-telling the color of the ink instead of what it says

- results: when you have an automatic and controlled process and attempt to do the controlled one, the automatic task will interfere

-selective attention

-paying attention to one task and ignoring other things

-listening to stimulus in both ears while ignoring one and repeating the other(shadowing)

-the unattended message is not remembered (barely remember meaning or if it is in another language)

-Broadbent

-we filter out the detected stimuli before processing occurs

- Filter after recognition

-don't notice unattended information after it's recognized unless the recognition stage decides it's important (e.g. own name, etc.).  So meaning is assigned to all stimuli, but only attended stuff reaches conscious awareness.

-eye movements

- You can't process all messages completely, so select one channel, usually by eye movements. This is the typical way attention is moved around:  you move your eyes and head to focus on the relevant information...ignored information is outside of vision or in peripheral vision

-Posner

- Subject is asked to look at a fixation point in the center, then press a button when a rectangle flashes on the screen. Arrow points to the side on which there is an 80% chance that the box will appear.   People are faster when the arrow is correct (valid case, 80% of the trials) than when the arrow is incorrect and points in the direction opposite to where the box appears (invalid case, 20% of the trials).

-Treisman

-we have "maps" for features and when we;re looking for multiple features we must "glue" the maps

- searching for something that can be distinguished from the background by a unitary feature

- independent of number of distractors

-no single feature that will allow you to discriminate the object

-requires attentional "glue"

- dependent on number of distractors

- Observed principally in patients with right parietal lobe damage.

-They neglect to process the contralateral (left) sides of displays to the point of reporting about them.

-This is despite being able to recognize objects in the left side of visual space if they are presented without something else on the right side of space.

-the visuospatial neglect is just difficult disengaging attention

- So attention stays locked on to the right side of space, can't break loose

-Maybe disengagement mechanism is in right hemisphere, and that's why most neglect cases show damage here.

-hemispheres inhibit one another

-damage to one hemisphere causes the other hemisphere to dominate

-we remember more visual info than other info

-poor when: 

*for unattended and unimportant details

*when stimuli lack meaning

*when things are very similar

-good recognition has:

*attention to details

*meaningfulness and relevancy

*distinctives alternatives

-first showed 2560 then 10000 pictures

-estimated if showed 1,000,000 subjects could remember 730000 in 2 days

-there are a lot of information so we have details to pick from

-4 stimulus conditions

-memory test: old/new recognition test

-immediately and 7 weeks after 

-results:

-memory for all 3 picture types(photos, line drawings, and embellished line drawings) better than memory for verbal descriptions

-no difference between 3 visual conditions (suggests amount of detail isnt critical factor)

-we code stimuli with a visual code and a verbal code

-there are concrete words (can be coded both verbally and non-verbally) and  abstract words (can be coded verbally but not non-verbally)

-EVIDENCE:

*concrete words are remembered better

-internal representation of our physical environment that store the spatial features of the external world

-we learn the spatial layout of a map, not just the sequence of turns (rats in maze w/food)

-we use shortcuts and heuristics

-newer concept (developed out of STM models)

-emphasizes both storage and active processing of info

-memory for small amount of info for a few seconds 

-Inability to remember events occurring after brain injury.

-effects the hippocampus

-Patient H.M. had impaired LTM and normal WM

-Baddely

-we have a phonological buffer, visuospatial sketchpad, and a center executive

-sound based storer

-

-conscious recollection

-declarative knowledge (recall and recognition)

-unconscious change

-includes procedural knowledge (i.e. riding a bike)

-priming

-inability to retrieve explicit info prior to trauma

-temporally graded:

*memory of old info is typically intact

*more recent info is more vulnerable

-test number of moves to reach solution

-amnesics and control performed similarly 

-priming=complete more old fragments than new

-result: amnesics show normal priming, but poor recognition memory (they dont remember having seen the words)

-subjects given word list, and word stem list

-Explicit test: say the word from the list that began with that stem

-Implicit test: say the first word that comes to mind

-explicit results: hippocampus and frontal lobe activity increased

-implicit results: posterior visual area activity decreased

-general knowledge; memory of facts

-

-memory of personal episodes

-tied to time and place

-personal perspective

-allows inferences about members of a class

-they're helpful b/c we treat similar things the same

-not always based on physical similarities 

-taught them to peck one of four keys depending on whether a picture of a cat, flower, car, or chair was shown. Got reinforcement for pressing the correct key for each type. After training (40 per day for 30 days), they were 64% accurate at pecking with new exemplars (81% accurate with old exemplars). Chance was 25%. Worse than humans, but well above chance.