Advance Organizers
 PQ4R method – use questions to guide
reading.


64% correct, compared to 57% (controls)
76% of relevant questions correct, 52% of
non-relevant.
 These study techniques work because
they encourage elaboration.

Question making and question answering
both improve memory for text (reviewing is
better than seeing the questions first).
Meaningful Elaboration
 Elaboration need not be meaningful –
other sorts of elaboration also work.
 Kolers compared memory for right-sideup sentences with upside-down.

Extra processing needed to read upside
down may enhance memory.
 Slamecka & Graf – compared generation
of synonyms and rhymes. Both improved
memory, but synonyms did more.
Slamecka & Graf’s Results
Mnemonics
 Method of Loci – place items in a
location, then take a mental walk.
 Peg-word System – use peg words as a
structure and associate a list of items
with them using visualization.

Create acronyms for lists of items.
 Convert nonsense syllables (DAX, GIB)
into meaningful items by associating
them with real words (e.g., DAD).
“This Old Man” Song
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cYf9vkW_xU
 http://www.totlol.com/watch/5d-6Q5V79CM/This-Old-Man/0/
Pegword System
1 – bun
2 – shoe
3 – tree
4 – door
5 – hive
6 – sticks
7 – heaven
8 – gate
9 – wine
10 -- hen
Incidental Learning
 It does not matter whether people intend
to learn something or not.

What matters is how material is processed.
 Orienting tasks:
 Count whether word has e or g.
 Rate the pleasantness of words.
 Half of subjects told they would be asked
to remember words later, half not told.
 No advantage to knowing ahead of time.
Awareness of Learning
Flashbulb Memories
 Self-reference effect -- people have
better memory for events that are
important to them and close friends.
 Flashbulb memories – recall of traumatic
events long after the fact.

Seem vivid but can be very inaccurate, just
like everyday memories.
 Thatcher’s resignation:
 60% memory for UK subjects, 20% nonUK
9/11 Memories
 Talairco & Rubin (2003) found that 9/11
story-consistent details decreased and
inconsistent details increased with time.

Rate and amount of both kinds of details
were closely similar for flashbulb &
everyday memories.
 Sharot et al. (2007) reported greater
activity in the amygdala for people closer
to ground zero, when recalling 3 yrs later
Arousal & the Self-Reference
Effect
 Two explanations:


Activation of the amygdala involves a
biological mechanism reinforcing memory
for events important to us.
Info relevant and important to the self is
rehearsed more often – resulting in better
elaboration.
 High arousal may enhance memory
above and beyond rehearsal.