Term
| Sperling Whole Report Experiment (1960) |
|
Definition
-George Sterling tested how much information people take in with briefly presented stimuli
-Showed people a cluster of letters for 50 milliseconds, and people had to share how many of the letters they remembered using the whole report method
-On average people reported 4/12 letters correct |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When participants were asked to share everything that they saw |
|
|
Term
| Sperling Partial Report Experiment (1960) |
|
Definition
| When Sperling has people try to report all of the letters they saw, they only reported 4/12. So instead what he would do was he'd show them the word list, and then he would play different tones to represent the different rows he wanted to show them, either immediately after or a delay. (EX: High tone = First row). The people with the immediate tone cue got 3.3/4 correct! the people with a delayed cue got worse the longer the delay was. |
|
|
Term
| Sperling's Results Suggest |
|
Definition
Duration of Iconic Memory is very short (0.5-2.0s)
The Capacity of iconic memory is large is you access it quickly enough |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When a sparkler moves, it leaves a "trail of light." This is caused by the retention of the perception of light. When we see things or are exposed to stimuli, they stay in our brains for a little bit. Thats what Sterling studied! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The brief sensory memory for visual stimuli
EX: seeing a sparkler move for a few seconds, the trail remains for a bit |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The brief sensory memory for auditory stimuli. Its when we hear a sound and it stays in the mind for a bit. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The initial memory we have as we are exposed to a stimulus. We are exposed to a countless amount of memory stimuli but only selected memory gets put into further processing. All other sensory memory is discarded after 1 second. |
|
|
Term
| Capacity of Sensory memory |
|
Definition
| Extremely large, if not unlimited. Only remember what we choose to keep though, goes to further processing. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The process of going from the input to sensory memory, to short term memory, and when it is rehearsed enough it goes into long term memory. Has clear distinction between long term and short term memory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Process that initially stores the information into our LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Period between learning and testing. Getting the information stored into your brain |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The process of retrieving our stored memory and using it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| What you do with a memory while its in memory, repeating a stimulus over and over |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The system involved in storing small amounts of information for a brief period of time. |
|
|
Term
| Brown-Peterson (1959)COGLAB (AKA Peterson-Peterson) |
|
Definition
People were given three letters and then a number and were asked to count down from that number by 3s. The people were then asked to recall the 3 letters, at different times. Some were asked after 2 seconds, some were asked after 18 seconds of counting down by 3s. People who were asked 3 seconds after could remember 80% of the time, people who were asked 18 seconds later could only remember 12% of the time.
-After the first trial, people remembered a good amount, even after 18 seconds
-After many trials, people after 18 seconds could only remember 12%! This showed Proactive interference, or that new information interferes with previously learned info. |
|
|
Term
| Duration of STM without rehearsal |
|
Definition
| Without rehearsal, something will stay in STM for about 15-20 seconds. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| 7 +/- 2 items (5-9 items) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The one who said that STM can hold 5-9 things (7+ or - 2). He wrote it in a paper stating that STM has a set capacity. This is proven in the Digit Test! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A test to see how many digits a person can remember. Person is presented with a set of numbers starting at 3 digits and increasing a digit with each trial.
Most people remember up to 5-8 Digits! Shows that STM has a specific capacity, usually 5-9 items. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone is presented with a low of information and chunks it together into groups to remember it. It allows us to expand the STM capacity magic number of 7(+/-2). |
|
|
Term
| Chase and Simon Chess Experiment (1973) |
|
Definition
Chase and Simon showed chess masters and chess beginners chess boards. Some chess boards were taken from real games, and some chess boards were just the pieces put in random places. When the people had to recall real chess boards, the chess masters did much better than the beginners, because they were able to use chunking and determine which pieces could possibly go where. When in random order, the chess masters and beginners did the same!
-Shows how much chunking can enhance STM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Memory trace weakens over time, can be prevented by rehearsal
-this is a loss of AVAILABILITY |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When the learning of one thing causes the loss of the memory trace of something else. Learning new info makes us forget old info |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When old information prevents the learning of new information. It is forgetting new things because we remember the old ones. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Information is stored in Short Term Memory based on Visual and Auditory Coding.
EX: Pear and Fair would get coded in STM because the rhyme. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Storing something in memory, usually STM, based off of what it sounds like |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Storing something in our memory, usually STM, based off what it looks like |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Storing something in Memory based off of its meaning
EX: Pear and Apple would get stored because they're both fruit |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Storing something in STM or LTM because of its meaning |
|
|
Term
| Wickens Proactive Inhibition Experiment (1976) |
|
Definition
On each trial, people were presented words from one of two categories, fruit or professions. People would listen to 3 words from each category, count backward for 15 seconds, and then try to remember the words. They did this for 4 trials.
Once, people did 4 straight trials of fruit, with people getting worse each time (as they just had more fruit to remember). A second time, they did 3 trials of fruit, with people getting worse each time, and then a trial of jobs. Because this was the first time people had to remember jobs and not fruit they did much better, showing a release of proactive interference! and that semantic meaning memory occurs in STM. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Processes that can be controlled by the person and may differ from one task to another. EX: rehearsal, getting yourself to remember something, is a controlled process |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Short Term Memory is not only used for storage, but active processes as well! (Like having a converstaion hence why semantic STM coding is possible!
-STM damage leaves LTM in tact, showing it is not necessary for coding either. |
|
|
Term
| Baddeley Dual Task Experiment (1974) |
|
Definition
People were asked keep some numbers in their head, while reading a passage. People were able to do it! the less they had to remember, the faster they read and less error they made, but even at the max remembrance load their memory was still good
-Showed the Modal Model to be false, as people could do two STM activities (remembering the numbers and the passage) at once! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A Limited capacity system for temporary storage and manipulation of information for complex tasks such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning. It is another word for Short term memory, but in includes active processing as well as storage |
|
|
Term
| Differences between Short Term Memory and Working Memory |
|
Definition
1. Short term memory is concerned with storing information, where working memory is the manipulation of information (remembering a phone number vs remembering numbers while reading)
2. Short term memory consists of a single component, whereas working memory consists of a number of components |
|
|
Term
| Baddeley's Working Memory Model |
|
Definition
| The idea that short term memory, working memory, consists of 3 factors, the Phonological Loop, the VisuoSpatial Sketch Pad, and the Central Executive |
|
|
Term
| Editted Baddeley's Working Memory Model |
|
Definition
| Baddeley added a 4th component to his working memory model, the Episodic buffer. I don't need to know what it is, but know that its there |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The part of the Baddeley Working Memory Model that is responsible for auditory and verbal information. It has the phonological store and the articulatory rehearsal process, which store and rehearse the auditory and verbal information.
-It is the STM in Modal Model |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A part of the phonological loop of Baddeley's working memory. A limited capacity that holds auditory and verbal information. |
|
|
Term
| Articulatory rehearsal Process |
|
Definition
| The part of phonological loop of Baddeleys working memory. It is the part that rehearses the auditory and verbal information and prevents it from decaying. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The part of the Baddeley Working memory model that focuses on visual and spatial information. To rehearse this information, we think of pictures of things and use imagery |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The part of the Working Memory model where major working memory occurs. It pulls information from Long Term Memory, and coordinates that with the activity in the phonological loop and visuospatial sketch pad by focusing on specific parts of a task, and shifting out attention amongst tasks. |
|
|
Term
| Example of Working Memory Model in Place |
|
Definition
Person driving a car. They listen to the passenger to get directions while also hearing the radio. The person says to turn left at the light.
-The phonological loop takes in what the passenger says
-The visuospatial sketch pad puts the idea of where to turn in place
-The central executive puts them together as to where to turn, as well as tune the radio noise out |
|
|
Term
| Phonological Similarity Effect |
|
Definition
| The confusion of letters or words that sound the same. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The idea that when trying to remember words, we are better at remembering shorter ones.
Braddely had people memorize a list of short words and a list of long ones and the shorter words were remembered more
-Stated that people are able to remember words they can pronounce in 2 seconds or less! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Repetition of irrelevant sounds that acts a distractor and reduces memory. |
|
|
Term
| Word Length Effect experiment with Articulatory Suppression |
|
Definition
| People were again asked to memorize a list of short words and a list of long words. BUT this time, people were asked to say the words "the the the" while remembering the words, causing articulatory suppression. This showed that articulatory suppression, or saying "the the the the" reduces memory, but also eliminates the word length effect! we remember big and small words at the same rate when repeating unnecessary information |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The creation of visual images in the mind in the absence of a physical visual stimulus. |
|
|
Term
| Shepard and Metzler Mental Rotation Experiment COGLAB |
|
Definition
| People were asked to look at a certain shape, and then determine if another shape was identical to the presented one. Alot of the time, it would be the same object but rotated around in different directions. It was found that the more something was rotated from the original picture, the longer the reaction time it took to determine if it was the same picture or not. This showed the operation of the visuospatial sketch pad and how it involved rotation through space |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A trouble for those who usually have frontal lobe damage, it is when you Repeatedly perform the same behavior even if its not doing anything for you to achieve the desired goal. |
|
|
Term
| Delayed Response Task Experiment |
|
Definition
Monkeys had their pre frontal cortex damaged or removed, and then they were asked to observe where a piece of food was between 2 trays. Then there was a delay, and they were tested to see if they could find the food. If they could not see the food, they could not find it. This proved that the prefrontal cortex has to do with short term and working memory!
-Also proved why babies cannot know something is there without seeing it, because their prefrontal cortexes are not yet developed. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The central exectuive does not work as well with age, so our working memory decreases with age. |
|
|
Term
| Funahashi Monkey Experiment |
|
Definition
This was another experiment with looking at monkeys and their prefontal cortexes. It recorded prefrontal neurons of a monkey and had the monkey focus on an X in the middle of a screen, and while this occurred, there was a a blue square that appeared in one of the corners of the screen. WHen the square appeared, a neuron in the prefrontal cortex was fired, and when the square went away, other neurons in the prefrontal cortex were firing. When the X was removed, the monkey moved its eyes to where the square was, proving it not only remembered where it was, but the prefrontal cortex activation in the brain is what caused it.
-This showed that information of memory remains there as long as the neurons keep firing! |
|
|
Term
| Vogel brain activation in humans experiment (2005) |
|
Definition
| People's brain activity was measured during a task. They were asked to look at a cue, an arrow pointing in a direction, and then asked to say how many red bars were in that cues direction. However, there were also blue bars there acting as distractors in some of the trials. They tested people with HIGH and LOW memory capacity. It was shown that the distractors had little effect on the brain activity of those with HIGH memory capacity. However, in the LOW memory capacity, with the presence of the blue distractors it increased their brain activity by a lot. This shows that people with high memory capacity are efficient at ignoring distractors and irrelevant blue stimuli didnt take up memory space, where as low memory capacity participants it did take up a lot of space. This test shows how effective a persons working memory is, and dictates how people create intelligence tests. |
|
|
Term
| Gazzaley Supression Experiment (2005) |
|
Definition
| People were given a set of pictures and asked to pay attention to the faces. They then were shown a face and asked if that face was part of the series of pictures they just saw. This tested people's ability to suppress unnecessary stimuli. It showed that Younger People are better at suppressing than Older people. It also showed that some old people are better at it than others, with some people have more activation in the brain. Shows that some people are more efficient at supressing memory than others |
|
|
Term
| Task Difference Experiment |
|
Definition
| People were asked to either hear words or look at pictures. They were then asked questions about what they saw or heard. People were either to answer by pointing or speaking it verbally. People who got the stimuli verbally were better when answering by pointing, and people who looked at pictures were better when answering verbally. This is because we are more efficent when storing things when using the verbal spatial sketch pad and the phonological loop together, not one of them twice. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The system that is responsible for storing information for long periods of time. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The loss of the ability to create new memories. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The loss of memory for events that happened in the past |
|
|
Term
| Length of Long Term Memory |
|
Definition
| Long Term memory covers a span that stretches from about 30 seconds to your earliest memories! 30 seconds on! |
|
|
Term
| Murdoch Serial Position Experiment (1962) COGLAB |
|
Definition
| Someone reads to someone else a list of 15 words. They are then asked to repeat the words that they remember. Whether or not they remember the word has to do with the words "position" on the list, or how far up or down the list was. Remembering the first few words are a result from them having time to go into LTM, or the primacy effect. Remembering the last few words are a result of them staying in STM, or the recency effect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone is given a list of words, the words at the beginning of the list have an advantage of being remembered because they have more time to be rehearsed, and this end up in our LTM. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone is given a list of words, the words at the end have an advantage of being remembered because they are the most recent ones, and thus remain in our short term memory when being tested. |
|
|
Term
| Rundus Serial Position Experiment with a delay COGLAB |
|
Definition
| People were asked to listen to a list and report the words they remembered like before. But this time, people had to wait 30 seconds before they reported. This eliminated the recency effect, as participants could no longer just rely on STM to remember the words at the end. Thus, people did worse and and worse the longer down the list of words. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
During the serial position experiment, if someone is given an unusual word, they are more likely to remember that word than they normally would on the regular list
EX: the 7th word on the list is ASSHOLE. Even though people would normally have a hard with a word at this position, because it is unusual people are more likely to remember it. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| LTM coding is mainly semantic (meaning) coding. EX: putting pine and oak together as trees |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The fact that someone can have a brain impairment in one area and be fine in another. EX: STM vs LTM |
|
|
Term
| Neuropsycholigcal evidence of Double Dissociations in memory |
|
Definition
-Clive Wearing (good STM, but can't form new LTM)
-HM (good STM, but cannot form new Long Term Memories) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| HM was a guy who suffered from epileptic seizures. He had his hippocampus removed to help with the seizures. It helped with them, but caused him the inability to form new long term memories. Thus, HM has STM functioning but not LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| She was someone who had damage in her brain that prevented her from forming new short term memories but her long term memory was in tact. |
|
|
Term
| Serial Position Effect with more word time |
|
Definition
| People were asked to listen to a list of words like before, but this time they were asked to listen for 5 seconds between each word instead of 2. This caused people to remember more words because LTM was enhanced, because it allowed more time for rehearsal. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The likelihood of something being stored in LTM is related to how long it is in STM |
|
|
Term
| Massed vs Distributed Spacing for Memory |
|
Definition
| Massed is when you cram for a test, distributed is when you study once a day for a while. It is proven by Glenberg (76) that distributed spacing is better! |
|
|
Term
| Glenberg Memory Retention Experiment |
|
Definition
A list of words was provided to someone. They were then asked to list the words they remembered, with all of the words being presented at some point on the list twice. It was shown that the farther apart, or greater spacing, a word had with itself, the better someone was at recalling that word.
-The amount of practice was the same (twice), but the memory was different depending on the distribution
-In general, the more distributed the word the better you were |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
People had HM try and do a mirror tracing study, which was they had to trace a shape by not looking at the shape itself rather the reflection of it through a mirror. The results showed that HM got better over time! Thus proving there are more than 1 types of LTM! He was able to implicitly get better with the task over time, proving he had implicit memory fine, but could not explicitly remember things about the brain
-This was an example of improving his procedural, skill, memory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Unconscious memory, that we are not aware of |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Conscious Memory, that we are aware of
-It consists of episodic and semantic memory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A part of explicit memory in long term memory, it is our stored knowledge of personal experience |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A Part of Explicit Memory in long term memory, it is stored knowledge and memory for facts. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A type of Implicit Memory. It is when we have a change in a response to a stimulus after a previous presentation of the same stimulus.
EX: reading a word is easier after seeing it for the first time. we become primed to it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
It is a type of implicit memory, The memory for doing things that require action, AKA skill memory.
EX: typing on a key board or |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
It is a type of implicit memory. It is when someone pairs a neutral stimulus with a non-neutral response.
EX: almost getting in accident with red SUV, now fear of seeing red car. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Our ability to identify something that was encountered earlier. A multiple choice question is a recognition question. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Sach had someone read a passage about Gaileleo, and then had them read 4 sentences. He asked them which sentences were the same as part of the passage that they read. One of the sentences was word for word, where two of the four we closely worded but not exact. This tested people's recognition memory, or their ability to identify previous stimuli |
|
|
Term
| Semantic Memory Enhancing Episodic Memory |
|
Definition
| An example would be if two people were watching a football game together. One person doesn't know a lot about football where as one does. When asked about the game, the one with little semantic knowledge of football would say something like "I remember a football game" whereas someone with a lot of semantic football knowledge would say something like "I remember the pass over the left side on third and 10", influencing their episodic memories. |
|
|
Term
| Graf Memory Type Experiment |
|
Definition
| People with amnesia were asked to perform a task where they were given a list of words. Half of the time, they were told to repeat the words. The other half, they would be given half of the word they already saw and had to decipher what it would be, like gar___ to garbage. When people had to recall the words completely, they did poorly, as it involved episodic memory, which is poor in amnesiacs. But when they only had to fill in the word, they did just as well if not a little bit better than the normal people! Showing Amnesia effects peoples explicit memories, but not their implicit ones. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When you are exposed to a direct stimulus and it enhances your memory. For example seeing the word bird before an exam causes you to put the answer "bird" on a question |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When the enhancement caused by a priming stimulus is based on the meaning of a stimulus.
EX When you see the word furniture, you a primed to respond to a question with something like "chair" |
|
|
Term
| Gollin Picture Fill Experiment |
|
Definition
| Gollin tested five people with korsakoff's syndrome, a disease that causes you to lose your memory after too much alcohol. He had them look at a fragment of a picture, and tried to have them identify what the picture was (an airplane) he had them do this everyday. It showed that each day of the experiment the participants got better showing less and less error! proving that even with memory loss from korsakoff syndrome people's implicit memories remain intact, and are able to get stronger. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Participants are more likely to rate statements they have read or heard before as being true, simply because they have been exposed to them before
*This is implicit memory in our everyday life |
|
|
Term
| Implicit Association Test |
|
Definition
People had a harder time associating good words with arabs and bad words with people of any other race
-Shows Implicit feelings about Arabs, even if explicit memories of them could be fine |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| People were shown 15 pictures of pennies, with only one of them being a real penny, and all the other ones being fake in some way. People were asked to identify which was the real penny. A lot of the time, people have a hard time determining which penny is the real penny. This refutes the Total Time Hypothesis and thus the Modal Model of LTM! We see pennies all the time, but our LTM of them is not clear |
|
|
Term
| Glenberg et al Maintenance Experiment (1977) |
|
Definition
| Glenberg had people remember a 4 digit number, and then had them rehearse a word for a period of time (2-8 seconds). They repeated words for 64 trials. Then people were then tested NOT on the number they had to remember, but the different words they had to repeat! Most people did poorly, with only a 12% recall. This shows how Maintenance rehearsal is not an effective way to store information in LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone repeats something over and over in order to remember it, in order to remember it. This helps people maintain information in their STM and WM, but not an effective way of transferring info to LTM |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| It occurs when you make connections between the meaning of an item and something you know in order to remember that item. It is a good way to store LTM information |
|
|
Term
| Levels of Processing Theory |
|
Definition
| The idea memory depends on how information is encoded, with "deeper" processing, or processing with a lot of attention to the stimuli's meaning, resulting in better encoding. While Shallow processing, which pays little attention to meaning, leads to lesser encoding. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When encoding something with little attention to its meaning. EX: looking at physical features such as number of letters in a word |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Encoding that involves close attention, focusing on an item's meaning and relating it to something else. |
|
|
Term
| Craik and Tulving Depth of Processing Experiment(1975) |
|
Definition
| Participants were presented with a question, followed by a specific word, followed by the participant's response. They were either asked if the word was printed in capital letters (shallow), if the word rhymed with another word (deeper), or a fill in the blank question (deepest). After all the questions, participants were asked to recall all the words. The people who did shallow processing remembered the least amount of words, then the deeper people with the rhyme, then the fill in the blank question deepest processing people remembered the most. |
|
|
Term
| Examples of Deep Processing Elaboration |
|
Definition
-putting words in complex sentences
-forming visual images
-linking words to yourself
-Generating Information
*pairing things up yourself
-Organizing info to fit pre existing knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When you generating information yourself, or learn it yourself, you learn better than when you passively receive the information |
|
|
Term
| Browner et al organization tree Experiment (1969) |
|
Definition
| People were split into two groups. One group was presented with an "organization tree" for minerals, animals, clothing, and transportation pre grouped together for them. The other group was given a tree but the words were in a random order. The people with the organized tree remembered 73 of the words, while the people with the disorganized tree remembered 21 words. This shows that organizing information helps us encode it into our minds. |
|
|
Term
| Bransford and Johnson Balloon Picture Experiment (1972) |
|
Definition
| People were presented with a passage and a picture describing the passage. Some people receive the picture first, then the story, and others received the story, then the picture. It was shown that participants who saw the picture before the passage remembered twice as much as the people who saw the picture after the story. This proves that organization helps memory encoding. The picture provides us with a way to organize the story, which makes the information about the story much easier to remember. |
|
|
Term
| Roedigar and Karpicke School Study Experiment (2006) |
|
Definition
| Participants were to read a story for 7 minutes and then math problems for 2 minutes (as a distractor). Then half of the people just reread the story for 7 minutes, while the other half were tested on it. They were tested it on it again 5 minutes, 2 days, and 1 week later! It showed that after 5 minutes, the re-reading people did better. But after 2 days and 1 week, the people who were tested actually did better! This proved the testing effect, that people test better when pre-testing themselves, to be accurate. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| People are more likely to remember things in the long term when they test themselves on it. |
|
|
Term
| What determines LTM Retention? |
|
Definition
-Amount of Practice (total time hypothesis)
-Spacing (cramming vs. studying for a while/ massed vs distributed)
-Depth of Processing (maintenance vs. elaboration, shallow vs deep processing)
-Organization (importance of pre existing knowledge to help organize new memories)
-Retrieval Practice (Like the Testing Effect, practice getting the memories out of our mind) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Words or other stimuli that help us remember information in our memory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When someone is presented with retrieval cues to aid in the recall of previously experienced stimuli
EX: Is Helena the capital of Montana? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When someone is asked to simply recall a stimuli.
EX: What is the capital of Washington? |
|
|
Term
| Tulving and Pearlstone Recall Experiment(1966) |
|
Definition
| People were given words from specific categories to remember , such as birds, furniture, professions, etc. They then were tested in two different ways. One group was tested with a recall test, and had to just say the words that they could remember. Another group had to say the words they could remember, but were given the categories, and thus was a recognition test. The results showed that recognition tests have students perform better, as 40% of the words were recalled in the recall group and 75% of the words were recalled in the recognition group. |
|
|
Term
| Mantyla Retrieval Cue Experiment (1986) |
|
Definition
Mantyla showed his participants a list of 600 nouns, such as banana. With each noun, they were to give 3 words that described that noun, like yellow, bunches, and edible. Participants were then given a surprise memory test, and were given the three words they gave. When people saw the 3 words they gave they remembered 90% of the words!
Then people's words were swapped with other people who did the experiment before, and this time when using other people's words people only got 55% of the words right! Then people who didnt previously take the experiment were studied and given the 3 words of others, and only 17% of the nouns were correct. This shows not only that retrieval cues are effective for retrieving memory, but they are much more effective when they are our own cues. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The principle that states that we encode information along with its context!
-The effectiveness of our ability to retrieve and use our memories depends directly on the match between the retrieval cues (what brings it out) and the information stored.
-So, if you study in one area, you will test best in that area, because the information you remember will be encoded along with the place you studied it! |
|
|
Term
| Thompson and Tulving Encoding Specificity COGLAB Experiment (1970) |
|
Definition
Participants were either cued with with no cue, cue A (hand), or cue B (tree) during studying, during being tested, or both. They were then tested to remember words. When there was no test cue people remembered about 25% of their words. When there was a cue at the test but not during the study, people remembered 50% of their words, just based off of their semantic word knowledge. The people who got the study cue but no test cue only remembered 25%, same as the normal people. When people got cue A for study and cue B for test, it was the same as getting just cue B at the test, and people remembered 50% of the words. The recall was at the highest when the studier's cue matched the test cue, and they remebered 75% of the words.
LONG STORY SHORT: How you study words effects how you will remember those words |
|
|
Term
| Godden and Baddeley Diving Experiment (1975) |
|
Definition
| Participants were split into two groups, where half of them studied words underwater and half of them studied words on land. They then were tested, splitting the two groups into four groups. one group studied underwater, and tested underwater. Another group studied underwater, and was tested on land, and so on. It was shown that the participants who studied underwater did better underwater! And those who studied on land did better on land. This proved encoding specificity, or that context can be used as a retrieval cue and testing in that context increases the strength of that cue to memory trace match. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Learning that is associated with a specific internal state, such as mood or awareness. The happier you are when you study, the better you'll do on a test when you're happy |
|
|
Term
| Eich and Matcalfe's Mood Experiment |
|
Definition
| People's moods were manipulated to happy or sad. They then were asked to study a set of words. They then were tested, with again some of their moods being altered. If people tested sad and studied sad, they did better! also, if they studied sad and tested happy they did worse! This proves state-dependent learning, that states that we can learn based off of our internal state. |
|
|
Term
| Morris Transfer-Appropriate Processing Experiment (1977) |
|
Definition
| Participants were given a list of words. They then were asked to either focus on the meaning on the word, or focus on the sound of a word. They then were tested! When the meaning group was asked a meaning task, it resulted in getting 84% of the words right. But when the meaning group was tested with a rhyming task, it only got 33% of the words right. This proved the transfer appropriate processing, or memory in enhanced when the type of task in encoding matches the one in retrieval |
|
|
Term
| Grant et al Studying Experiment (1998) |
|
Definition
| Participants were split into two groups. One group studied a list of words with noise, other group studied in the quiet. They were then tested, either in noise or quiet. The people who studied in quiet did better in quiet, and the people who studied in noise did better in noise. This proved the idea of context based memory and encoding specificity, stating that the condition we study carries along with the information itself during encoding. |
|
|
Term
| Distinctiveness and Memories |
|
Definition
Memories become more distinct when they involve unusual even or stimuli. Unusual stimuli or events are usually remembered better than typical ones.
-This is due to encoding an atypical stimulus leads to deeper processing
-retrieving a memory trace dissimilar to others leads to distinctiveness
EX: the fewer hits on google, the better, assuming you are searching for one of those hits |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Methods for improving long term memory
EX: figuring out which retrieval cues are best to use |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Decay - the loss of memory over time
Interference - The loss of memory due to the presence of a new memory |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| It is a forgetting mechanism that occurs during storage. It is the process of losing memory over time whether its in the short term with prevented rehearsal, or in the long term after the memory gets less consolidated. It is an availability impairment |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Forgetting of a memory trace as a consequence of other memory traces |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A type of interference that occurs because of temporary inaccessibility of one trace due to similar traces. This occurs during the retrieval phase and is an accessibility issue. |
|
|
Term
| The tip of the Tongue phenomenon |
|
Definition
| The inability to recognize visual objects resulting from brain damage |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A type of interference where the availability of one trace is effected by the presence of other similar traces. It occurs during the storage phase, and is an Availability issue |
|
|
Term
| Deese (1959) and McDermott (1995) False Memories Experiment COGLAB |
|
Definition
Participants were asked to study a list of words that had to do with a particular category. They then were tested by given 6 words and asked which ones were on the list. Some were actually on the list, some were not on the list but fit the category, and some did not fit the category at all. It was found that people would put other words that fit the category as being on the list!
EX: given words like bed, rest, awake, tired, dream, etc. And then people would be tested to see if the word sleep was on the list, even though it was not. Many people put that sleep was on this list!
-This showed that constructive processes in our memory have error, as false memories arise from the same processes that construct new memories |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Recollected events that belong to a person's past. We remember events that make up our stories of our life using "mental time travel" or reliving them like in an autobiography.
-Contains BOTH episodic and semantic memory
-The farther away the personal memory, the more semantic (factual) the memory is |
|
|
Term
| Cabeza Pictures Experiment (2004) |
|
Definition
Participants were asked to take pictures around DUKE university. They were then shown the pictures of the places they took, and shown pictures taken by other people of places they took, and tested for brain activation. The study showed that even though they were looking at the same place, when people were looking at their own photos their hippocampus was more activated, with more videospatial areas activated. This proves that autobigraphical memories elicit more extensive brain areas, and have a more clear impact on memory, than simpler "laboratory memories."
-in other words, memories are stronger when they are our own. |
|
|
Term
| Rubin Reminiscence Bump Study |
|
Definition
| A study that showed that The enhancement of our memories for adolescence and young adulthood found in people over 40. People over 40 reminisce a lot, so their memories of when they were younger become clearer |
|
|
Term
| Rathbone self image hypothesis Study |
|
Definition
| Rathbone studied the memories of people who emigrated to America. He found that when people emigrated in their 20s, the had a reminiscence bump for their 20's remembering a lot of memories. But when people emigrated in their 30s, people actually had a bump in their 30s! This proves that the reminiscence bump is based off the self-image hypothesis, or that we have enhanced memory to events that change people's life identity. |
|
|
Term
| Phelps Memory Arousal Study (1995) |
|
Definition
People were given a list of words, with some of the words being arousing words like profanity and sexual words, while some words were neutral words, like store and street. It was found that people had better memory for the more emotionally stimulating words!
-this experiment was also done with pictures on 2005 by Dolcos.
-This proves that emotion has to do with our ability to retrieve memories |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Refers to the memory for circumstances surrounding how someone HEARD about a surprising event, not the event itself. EX: The day of Sandy Hook, studying for calculus, is a flashbulb memory, not the sandy hook memory itself. |
|
|
Term
| Constructive Factors of Memory |
|
Definition
| When people construct memories, they include what actually happened,but also factors such as the person's knowledge, experiences, and expectations. These are all pieced together and "constructed" to form our memory |
|
|
Term
| Bartlett War of the Ghost Experiment (1932) |
|
Definition
| Participants were to read a Canadian Folk Tale about people being attacked by ghosts. They then were asked questions and were to retell the story. A week later, they were to recall the story again. They did this for about 5 weeks. The results showed that with each passing week, people remembered less about the story (decay of memories over time), but it ALSO showed that as time went on, people changed things about the story. This biggest change was that the story became more English (where the participants were from), compared to Canadian. This proved the idea of Memory Distortions, which says that the constructive part of our memory that attaches our beliefs, feelings, and this instance culture to our memories can sometimes distort them. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The process of determining the origins of our memories, knowledge, or beliefs. Determining where we learned something |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Misidentifying the source of our memories. Thinking we learned something from one person but actually learning it from somewhere else. |
|
|
Term
| Jacoby Becoming Famous overnight Experiment |
|
Definition
| People were asked to read and study a list of names, with some being famous and some being non famous. They were then tested on the list by having to say whether a person was not famous and on the list before, not famous and not on the list before, or a famous person. Immediately after studying, people did well in identifying who was famous and who was not. However, after a 24 hour delay, some of the non famous people were labeled as famous! This is why it is called the become famous overnight experiment, and it proves how we can have source attribution errors, by mixing up some one as famous when we were actually told he wasn't |
|
|
Term
| Marsh Gender Source Monitoring Experiment (2006) |
|
Definition
| People were told to read a statement made by someone with a neutral name, either Pat or Chris. Sometimes the statement was stereotypical male, sometimes female, sometimes neither. Once they were presented with the sentence and the name of who said it, there was a delay where theyd do a puzzle and then they were told that Chris was a boy and Pat was a girl. They then were asked who said the statement. The results found that the gender labels effected their judgement. It showed that correctly signed the boy words to the male, and girls correctly to the girls, at high rates. But when a female said something masculine or vice versa, people were more likely to get it wrong, and assume the boy actually said it. This shows that without a strong memory of who presented the stimulus, our memory retrieval will be biased to our real-world knowledge and lead to source misattribution errors |
|
|
Term
| Branford and Johnson House Sentence Experiment (1973) |
|
Definition
| Participants were either in the control or experimental group. The experimental group read a sentence about a guy pounding a nail. The control group read a sentence about a guy looking for a nail. They then were asked if they saw a sentence that contained the word "hammer." The experimental reported seeing the word hammer 57% of the time, where as the control group only reported it 20% of the time. This proves the idea of pragmatic inference, or when people reading a sentence leads to someone expecting something not explicitly said. It causes us to change our memories! It also shows that memory includes information that is implied |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When reading a sentence, it leads to someone expecting something that is not explicitly stated or necessarily implied. |
|
|
Term
| Brewer and Treyens Office Experiment (1981) |
|
Definition
| People were asked to sit in an office for a couple of minutes while they waited for their experiment. When they were pulled out of the room, they learned that it was actually a memory experiment, and they had recall as many things as they could from what was in the office. The results showed that people would in fact write down some things that were in there, but also things that weren't that fit a typical office "schema" (like saying books were there even though there were no books). This proves that our schemas influence our memory and can cause us to make inferences about our memories. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A persons knowledge about some aspect of the environment
EX Schema for fruit is usually an apple |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A person's conception of the sequence of actions that occur during a particular experience.
EX: your script for the post office is waiting in line, filling our forms, giving your letter to the post office, watching them stamp it, etc. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone gets misleading information after they witness an event, and it changes how someone describes the event later. It is essentially telling someone something that changes their memory |
|
|
Term
| Loftus and Pickerall False Childhood Memories Experiment (1995) |
|
Definition
| Researchers went to kids families and had them tell them stories about events their family did. Then the researcher went to the child, and restated some of these stories, and then asked if the child remembered it. Then, the researchers made up a story, and asked if the child remembered the fake one. The results showed that 30% of the fake memories were recalled as true, even up to 2 weeks later. This shows that memories can be implanted into our brains, as long as they are believable. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| People were shown a picture of a red datsun stopped at a stop sign. They then were asked questions about the picture. Some of them got questions about what happened at the stop sign, and others got questions about what happened at the YIELD sign. Participants were then shown the slides again. People who received questions about the yield sign were more likely to report they saw a yield sign in the slides. This shows the misinformation effect, or the fact that by asking about the yield sign it caused people to think they saw one. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Misleading post information impairs or even replaces memories that were formed during the original experiencing of an event |
|
|
Term
| Lindsey et al Photograph misinformation study (2004) |
|
Definition
| Participants were shown slides of a story and it was narrated by a female voice. Two days later, they were to be tested on the story. Right before their test, the same woman narrated the story again, but this time without the slides. In her new narration, she changed a couple of details in her story. They were then tested on what was on the slides. People responded by reporting 27% of incorrect information. However, in an alternate experiment, a man re-narrated the story the second time, people only reported 13% incorrect information. This discrepancy was because in the male voice, people were able to more easily determine which story was which. When people reported wrong information, it was because they were reporting things they thought they got from the slides, but in reality they got from the woman. This shows that the misinformation effect can effect not only what we remember, but what we remember where some information came from. |
|
|
Term
| Hyman et al Early event false memory experiment (1995) |
|
Definition
| Hyman asked participants in their college years to speak to their parents. He received stories about their childhood from their parents. He then questioned the participant about the events, while including a false event. He then asked the person if they remembered it. The participant said no. But two days later, when asked about it, the person not only remembered it but was able to describe the event! (the event was spilling the punch at a wedding when the boy was 6). Even though he was able to describe the wedding, the wedding never actually happened! This shows that belief in false memories grows stronger with time, causing them to be more and more "true" in our heads over time |
|
|
Term
| Sharfe and Bartholemew Romantic Relationship Experiment (1998) |
|
Definition
These guys tested couples and had them rate their current relationships. 8 Months later, they had them rate their relationships again. They then were asked questions about the first ratings. The results showed that the memory of the first ratings were biased towards being like the current ones.
EX: if relationship went bad, people would say something like "O i said she wasn't that great" when he infact said she was great. This proves that bias causes errors in commission, or in other words produces memory errors |
|
|
Term
| Loftus Eyewittness Testimony Experiment |
|
Definition
| Participants were jurors in a robbery mock trial experiment. When presented with just the evidence, 18% found the defendant guilty. But when there was evidence and an eye witness testimony, it rose to 72% of the jurors finding the defendant guilty. This shows how influential eyewitness testimonies are! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When someone in an eyewitness situation pays less attention to the crime because there is a weapon involved, which takes a good part of their attention away. |
|
|
Term
| Stanny and Johnson Weapon Experiment (2000) |
|
Definition
| Particpants were shown a filmed simulated crime. In one instance, the perpetrator had a gun and used it, and in the other instance he did not. They were then asked questions about the perpetrator, the victim, and the gun. People remembered more about the perpetrator, victim, and the gun itself when the gun wasn't fired compared to when it was. This proves weapon focus, or that when a weapon is used in experience it causes us to focus on that and not the other factors of the experience |
|
|
Term
| Ross Familiarity Eyewitness Experiment |
|
Definition
| Participants were shown one of two films. One film had a male teaching, one had a female teaching. Then they saw a video of the female teacher being robbed. They were given a photopsread to identify the robber, sometimes with the real robber there sometimes not. When the real robber was not in the photospread, 60% of the people reported the male teacher was the one who robbed the female one! When he was not in the photospread, 18% reported it. This however shows familiarity with memories, espeically eyewitness testimonies. People reported that the male teacher was the robber because they were already familiar with him. |
|
|
Term
| Post Identification Feedback Effect |
|
Definition
| During an eyewitness, when someone tells someone else they got the suspect right, it makes them more confident the suspect did it, even if the confirming person is wrong. |
|
|
Term
| Wells and Bradfield "you Identified the subject" experiment (1998) |
|
Definition
| People were shown a video of a crime scene. They then were given a list of pictures of suspects. They picked a suspect and received feedback. People who were told you got the suspect correct had the highest confidence in their results, then people who got neutral responses, and then people who were told they got it wrong. However, all these people were confident in the WRONG SUSPECT. This proves post identification feedback effect, and that when someone gets reassuring information about something, they will have higher confidence even its in correct |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Hebb Proposed that first a nueron is exposd to a stimulus. And over time, it is exposed to that stimulus over and over. As time progresses, the structure of the neuron changes to fire more often. This proved long term potentiation, or enhanced firing of neurons after repeated stimulation.
Shows how repeated stimulation causes enhanced responding and structural changes. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The part of the brain that is crucial for forming new LTM. Proved through HM when he lost his hippocampus |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the process of transforming a new fragile memory into a stable permanent one. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Memories that occurred a long time ago |
|
|
Term
| Trend of Retrograde Amnesia |
|
Definition
| Retrograde amnesia seems to have higher levels of amnesia (more forgotten) the closer the even is to an injury. This is because the longer time a memory has in the brain the more it is consolidated (hardened). |
|
|
Term
| Consolidation over time... |
|
Definition
| Overtime, there are synaptic connections between the hippocampus and the cortex of the brain. As consolidation occurs, the synaptic connection between the cortex and hoppocampus becomes lost and the connection becomes just with the cortex and itself! When a memory is fully consolidated, it no longer needs the hippocampus! Which is proven by HM |
|
|
Term
| Kim and Fanselow Lesion Experiment (1992) |
|
Definition
| Kim and Fanselow studied rats by having them perform "freeze experiments." If a rat froze, it would not get shocked, and if it didnt it got shocked. Over the span of 30 days the rats were trained and fear conditioned to freeze. These rats were compared to rats who experienced lesions in the brain by removing their hippocampus. It was found that when you removed the hippocampus after 1 day of training, the rat with the hippocampus performed much better. But, after 30 days of training, a rat had his hippocampus removed and compared favorably with on that did not. This proves that memories do infact consolidate over time, and that eventually those memories will not require hippocampuses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A mental representation used for various cognitive functions, including memory, reasoning, and understanding language.
EX: Thinking about cats leads to your concept of cats, which includes info about what they are, what they look like, how they behave, etc. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A function of concepts that puts things into categories.
EX: When you see a car on the street you categorize it into FORD, Chevy, Mistubishi, Dodge, Hyundai, etc. |
|
|
Term
| Denominational Approach to Categorization |
|
Definition
Determining whether something is in a mental category by whether or not it fits a definition or not.
THIS DOES NOT ALWAYS WORK
EX: bachelor, unmarried, adult, male, human, can be the definition, but what about the Pope? |
|
|
Term
| Overall Problems with Definitional (classical) view of categorization |
|
Definition
-Typicality (there are outliers of things)
-Fuzzy boundaries (is this a chair but this not a chair) |
|
|
Term
| Prototype model of categorization |
|
Definition
| Where membership into a mental category is determined by comparing the object to a prototype that represents the category |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the most "typical" member of a category. What people mentally compare something too |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
How well something compares to a categories' prototype.
HIGH prototypicality - means a category member is very closely resembled to the category prototype
LOW prototypicality means the category does not closely resemble a typical member of that category |
|
|
Term
| Rosch Category Experiment (1975) |
|
Definition
| Rosch gave people lists of words and they were to rate them from 1-7, 1 being the best, on how well they fit a prototype of something. The results showed that a sparrow was very close to that of a bird, but a bat was very far away from that of a bird. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
we were presented with 2 prototypes of pictures of dots. We we were then presented with pictures that fit one of the categories based off of the prototype. Some of them were used over and over and were called "familiar exemplars." Some were considered very close to the prototype. What was found was that the reaction time for a prototype you were seeing the first time was faster than an exemplar "near" the prototype you had seen before. This proves prototypes are abstracted and used when we are learning. They are stored in our semantic memory and we use them to categorize, even as we are learning
-Near exemplars of prototypes did better than far ones as well! this proved the typicality effect, or that the closer to a prototype something is the clearer it will be in memory and easier to retrieve |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The ability to judge a higher prototypical object more rapidly. EX reaction time for Is apple a fruit would be faster than Is pomegranate a fruit |
|
|
Term
| Exemplar Model of Categorization |
|
Definition
| A category is defined by many examples, instead of the one prototype, with each example called an exemplar. |
|
|
Term
| Hierarchical Organization |
|
Definition
| Larger more general categories are divided into smaller, more specific ones, creating a number of level of categories. Like a tree! |
|
|
Term
| Superordinate/ global level of hierarchical model |
|
Definition
The most general stage of the model, the "top"
EX: Furniture |
|
|
Term
| Basic level of hierarchical model |
|
Definition
| The middle level of the model. EX furniture -> a table |
|
|
Term
| subordinate/ specific level of hierarchical model |
|
Definition
| The lowest most specific level of the model. EX furniture -> table -> kitchen table |
|
|
Term
| Tanka and Taylor Plant Label Experiment (1991) |
|
Definition
| They had a bunch of college students walk around campus and had them label the plants. Most of their responses involved the basic level, such as "tree," and very little of the specific level "like oak tree." Then they brought around a bunch of plant experts and had them do the same thing. This time, the plant experts labeled things specifically a lot and basically a little, almost at the same rate as the college students but vice versa. This showed that the "special level" on the hierarchical model, or the level of meaning people focus on in a task, is not the same for everyone! So where we categorize things is not the same for everyone |
|
|
Term
| Rosch Naming things demonstation |
|
Definition
| Rosch showed people a picture of random things ( a fish, a guitar, and a pair of jeans) for 5 seconds. He then asked people to tell him what they saw. Most people told him the basic level of response, which was fish, guitar, and pants, instead of going into more detail and the specific level like jeans, bass, or electric guitar. This showed that people tend to use the basic level name of something when describing it |
|
|
Term
| Collins and Quillian Hierarchical Model |
|
Definition
Collins and Quillian created a network model of human memory. It stemmed from the most specific things at the bottom to the most general things at the top. It consisted of nodes, which were each category, and the links, which connect the categories together. Properties are the features of each node, or category. It experienced cognitive economy because nothing could be above a node on the hierarchy without it experiencing it.
EX: Robin is a bird, which is also an animal |
|
|
Term
| Collins and Quillian Network Travel distance Experiment |
|
Definition
| They hypothesized that the farther someone had to go in their collins and quillian hierarchy, the longer it took them to use that in a response. They did this by using the sentence verification method with canaries. They asked, if a canary was a canary, was it a bird, and was it an animal, the 3 stages. The results were that with each level the response time took longer, proving that the amount of time it takes you to retrieve info has to do with the distance traveled through a network |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| In the C+Q model, it is the idea that activity spreads out along any link that is connected to an activated node. For example, when the property for the bird node is has feathers, that means all nodes under the bird node must have feathers. |
|
|
Term
| Lexical Decision COGLAB experiment |
|
Definition
| Participants are asked to read words in pairs, some of which are words and some of which are not words. Their task was to as quickly as possible determine whether or not it was a word, testing someones reaction time. It was found that when words were associated with each other, it took them less time to report the 2nd word as it would with a non related word. This is due to spreading activation and priming! When we retrieve the first part of the associated word from our memory, it almost in a sense "clears the path" for another word when its from that category. |
|
|
Term
| Problems with Collins and Quillian Hierarchy Model |
|
Definition
1. it is a hierarchy!
-According to this model, it should take longer with each category up the tree. However, that is not always the case. Researchers found the reaction time of asking true or false to "a pig is a mammal" was slower than the sentence "a pig is an animal" even though animal is higher on the hierarchy!
2. Could not explain the effects of the prototype modal (how canaries were more viewed as birds than ostriches, that type of thing) |
|
|
Term
| Collins and Loftus Semantic Network |
|
Definition
| When the Collins and Quillian model was scrapped due to hierarchical and prototype issues, a new model was made to fix these issues. In this model, things were bunched together in a spider web looking thing, all being connected by category nodes and links like before. However this time, the length of the link depended on how connected two items were, and each order of links depended on peoples personal experience and knowledge. the problem was that this ended up explaining TOO Much, or in other words it was so general that it couldnt be falsified |
|
|
Term
| Problems with Collins and Loftus Semantic Network |
|
Definition
-Without being able to prove it wrong, we have to always assume it is "right" and we cannot always do that!
-It also does not stimulate theory or being out new experiments.
-it does not allow us to make predictions |
|
|
Term
| What makes a good psychological theory |
|
Definition
Explanatory Power
Predictive Power
Falsifiability
Generation of Experiments |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Creating computer models for representing concepts and their properties based on characteristics of the brain
-Comparing the brain to a computer |
|
|
Term
| Connectionist network of the brain |
|
Definition
| A network of units that connect input units, to hidden units, to output units. Stimuli from the outside word activates the input units, which send signals to the hidden ones, which send signals to the output ones. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A measure that determines how signals sent from one unit either increase or decrease the activity of the next unit. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The connectionist model is based on the neural networks of the brain. It believes that the units behave like the neurons, the links are the axons, and the connection weight is the firing rate. This shows that connectionist models follow the idea of distributed representation, whereas things like the Collins and Quillian model follow more the grandmorther cell approach.
-There are also excitatory and inhibitory connections (thinking something IS or IS NOT)
-learning changes the connection strength over time, just like how learning in neurons changes the structure |
|
|
Term
| Output determination in Connectionist models |
|
Definition
-The activation of input units
-how much they are activated (they're connection weights)
-each pattern of connection weight leads to a different output |
|
|
Term
| Before learning output in connectionist model |
|
Definition
Before learning what something is, we establish random weights with an input. This leads us to produce random outputs of something.
*this mainly occurs with development, as we get older seeing fewer things that produce truly random input
-After learning we organize our weights and which ones produce which response |
|
|
Term
| Generalization and the Connectionist Model |
|
Definition
Although we may not have learned/trained for something, we can generalize and infer about it.
EX: using semantic knowledge, a kid can figure out a tucan is a bird without knowing what one is |
|
|
Term
| Typicality and the Connectionist Model |
|
Definition
| The more typical something is (closer to a prototype), the easier it is to learn. Consequently, atypical members are more difficult to learn because they are harder to classify |
|
|
Term
| Rodgers and McCelland Connectionist Model |
|
Definition
| They produced the "big" model. It is where activation of a concept unit and a relation unit creates activity throughout the network that culminates in activation of property units |
|
|
Term
| Connection weights and simularity |
|
Definition
| It was found that similar concepts (canary, robin, swallow) have similar connection weight patterns! |
|
|
Term
| Progressive Differentiation |
|
Definition
| How our brain processes information. In learning, we go from learning the general things to more specific things. The more general the quicker it is to learn. This was shown in the experiment where people learned the difference between plant vs animals, birds vs fish, etc. all the way to pine vs oak. They learned pine vs oak the longest and the least, and plants vs animals the most |
|
|
