1. process of attention where we decide which specific stimulus to attend to

ex: reading only the red words within the black text

1. processes that allow us to allocate attentional resources to control performance of several tasks simultaneously

ex: driving and talking on your cell phone

1. refers to listening to a dif. message in each ear

2. told participants to attend to and "shadow" one ear

3. "shadow": repeat diolouge after it is heard

Dichotic Listening Results

Attended Ear

1. requires surprising amount of attention and concentration

2. subjects are reasonably accurate in shadowing attended message (about 1 second lag & monotone voice)

3. unaware of changes in their speech (monotone)

4. remember little of the content of the shadowed message (especially when topic difficulty increases)

Dichotic Listening Results
Unattended Ear

1. subjects can only report physical charactertistics (pitch, sex of speaker)

2. don't notice revered speech or when switched to another language

3. do not recall any content info

4. words repeated up to 35 times were not recalled

5. only able to recognize name or danger signal ("fire")

1. filters message before incoming information is analyzed for meaing

Message→Sensory Mem→Filter→dectector→memory

                                    ↑                 

                         Attended message

Broadbent's Filter Model:

Sensory Memory

1. holds all incoming info for a fraction of a second

2. transfers all info to next stage

3. large capacity, fast decay

Broadbent's Filter Model:

Filter/attended message

1. indentifies attented message based on physical characteristics (pitch, sex of speaker)

2. only attended message is passed on to the next stage

Broadbent's Filter Model:

Detector

Broadbent's Filter Model:

Short-term memory

1. receives output of detector (meaning)

2. holds info for 10-15 seconds and may transfer it to long-term memory

1. it is easier to focus on one channel at a time

2. it's hard to switch attention back & forth

1st conditions: person hears 2 letters in each ear simultaneously

-after 3 presentations, asked to repeat letters in any order

-usually repeat order of 1st ear than 2nd (65% correct)

2nd condition: foced to remember & repeat pairs of letters

-harder for participants to remember b/c they had to switch (only remember 20% of pairs)

1. evidence that some info that wasn't selected based on physical properties gets thru filter

-cocktail party effect: 30% heard their name or important word in unattended ear

-fluent bilinguals notice same message is presented in each ear when if dif languages (detect b/c of meaning)

-when physical differences btw the streams were eliminated Ss could still shadow (voice of same person)

1. switching between ears can happen automatically if meaning is detected

ex: "Dear Aunt Jane" experiment: heard "dear, 7, Jane" in 1 ear and "9, aunt, 6" in other. When asked to shadow ear 1, participants said "Dear Aunt Jane"

Treisman's Attenuation Model

"Leaky Filter Model"

1. messages get thru to attenuator where meaning is recognized and volume of message is either "turned up" or "turned down"→increases or decreases signal strength

2. both attended & unattended messages reach dictionary unit where words have high/low threshold for being activated

Treisman's Attenuation Model:

Attenuator

1. analyzes info in terms of:

-physical characteristics (ex: differentiate btw word & #)

-language (if gender same, choose language)

-meaning (story about sun or seahorse, attend to sun message for meaning)

2. BUT: analysis proceeds only as far as necessary to identify attended message:

-unattended messages are not completly blocked, volume is "turned down" and they leak thru

Treisman's Attenuation Model:

Dictionary Unit

1. contains stored words, each have a threshold for being activated

2. some words have permanetly lower thresholds (recognizable even in eak versions: your name or FIRE!)

3. difficult or unfamiliar words have high thresholds and meaning is not processed as much

1. presented message in one ear:

"they were throwing stones at the bank"

2. and influential word in other ear:

"river or bank"

3. asked to choose sentence w/ closest meaning:

-they threw stones at the river

-they threw stones at the savings & loan building

4. biasing words affected their choice, unaware of this

1. Message A,B,C,D are first meaningfully processed

2. Selective filter chooses message w/ most meaning

3. Message B is sent to response

1. uses almost all of person's cognitive resources; no resources left for other tasks

2. support early selection models→cannot process meaning of ALL stimuli b/c there is too much of it

1. uses few cognitive resources; leaves many resources left for other tasks

2. supports late selection models: able to process simple stimuli in meaningful way first and then filter it

1. must decided ASAP if target is in center position

2. press "z" if A or B presented

3. press "m" if C or D presented

-tests effects of cognitive load on reaction time

compatable flanker

BAB

1. fastest response to target because you can press the "z" key for A or B

2. does not require one to make a decision

incompatable flanker

CAC

1. slowest response to target because C requires different letter response than A (requires decsion/CRT)

Neutral Flanker

XAX

1. Tests whether participants can focus their attention on detecting target (X) so that the identity of distractor (N) will not affect their performance

-press Y when N is detected in central display

2. in low-load condition, participant had additional cog. resources→looked at incompatable flanker (N)=slower reaction time

3. in high load condition, P had less cog. resources to pay attention to incompatable flanker (N)=faster reaction time

1. one potential target

2. reaction time longer for incompatable distractors

3. participant still had resources available to process additional information

1. type of distractor does not affect reaction time

2. participants use all resources

3. no resources available to process the distractor

High-load experiments=early selection

Low-load experiments=late selection

1. required when 2 or more tasks are performed @ same time

2. dual task paradigms:

-involve 2 tasks (A and B)

-compare and contrast response times in 3 conditions

(A only, B only, A and B together)

task 1: write down words you are told to

task 2: read short story aloud

-students trained for 17 weeks

-after 6 weeks, their reading rates approached normal speeds (meaning that writing didn't influence reading)

-words and stories still processed meaningfully

-participants learned to combine 2 taks & perform them qualitatively different compared to untrained people

-PRACTICE IS KEY!

1. effortful

2. slow

3. need conscious awareness

-can become automatic after time/practice

(ex: taking notes while listening to lecture @ same time)

1. performed w.out conscious control and mostly w/out awareness (sometimes conscious control can impair performance: like when trying to explain how to ride bike step by step)

2. demand little/no effort (ex: typing)

3. performed in parallel w/ other processes

1. automatic processes are hard to control

2. participants asked to say color of word

YELLOW

3. condition 4: conflicting word/color was most difficult

1. if showen two versions of a picture, differences btw them are not immediately apparent

ex: experiment where person behind counter ducked down and another person popped up-few people recognized it was a different person

1. movement: see something in corner of eye (we usually turn to see what it is)

2. sound-hear a loud noise (turn to see what it is)

-examples of bottom up processes

Directing Visual Attention w/ Eye Movement:

Bottom-up initally more important

1. views characteristics of scene and detects what should/should not belong in scene

2. bases object perception on saliency:

-bright colors

-high contrast

-highly visible orientations

ex: kitchen scene where 1 pic showed pot & other printer

Directing Visual Attention w/ eye movement:

top down process

1. knowledge & goals of observer

ex: knowledge that printer doesn't belong in kitchen captures attention (ppl look at it longer)

2. eye movement guided by top-down processes (ex: when making a PB&J sandwhich)

1. study attention influence w/out changing image on retina (continue to look at same thing)

ex: Colby: used monkies to test covert attention

-monkeys fixate on small dot

-1/2 of monkeys had to react to diming of peripheral light

-recorded firing of neuron in parietal cortex (higher for monkeys that had to press button when P. Light dimmed)

-SPECIALIZED NEURONS IN PARIETAL LOBE FIRE IN P.LIGHT ATTEND CONDITION

1. attention relies on a complex interaction among many brain areas

-localized to sensory regions early in time

ex: occipital lobe when tasks involve vision, temporal=tasks involve auditory

2. Parietal lobe: spatial aspects (most important for attention) & allocation to particular stimulus/task

3. frontal lobe: selsection for particular motor responses, attention, planning-"Parent of the Brain"

1. Lesion to the parietal lobe results in hemilateral neglect

-space neglected is on opposite side of lesion

-more severe after right hem. lesion

-inattention is seen regardless of modality presented

ex: damage to right hem causes person to neglect/ignore everything in left visual field

-drawings of only right side of a clock or house

1. Autism is a serious developmental disorder in which 1 major symptom is withdrawal of social contact

2. can solve reasoning problems that involve social situations

3. cannot function when placed in an actual social situation (not socially engaged)

4. problems may be due to the way they observe/pay attention to their environment

1. instead of looking at eyes of another person, they look at a random facial area (mouth)

2. when observing a movie, they ignore kissing scene & look at a light switch on the wall behind them

3. usually look at things that give them no social or emotional insight into a situation

1. memory is the ability to use information that was previously encoded or processed

2. never directly observed; experiments use indirect observation

3. existence of memory is inferred from certain behavior (ex: change in level of performance)

1. had Herpes Simplex Encephalitis (brain inflammation) that ruined his limbic system (central to episodic mem)

2. episodic memory (ex: memory of your 10th b-day party) was destroyed (retrograde amnesia)

3. has both retro & anterograde amnesia

-retrograde: memories of past

-anterograde: amnesia (inability to remember) events after amnesia started (ex: new events)

1. translates stimulus into internal code to form a memory representation of stimulus

-must pay attention to info in order to encode it

1. maintaining of a memory representation

2. in order to be stored, a memory representation needs to be consolidated (ex: like a zip file)

3. currently under debate: whether consolidation is only needed at beginning of a memory representation's life or throughout its existence

1. finding & reproducing a stored memory representation

-accessing information stored in LTM

1. encoding, storing, recall/retreival

2. in order to study aspect of human memory, all 3 processes need to be considered in designing experimental paradigm

1. explicit memory task: participant asked to consciously remember a previous experienced knowledge; conscious recollection

ex: asked to memorize a list of words and repeat the list 5 minutes later

2. amnesic people fail to consciously recall prior information

1. implicit memory tasks: participant is engaged in a task that DOES NOT REQUIRE concious recollection of previously presented info; unconscious recollection

2. participant's behavior still measurably affected by prior experience

ex: asked to drive to the movies; need implicit memory to know how to drive, but don't consciously access info; automatic

1. participant shown item (ex: of a cat w/ hat) and has to decide whether the test items (presented afterwards) match the item presented previously (cat in hat)

-ex: multiple choice tests=recognition task

1. 2 items are presented

2. participants must choose correct one

ex: 1st presented picture of cat with hat, 2nd: shown two pictures similiar to first picture, must decide which one is correct based on explicit memory/recognition

1. four items presented

2. participants must choose which one (out of the 4) matches the picture shown previously

1. only 1 item presented

2. participant must decide whether it was part of the learning phase (whether it was "old" or "new" [not shown during experiment])

1. independent: show "old" words, put "new" words in sequence that were not shown previously

2. dependent measure: person must carefully examine whether word is from "old" list or was added in to confuse

1. encoding phase: participant  studies several stimuli

(ex: dog, cat, fish, mouse, bird, ocean, octopus)

2. after time interval, participant:

-recalls all items in any order (FREE RECALL)

or

-recalls all items but provided w/ cues (CUED RECALL)

(ex: memory aids: animals, animal environments)

3. performance measurement: amount of items correctly recalled(hits)-incorrectly recalled items(false alarms)=recognition

1. participant NOT asked to recollect/remember previous knowledge

2. participant's behavior often affected by prior experience (w/out conscious recollection of prior experience)

-word-stem completion

-picture-fragmented identification

1. encoding: words are presented & participants engage in encoding tasks (ex: rating correctness of word)

2. test: a list of word-stems presented & participant instucted to "fill in blanks" w/ 1st word that comes to mind (ex: previously presented word "apple", word stem AP__)

3. result: participants more likely to respond w/ "primed" words

1. encoding: pictures presented, participants engaged in encoding tasks (ex: rating how much they like picutre)

2. test: presented w/ fragmented versions of old & new pictures

3. result: participants able to identify primed pictures at higher fragmentation stages compared to newer pics

1. info: auditory, visual

2. code: relatively analog representations of sensory input (exact pictures of stimulus)

3. capacity: large

4. duration: most info decays w/in seconds & is permanently lost

1. code: acoustic, visual and SEMANTIC (meaning)

2. capcity: small; 7±2 items (phone #)

3. duration: indefidently, if rehearsed. If info not continually rehearsed, decay=15-30 seconds

code: semantic (meaning/emotion based)

capacity: large; unlimited

duration: unknown; months, years, entire life

the stages of memory:

sensory, STM, LTM

1. controlled by person, also specified by task instruction

ex: attention strategies  (focusing only on subset of features)

-rehearsal (repeating stimulus over and over)

-Mnemonic strategies (relating phone # to date in history or time running a mile)

1. there are buffers in sensory info w/ a very short duration (sensory info fades quickly)

ex: allows us to see 24 still frames per second in a movie as one continuous movement (keeps image in head miliseconds longer)

2. keeps analog representations of stimuli (every sense has dif sensory mem/register)

3. ICONIC: sens. memory for VISUAL INFO; idividual visual image=icon

1. Sperling conducted 3 important experiments on iconic memory

2. in each experiment, participants presented w/ 3X4 letter matricies for a brief time and task was to report what they saw

3. Sperling studied capacity & duration of iconic memory

1. matrices presented for 50ms each

2. whole report technique: participants have to report ALL letters they saw

3. results: participants can report 4-5 letters, however, many claimed they saw more letters

1. partial report technique: immediately after stimulus offset a tone (low, med, high) signaled which of the 3 rows to report

2. results: participants could ALWAYS report 3-4 letters-no matter what row

3. conclusion: CAPACITY of sensory memory around 9-12 letters

1. used partial report technique

2. IV: interval btw stimulus offset & signal varied (2 ms, 200ms...)

3. Results: the longer the interval, the less letters participants could report. After 500ms, only 1-2 letters could be reported

4. Conclusion: DURATION of icon less than 500ms

1. whole-report: approx 30% of letters

2. partial: approx 80% of letters

3. delayed: >30% of letters, advantage of cue (tone) no longer applied b/c of longer duration

1. aferimage: when you stare at bright light (flash), afterimage persists even tho external light source is gone

2. experimental idea: if iconic mem is afterimage, participants should make predictable errors if they have to report color of icons (ex: afterimage of red stimulus is green)

3. result: participants correctly reported color of stim

4. conclusion: iconic mem=a form of memory

1. if IM only stores unanalyzed, raw, analog representation of stim, then there should be no partial report advatage when category instead of tone used as cue

2. experiment: 3X4 matricies had letters & #'s (equal amount), displayed 50ms, after delay, had to report either: only letters or only numbers (partial report) or both (whole report)

3. results: same partial report advantage found

4. conclusions: iconic mem processes info to some degree (b/c able to make distinctions btw categories)

Parameters of Iconic Memory:

1. capacity

2. duration

3. code

1. capacity: 9-12 items

2. duration: >500ms

3. code: raw stimulus info & some kind of processed info

-possible explaination for Cowan's 2 phases of IM:

Phase 1: raw stimulus stored for short time

Phase 2: recoding (processing) of some aspects of stimulus into other forms of representation

1. dif letters presented in R & L ear & other letters presetned simultaneously in BOTH ears

2. impressions able to differentiate 3 distinct inputs

3. echoic mem lasts longer than iconic mem

1. pattern recogniton: identification of sensory stim takes time. Stim need to be compared to pattern stored in STM or LTM. Sensory mem keeps analog stim reprentation available for hte time needed to recognize it

2. stimulus selection: helps us decide which sensory input (out of the vast amount) to pay attention to & which to ignore

3. continuous perception of environment: allows for perception of continuous environment instead of series of snapshots (ex: movie "flicks")

Duration of STM: Brown-Peterson Distractor Technique

PROCUDURE

1. in order to measures duration of STM, REHEARSAL MUST BE PREVENTED

2. procedure: present participants w/ nonsense syllables (ex: AHI, GEB, GGL) & ask to remember

-participants asked to count backwards by 3's from starting # (ex: 821)

Duration of STM: Brown-Peterson Distractor Technique

RESULTS/PASSIVE TRACE DECAY

1. rapid fogetting of small amounts of info (trigrams) w/ in seconds of entering STM

2. after 18s, info decayed slightly, after 30s, gone completely

3. DURATION OF STM: 18-3o seconds

4. passive trace decay: info doesn't register deeply enough so it's passively forgotten

1. performance=NO MATTER HOW LONG INTERVAL, performance was perfect on FIRST TRIAL

2. interpretation: after a few trials, previously presented trigrams interfere w/ new ones

3. participants had problems distinguishing btw letters presented earlier & on current trial

4. proactive interference

Keppel & Underwood:

PROACTIVE & RETROACTIVE INTERFERENCE

1. proactive: previously learned info interferes w/ newly learned info (learning CLF for stats and trying to memorize "new" formula)

2. retroactive interference: recently learned info acts backward in time to interfere w/ recall of info learned in past (difficulties remembering old phone # b/c you memorized the new phone #)

Code of STM: Conrad

(is info in STM coded only acoustically or also visually?)

1. procedure: list of letters visually presented, then participant had to recall letters

2. DV: errors participants made

3. result: errors were acoustic confusions (ex: instead of "d" they said "t": letters that sounded the same). Visual errors rarely made (ex: confusing V with U)

4. conclusion: coding of STM is acoustic (phonological)

Code of STM: Conrad

(What about code of STM in deaf people?)

1. procudure: list of letters visually presented to deaf ppl

2. result: deaf participants made visual confusion errors but NOT ACOUSTIC errors

3. conclusion: info can also be coded visually in STM

Code of STM: Wickens

(Can STM code information Semantically?)

1. task: listened to 3 words, couted backwards for 15 seconds, attempted to recall all 3 words

-3 trials, dif words on each trial, all same category

-on trial 4, words were from a different category (fruits)

2. result: release from proactive interference if category switched (from fruits to furniture)

3. conclusion: info can be coded sematically (meaning) in STM

1. procedure: presented participants w/ string of letters & asked them to memorize

ex: ATTI BMCI AF BSIO SIO U

2. result: on average, particiapants able to recall 7±2 letters in order

3. problem: what if info was meaningful (would it be easier to remember?)

1. capacity of STM increased by chunking

2. a "chunk" is a "meaningful unit of information" (can also be single letter)

3. procedure: participants presented w/ meaningful groups of letters

ex: "ATT IBMM CIA FBI SOS"

4. results: on ave, participants able to recall 7±2 chunks

1. procedure: large list of items to be remembered, free-recall task

2. result: around 2-5 items remembered

3. observation: items in beginning and end of list have a higher probability of being remembered than items in middle of list

-primacy effect: better retention of 1st few words

-recency effect: better retention for last words

1. Serial position curve: provides good example of eplanitory power of A&S model of memory

-primacy effect: rehearsal of 1st items increased chance of them being transfered to LTM
-recency effect: last few words still in STM (subjects report these items 1st during free recall)

-asymptote: items in middle didn't receive as much rehearsal & faded out when replaced by last words

1. search is central operation in STM

2. prodcedure: memory set (string of digits) presented to participant. They are presented w/ 1 target digit & had to decide whether digit was in memory set

3. IV: memory set size (1-10 digits), target present (yes, no)

4. DV: reaction time of response

Sternberg: Scanning Paradigm

Serial and parallel

1. serial: if set size affects RT, then process is serial

*condition when person goes thru the sequence of #'s in head and then decides if target was in sequence

2. parallel: set size has no affect since all digits in set are scanned simultaneously

*condition when person sees ALL #'s in the set at once

Sternberg: Scanning paradigm

Self-terminating vs. exhaustive

1. self terminating: reaction times for yes compared to no trials should be faster (unless target is last digit)

2. in a yes tiral, search would have been terminated as soon as match would have been found.

3. exhaustive: searching all numbers in sequence (serial) even if target is identified, they go thru ENTIRE set of #'s instead of stopping as soon as they recognize target

ex: target is 6, scan set: 2969825

-even tho you find 6, you still continue to scan entire set

-exhaustive=exhausting!

Sternberg: Scanning Paradigm

Results

1. results: Reaction time is a linear function of memory-set size. Give the same memory-set size, you get the same RT for yes & no responses

2. RETRIEVAL FOR STM IS GOVEREND BY A MECHANISM THAT EMPLOYS A SERIAL-EXHAUSTIVE SEARCH ALGORITHM

1. a more elaborate model of STM then A&S's

2. Findings indicate STM holds different kinds of info

3. STM has an ACTIVE processing componenet (working memory)

*same as A&S model except STM is replaced with Working Memory

1. central executive (brain)

2. visuospatial sketchpad (eye)

3. phonological loop

4. phonological store (ear)

5. articulatory control system (voice)

1. holds verbal & auditory information

2 subcomponenets:

-articulatory contorl system (verbal rehersal system/high capacity)

-phonological store (passive/speech based storage system/low capacity: 2 seconds)

1. holds visual and spatial information

ex: solving puzzles, visualizing routes

1. pulls info from LTM

2. coordinates activity of p-loop & V-S-S

3. decides how to divide attention

Phonological Loop Evidence:

Phonological Similarity Effect

1. stores info by the way it sounds

2. letters or words that sound similar are confused

ex:

G C B T V P (harder)

F L K S Y G

Phonological Loop Evidence:

Word Length Effect

1. memory better for short words than long words

2. takes longer to rehearse long words & to produce them during recall

ex: experiment in class

1. while reading words, say "the, the, the...."

2. interferes w/ rehearsal:

-reduces memory span

-eliminates word legnth effect

-reduces phonological similarity effect

(reduces 2 forms of evidence for P-loop & also memory)

Central Executive Experiment

-allocation of attention

1. asked participants to look at pics of faces & scenes

2. told experimental group to focus only on FACES

3. asked experimental group to remember faces

-area in temporal lobe responds to scene recognition: 

-good suppressors (of scene): area not lit/active

-poor suppressors: area lit/active

GOOD SUPPRESSORS=BETTER MEMORY OF FACES

1. helps carry out executive control (most important component of working mem)

2. connections to temporal lobe (acticulatory suppressor: auditory)

3. temp lobe: contains hippocampus=connection to LTM storage

Working Memory & the Brain:

Delayed response Task

1. testing ability of frontal lobe

2. showed monkey 2 plates; 1 had reward (food), other had nothing

2. covered up plates & distracted monkey

3. uncovered plates & asked monkey to identify which plate was showed to him:

-requires working mem to remember object location

Working Mem & Frontal Lobe:

Recording neurons in the PF Cortex

1. trial 1: cue (square in upper left corner present) appears while fixating on target (cross)

2. trial 2: cue dissapears (delay) while fixating on cross; neural firing increases

3. trial 3: target cross dissapears & moneky must point to location of the missing cue (square)-upper left corner

*specific neurons fire for cue & cross→continue to fire in ABSENCE of target/cue

-everything NOT in immediate attention (past 18-30 seconds)

LTM= what happened 5 minutes ago-5 years ago

-lose detail over time

-remembering what you had for breakfast=LTM

1. tried to prove primacy effect is caused by LTM

2. allowed for longer intervals btw words than original experiment (ensured rehearsal)

3. items remembered better=evidence that primacy effect was due to LTM (rehearsal transfered 1st few words into LTM)

1. presented word list

2. waited 30 seconds after finished (occupied person w/ activity)

3. eliminates recency effect (words at end of list) because STM decays when no rehearsal

2. hippocampus

-in temporal lobe

-part of limbic system

-Clive & HM: STM was still intact but LTM was impaired

-KF: STM imparied but LTM ok

1. Clive & HM had no hippocampus or damage to hippcampus

-used double dissociation to find that long term memory is primarily concentrated in hippocampus

Long-Term Memory

Explicit (declarative)               Implicit (procedural)

hippocampus                         diverse brain areas

episodic & semantic          rep priming & procedural mem

1. memory for facts and events; knowledge that can be declared

2. often aquired in a single trial

3. directly accessible to conscious recollection

4. unusual events are remembered better than ordinary

1. procedural knowledge ("how" to do something)

2. repetition priming (does previous priming influence performance?)

3. memory for everything that isn't covered by explicit memory

ex: conditioned responses, habits

1. memory for experienced events

2. memory of where & when event happened

3. spatio-temporal signature (contain knowledge about context-place/time)

4. autonoetic awareness: recollection, mental time travel

1. memory for facts or gerenal world knowledge (includes language)

ex: "Paris is the capital of France"

2.  doesn't contain knowledge about where/when info was learned

3. believed to start out as episodic memories & lose spatial-temporal signature (where/when) over time

4. noetic consciousness: familiarity

Evidence that semantic & episodic are seperated

KC: semantic NO episodic

1. "knows" his brother died but can't remember what funeral was like

2. "knows" common facts (ex: where utensils are in kitchen)

3. no ability to "re-experience" a past event

Evidence that semantic & episodic are seperate:

Italian woman: episodic NO semantic

1. trouble identifying everyday things like meaning of words (ex: what a strawberry is)

2. cannot recognize famous people

3. able to tell you what she did that day or for her birthday last week

1. NO-KC proves this theory wrong

2. semantic facts related to personal history (ex: date of birthday) will be remembered better

3. semantic memory does influence our attention

ex: 2 friends watching football game, Bob is expert, Allen doesn't like football-Bob has better episodic memory of game (remembering certain plays) b/c his semantic knowledge of football is good

1. no episodic but still have semantic memory

2. develop normally (language, knowledge) until in school

3. proves there has to be a different "route" to aquire semantic memories

ex: man in video-could remember facts but not his childhood (loss of episodic & spatial memory)

Implicit Memory: Repetition Priming

TULVING'S EXPERIMENT

1. Tulving:

-training: 96 words

-test: word fragments (1/2 repeats, 1/2 new)

2. participant more likely to fill in stem with word that was seen previously (matched primed words)

ex: saw word "apple" during training and filled in stem of "a_ _ le" with p's

-didn't consciously try to learn/remember primed words→implicit memory

Tulving & implicit memory: Recall vs. Recognition

1. less forgetting in implicit memory task (word completion)

2. more forgetting for recognition task (explicit)

3. did a picture fragment completion and primed pictures recognized at more fragmented levels than new pictures

1. repetition of same stimulus increases liking and "truthfullness" (due to familarity)

2. works w/ advertising: consumers prefered to look at old/familiar advertisements rather than new/unfamiliar

-another example is hindsight bias

1. shallow encoding (features or stimulus like color, sound) vs deep encoding (processing word for meaning, synoyms)

2. hypothesis: deeper LOP=better memory for stimulus

Type I (rote)→shallow processing/bad mem

Type II (elaborative)→deeper processing/better mem

Procedure: participants presented w/ 24 words, encoding task varied in 2 ways:

IV: Level of processing: 5 levels (shallow-deepest)

IV: told they would/wouldn't be tested for memory

DV: free recall of words (% correct)

conclusion: small difference btw incidental (implicit) and intentional (explicit) recall of words

Self-Reference & Generational  Effect

(levels of processing)

1. when you relate material to yourself, it will be better remembered  (self-reference)

2. self-generated material is more memorable than material that is passively read

(after reading, test yourself [free recall] instead of reading info over again [passive])

Major Problems with Levels of Processing:

-Circular reasoning

-subjectivity "shallow" vs. "depth"

1. circular reasoning: depth processing hasn't been defined independent of memory performance

2. subjectivity: how can we define what constitues "deep" processing vs. "shallow" processing?

Procedure: 32 sentences, incidental encoding

IV: Encoding Task

-Group 1: Rhyming task (shallow): does target word rhyme w/ word X?

-Group 2: semantic task (deep): does target word make sense in this sentence?

IV: Memory Test

-standard recognition: 1/2 participants in each group had to decide whether words were targets in study phase

-rhyming recognition: 1/2 participants in each group had to decide whether test words rhymed w/ targets

1. Good LOP: semantic study group (deep processing) outpreformed rhyming study group (shallow) in a standard recognitin test

2. Bad LOP: shallow study test group outpreformed deep study group in a rhyming recognition test

-disproved that "deeper" processing=better memory; more task dependent

1. Central asusmption:

kind of processing that is useful at encoding depends on the kind of memory test that will be given

-encoding processes that are most effective match the retrieval conditions

(ex: studying for GS, test my free recall b/c that's how I'll be tested)

-deep processing= best performance on free recall test

-2 conditions:

1. studied underwater

2. studied on land

-when tested:

1. 1/2 underwater group had to recall on land & 1/2 recalled underwater

2. same for land-studiers

results: best recall occured when encoding and retrieval occured in same location

1. learning is associated with a specific internal state

-better memory if person's mood at encoding (ex: mood while studying) matches mood during retrieval (mood when taking test)

-did experiment where the placed participants in "sad" or "happy" conditions & tested them when in same or different condition

-did better when tested in same condition as when they learned material

M: match learning (studying) and testing conditions

-same environment (quiet), same mood, same location

   E:  elaborative rehearsal; make meaningful connections to material

T: test yourself while studying instead of reading material passively over and over again

O: organize material to make it easier to memorize

1. transforms new memories from fragile state to more permanent state (like a zip file)

-synaptic consolidation occurs at synapses (rapid)

-systems consolidation involves gradual reorganization of circuts in the brain (happens during sleep & over time)

1. learning & memory represented in brain by physiological changes at synapse

"neurons that fire together will wire together"

-increased # of neurons & same neurons fired when stimulus presented again

1. enhanced firing of neurons after repeated stimulation

2. structural changes & enhanced responding

structural changes:

-more receptors

-more neurons firing

-need less stimulation to fire

Standard model of consolidation

(involvement of hippocampus)

-retrieval depends on hippocampus during consolidation; after consolidation hippocampus is not needed

-reactivation: hippocampus replays neural activity associated w/ memory

Systems Consolidation Process

Fragile Memories →Permanent Memories

-synaptic: rapidly over minutes

-systems: slow reorganization of circuts w/in brain regions (week, months, even YEARS)

-eventually (after consolidation) hippocampus is no longer needed→cortical areas form connections w/in themselves & activiate memory

Graded Amnesia (HM)

Support for Standard Model

After HM's hippocampus was removed:

-memories right before surgery were forgotten

-memories increased the further back in childhood he went (because those memories were more consolidated/permanent)

-newer memories (happened prior to surgery): weren't remembered b/c weren't consolidated

Beliefs≠Reality

Eyewitness Truths

Eyewitnesses

-can have their memories altered (proves memories aren't permanent)

-memories are not accurate (picking wrong person in line up)

-high confidence even if inaccurate

-have false (implanted) memories

1. procedure: participants watch short movie of car accident and are then presented with sentences aimed at altering their perception

ex: "how fast were vehicles when...

Group 1: "they smashed into each other?"

Group 2: "bumped...

Group 3: "contacted"

-this altered their estimates of speed of car when asked

(smashed group had highest speed estimate while contacted group had lowest speed estimate)

1. participants saw same movie

-2 weeks later, presented w/ questions about accident

IV1: biasing word in participants sentence (smashed vs contacted)

IV2: "did you see broken glass?"-false memory

results: the probability of "remembering" seeing broken glass increases with speed estimate

ex: "smash" group was most likely to report seeing broken glass (FALSE MEMORY)

-reasoning: if effect of post-event info is not due to bias (word) but rather due to MEMORY DISTORTION, then it should be possible to induce false memories

-proved this theory with "broken glass" question (false memory)-groups claim they saw glass when really there was none

Does Misinformaiton affect visual recogniton?

Loftus: experiment w/ pictures of car & stop sign

1. procedure: participants see 30 slide of car accident. Fill in questionare that contains 1 critical question:

"did another car pass the red....

Group 1: "...stopped at stop sign"

Group 2: "....stopped at yield sign"

2. results: those who received misleading info (yield sign instead of stop sign) are below chance recognition

-report seeing same sign in slide show as in questionaire

1. Memory-trace replacement (Loftus): MPI replaces original memory completely

2. retroactive interference: MPI interferes with (but doesn't eliminate) original memory

3. source monitoring error: MPI is mistakenly identified as what was originally experienced (source memory error)

Creating flase memories

Loftus: "Asparagus, a Love Story"

-implating autobiographical memories

1. design:

-measurement before/after

-false feedback & inmage instruction

2. results:

-1/3 believes false memory (told liked asparagus 1st time they tried it, told to imagine that experience)

-affects preference, money spent on asparagus and choices in resturants for food

Eyewitness testimonies:

"how should line-ups or photo identifications be conducted so they reveal more accurate memories?"

1. show one photo at a time (so they can compare it to their own memory)

2. tell them person may/may not be in line up

3. no biased presentor (detective/cop on case)

4. length of presentation (10-15 seconds tops)