Cognitive Psychology Lecture Notes PDF

The Fall of Behaviorism and the Cognitive Revolution Dr. Dorothy Buchli Cognitive Psychology Mercer University  Agenda for today’s lecture 01 02 03 04 But…what is the Quick review: Behaviorism The Cognitive mind and...

The Fall of Behaviorism and the Cognitive Revolution Dr. Dorothy Buchli Cognitive Psychology Mercer University  Agenda for today’s lecture 01 02 03 04 But…what is the Quick review: Behaviorism The Cognitive mind and how History and was Revolution do we study it methods GREAT…until it REALLY? wasn’t What is Cognitive Psychology The branch of psychology concerned with the scientific study of the mind The mind creates and controls mental functions such as perception, attention, memory, emotions, language, deciding, thinking, and reasoning The mind is a system that creates representations of the world so that we can act within it to achieve our goals  Cognitive maps (Tolman, 1931) Controversy over language acquisition (Chomsky, 1959) The Fall of Behaviorism The Misbehavior of Organisms (Breland and Breland, 1961) Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1963) Edward Tolman’s Cognitive Maps Although behaviorism dominated American psychology for many decades, some researchers were not toeing the strict behaviorist line. One of these researchers was Edward Tolman. Tolman called himself a behaviorist because his focus was on measuring behavior. But in reality, he was one of the early cognitive psychologists, because he used behavior to infer mental processes. Tolman (1938) Cognitive Maps in Maze Learning  Controversy Over Language Acquisition Skinner (1957) – Verbal Behavior Argued children learn language through operant conditioning Children imitate speech they hear Correct speech is rewarded Chomsky (1959) –Innate Language Acquisition Device Argued language must be determined by inborn biological program that holds across cultures There is a “universal grammar” that all languages have; the mind is predisposed to understand those features Evidence for Innate Language Acquisition Device Children learn language in universal sequence Cooing Babbling Telegraphic speech Infant-directed speech (IDS) Novel utterances Errors The ‘Vocabulary Explosion’ The Universal Need to Communicate with Language Evidence for Innate Language Acquisition Device The Vocabulary Explosion The Universal Need to Communicate People’s need to communicate is so powerful that when deaf children find themselves in an environment where nobody uses sign language, they invent a sign language for themselves  (1961) The Misbehavior of Organisms Attempts to condition animal behavior did not work Instinctual Drift Animals’ built-in instincts prevailed Instinctual drift Albert Bandura and Social Learning Theory Albert Bandura: The Bobo Doll Studies Study 1: live models playing roughly with an inflatable clown. Study 2: filmed models playing roughly with inflatable clown. Study 3: filmed models and changed the consequences that the model received (reinforcement or punishment). Mean Imitative Scores for Aggression Attention Retention Reproduction Motivation  The Cognitive Revolution Shift from behaviorist’s stimulus-response relationships to an approach that attempts to explain behavior in terms of the mind Information-processing approach A way to study the mind created from insights associated with the digital computer The Cognitive Revolution Artificial Intelligence “making a machine behave in ways that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving.” (McCarty et al., 1955) Newell and Simon created the logic theorist program that could apply rudimentary logic to creating mathematical theorems The Turing Test: Can a Computer Pass for a Human? Ulrich Neisser Cognitive Psychology Sensory Memory Dr. Doe Buchli PSY 215 Mercer University What Is Memory?  What Is Memory?  Processes involved in retaining, retrieving, using, and manipulating information when it is no longer present  Information can include  Stimuli  Images  Events  Ideas  Skills  Active any time some past experience has an impact on how you think or behave now or in the future What Is Memory? Modal Model of Memory Modal Model of Memory Modal Model of Memory Modal Model of Memory  Modal Model of Memory  Conceptual distinction  Architecture of memory (structure) ◼ How is the memory system organized (number & type of memory stores)  Control processes of memory ◼ Activities occurring in the memory system (how info is retained in each of the stores) ◼ Rehearsal ◼ Strategies used to make a stimulus more memorable ◼ Strategies of attention that help you focus on specific stimuli Sensory Memory  Sensory Memory ❑ Very short storage of info from senses ❑ Functions: ❑ To capture info for further processing in STM ❑ Helps us to connect our sensory experiences ❑ Multiple stores: ❑ Visual sensory memory = iconic memory (Neisser, 1967) ❑ Auditory sensory memory = echoic memory ❑ Touch sensory memory = haptic memory  Persistence of Vision  The continued perception of a visual stimulus after it is no longer present  A sparkler can cause a trail of light when it is moved rapidly; occurs because the perception of light is held briefly in the mind  Persistence of Vision  The continued perception of a visual stimulus after it is no longer present  When watching a movie, you see a continuously moving image, but in reality there are 24 different images projected per second, each separated by a dark screen as the shutter opens and closes  What is the capacity of sensory memory (iconic)? Whole Report: Subjects are shown an array of items and asked to report all the items they saw. A N P L K M D T W B S R Results Subjects could not report more than about 4.5 items out of 12 on each trial. This is about 38% of the array. What is the capacity of sensory memory (iconic)? If I show you this…. your iconic memory does this… …but faster! Reports of “seeing” a scene after it disappeared Problem: If the info decays quickly, subjects don’t have enough time to report it!  What is the capacity of sensory memory (iconic)?  George Sperling (1960)  Believed that we can see more than we can report ◼ The limitation is not in storing the information but in reporting it ◼ Solved this problem (span limit problem) and supported the existence of iconic memory  Used two techniques:  whole report  partial report  What is the capacity of sensory memory (iconic)? 50 msec Partial Report: 4 x 3 matrix of letters for 50 ms, subjects report all the items from one particular row. Report Cue (I have horn, drum, pong)  What is the capacity of sensory memory (iconic)? Partial Report: Subjects are shown an array of items and asked to report a subset of the items they saw. B M C K Results: N V P A Subjects could typically report 3.3 out of 4 items W J U L (75%) on each trial, regardless of location. This means the entire image must be stored in iconic sensory memory, albeit for a short time.  What is the duration of sensory memory (iconic)?  Effect of delay of tone Report Varied time between the disappearance of Cue the display and the onset of the cue tone: 0 to 1 sec Cognitive Psychology Short-Term Memory Dr. Doe Buchli PSY 215 Mercer University STM – Definition  Short-term memory is the capacity for holding, but not manipulating, a small amount of information in the mind, in an active and readily available state, for a short period of time.  Also called “primary memory” or “immediate memory” STM – Function ❑ Re-codes info from sensory memory for longer storage ❑ Some info goes to long-term memory - stored for an indefinite amount of time ❑ Rehearsal important part of STM ❑ Rehearsal maintains a memory trace for a short period of time ❑ Rehearsal helps transfer information from STM to LTM STM Capacity ❑ Miller (1956) proposed capacity = 7 + or - 2 “chunks” of info ❑ Chunk = unit of info recoded from the sensory input  Words are chunks of letters  Multi-digit numbers are chunks of single digit numbers  Routes are chunks of locations STM Capacity  More recent measures of STM capacity have set the limit at about four items (Cowan, 2001).  This conclusion is based on the results of experiments like one by Steven Luck and Edward Vogel (1997), which measured the capacity of STM by using a procedure called change detection STM Capacity STM Capacity STM Capacity ❑ Span differs slightly depending on definition of“chunk”(varies with “complexity” of the chunk) ❑ Digit span = 7.7 Letter span = 6.35 ❑ Word span = 5.5 Trigrams = 3.2 ❑ But span can also vary based on chunking abilities (integrated and elaborated with knowledge in LTM) STM Capacity: Chunking  Worked with S.F., who over 2 years (320 one hour training sessions) increased digit span from 7 items to 79!  S.F. member of track and cross-country teams, and would relate digit strings to running times:  e.g. for string 4 1 3 1...  “I made a four minute and 13.1 second mile time”  But also used other things  Remembers 1943 as “near the end of World War II”  But memory span for letters, words remained near 7 STM Capacity: Chunking  Used chess players  Novices – 10,000 hours  Placed pieces on the board (up to 24) and players viewed for 5 seconds; then asked to reproduce the positions of the pieces from memory Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Capacity: Chunking Actual Game Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Capacity: Chunking Actual Game Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Capacity: Chunking Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Capacity: Chunking Random Game Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Capacity: Chunking Chase and Simon (1973a, 1973b) STM Encoding ❑ Coding: the way information is represented ❑ Auditory: acoustic, linguistic ❑ Semantic: meaning ❑ Visual: image ❑ Conrad (1964) ❑ Presented letters briefly, were to write down the letters. ❑ Included letters that looked alike (V and X) or sounded alike (V and C) ❑ Analysis of errors indicated the tendency to confuse letters with similar sounds – STM is auditory encoding STM Encoding Method: Ss learned lists of words. In all lists, the words either sounded alike (cat, hat, cat) had similar meanings (tiny, small, little) or were unrelated Results: more errors when subjects studied lists of words that sounded alike (man, mad, cap) than words that have similar meanings (big, huge, long) Conclusion: Similar sounding words confused in STM because memory code was acoustic. Semantically similar words confused in LTM because memory code was using meaning Baddeley (1966) STM Encoding Method – Presented Chinese radicals (no sound) and characters (has sound) to Chinese native speakers. Results –recalled 2.7 radicals (visual code) versus 6.4 characters (auditory code). Zhang & Simon (1985) STM Duration Petersen & Peterson (1959) Experimenter says: CHJ 506 Brown (1958) Begin counting backwards by 3’s After a set time, recall three letters Subject says: 506, 503, 500…CHJ STM Duration  After three seconds of counting, participants performed at 80%  After 18 seconds of counting, participants performed at 10% Petersen & Peterson (1959) Brown (1958) STM Duration  Proactive interference: occurs when information learned previously interferes with learning new information  Example: Your native language may make it more difficult to learn and remember a new foreign language  Retroactive interference: occurs when new learning interferes with remembering old learning  Example: After you get a new telephone number and use it for a while, you may have difficulty remembering your old phone number STM Duration Keppel & Underwood (1962) P&P result: A large drop in memory Little decrease in performance on trial for letters after a delay of 18 seconds 1, and more decrease by trial 3. between presentation and test Conclusion: previous trials interfered with later trials – proactive interference Cognitive Psychology Working Memory Dr. Doe Buchli PSY 215 Mercer University  Limitations of Modal Model’s STM  According to Atkinson and Shiffrin’s modal model, it should only be possible to perform one of these tasks, which should occupy the entire STM.  But when Baddeley did experiments involving tasks similar to those in the previous demonstration, he found that participants were able to read while simultaneously remembering numbers.  Working Memory  Working memory is a limited-capacity system for temporary storage and manipulation of information. It is involved in complex tasks such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning.  Working memory differs from STM  STM holds information for a brief period of time  WM is concerned with the processing and manipulation of information that occurs during complex cognition  Working Memory  Model attempts to explain two things  (1) the dynamic processes involved in cognition such as understanding language and doing math problems and  (2) the fact that people can carry out two tasks simultaneously.  Consists of a number of components that can function separately. Baddeley and Hitch (1974)  Working Memory  There are a number of phenomena that illustrate how the phonological loop handles language, how the visuospatial sketch pad holds visual and spatial information, and how the central executive uses attention to coordinate between the two. The Phonological Loop  Phonological similarity effect (Baddeley, 1998)  More errors occur when attempting to recall items that sound alike (e.g., C and T) than when recalling items that don’t sound alike (e.g., C and X)  Occurs even when information is presented visually because visual info involving language is transmitted into a verbal code by the ARM  Which is more difficult?  Read the following words, look away, count to 15, and recall.  Help, train, dream, gift, fight, blow, drive, brain, kite  Read the following words, look away, count to 15, and recall.  Alcohol, property, amplifier, officer, gallery, mosquito, orchestra, bricklayer  Word Length Effect Baddeley, Thomson, and Buchanan (1975)  Which is more difficult?  Read the following words while repeating the word “the” out loud (the, the, the…), look away, and recall.  Beast, bronze, wife, golf, inn, limp, dirt, star  Articulatory Suppression Effect  Having participants repeat a word or phrase out loud while they learn a list reduces recall for those items  Repeating the irrelevant word prevents rehearsal of list items The Visuospatial Sketchpad Shepherd & Metzler (1991) Shepherd & Metzler (1991) Quinn and McConnell (1996) Quinn and McConnell (1996) The Central Executive  The Central Executive  The control center of the working memory system. Its mission is not to store information but to coordinate how information is used by the phonological loop and visuospatial sketch pad.  It determines how attention is focused on a specific task, how it is divided between two tasks, and how it is switched between tasks.  The Central Executive  Individuals with damage to the prefrontal cortex often have difficulty performing tasks that involve the central executive.  When given a problem that can be easily solved by following a particular rule (“Pick the red object”), these patients do well until the rule changes. Will continue to follow the old rule indefinitely.  Such perseveration represents a breakdown in the central executive’s ability to control attention. The Stroop Task The Episodic Buffer Baddeley (2000): Revised WM Model  Episodic Buffer  Subsystem of WM that handles the brief storage of episodic memories when the loop and/or sketchpad are otherwise engaged  Integrates phonological, visual, and spatial info; holds these integrated representations in memory  Serves as a link between between WM and LTM Long-Term Memory: Encoding and Retrieval Improving Memory Dr. Doe Buchli PSY 215 Mercer University Long-Term Memory Interplay between WM and LTM Encoding: Getting Information Into Long-Term Memory Common study habits  Rereading  Taking practice tests (after studying)  Cram for exams  Study in one place  “If I learn in just the right way, learning will be easy!”  ….In the late 1980’s, the population of sea otters in the North Pacific Ocean began to decline. Of the two plausible explanations for the decline—increased predation by killer whales or disease—disease is the more likely. After all, a concurrent sharp decline in the populations of seals and sea lions was almost certainly caused by a pollution related disease, which could have spread to sea otters, whereas the population of killer whales did not change noticeably…. Prose passages (“The Sun” or “Sea Otters”; 256 and 275 words long) from a reading comprehension section of a test-prep book for the TOEFL Within the text were 30 idea units that were used for the basis of scoring Roediger and Karpicke (2006) 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins Final Study Study Study Study … Test 1 week 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins 5 mins … Final Study Test Test Test Test 1 week * No feedback * Nogiven feedback duringgiven testsafter tests Roediger and Karpicke (2006) Results 1.00 0.90 0.80 5 mins: Those that Proportion Recalled studied more, 0.70 remembered more 0.60 0.50 SSSS 0.40 STTT --- 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 5 mins 1 week Retention Interval Roediger and Karpicke (2006) Results 1.00 0.90 0.80 5 mins: Those that Proportion Recalled studied more, 0.70 remembered more 0.60 0.50 SSSS 0.40 1 week: Those that were STTT tested retained the 0.30 information they 0.20 learned; those that 0.10 simply read and reread 0.00 did not 5 mins 1 week Retention Interval Roediger and Karpicke (2006) Take Home Message  If you only want to remember information for a VERY short time, it is okay to simply reread your notes, the chapter, listen to recorded lectures and podcasts, etc.  BUT, for an exam (or anything without a really short retention interval), this kind of passive studying is not sufficient Take Home Message  TEST YOURSELF & GENERATE INFO!  Make flashcards  Take a practice test or chapter quiz  (1) Sketch out an outline using chapter headings and subheadings, (2) Read the chapter once, and (3) Fill in the content based on what you have read, (4) Go back and fill in what you couldn’t  ALL OF THESE STRETEGIES = ACTIVE RETRIEVAL FROM MEMORY Sometimes we have to read, we can’t just test ourselves and generate information. What are some ways to read actively? SQ3R Study Method  Actively process information as you read!  Survey  Question  Read  Retrieve  Review But how should I schedule my study time? To cram or not to cram? Study Study Study Test Study Study Study Test 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 Massed Spaced To cram or not to cram? Study Study Study … Test Study Study Study … Test 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 Massed Spaced Massed Spaced Take Home Message  Cramming is good if you take the test within a few hours and never need that info again (since you will forget it very quickly)  Cramming is bad when you want to retain knowledge over an extended period (for a class with several cumulative midterms and a cumulative exam, cramming would be a bad strategy) Why is spacing good for long-term learning?  Several (not mutually exclusive) theories…  Attention  Retrieval  Variability Inductive learning  Ability to generalize concepts and categories from exposure to multiple exemplars, and apply to new exemplars  A natural option then is to teach one concept at a time, immerse students in one lesson so that they can understand it more fully. Gentoo Where’s the Gentoo? Hypothesis  Blocking/massing allows the learner to notice characteristics that unify a category Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo  Interleaving/spacing makes doing so difficult Gentoo Lachesis Reinhard Gentoo “Spacing is the friend of recall but the enemy of induction.” -Ernst Rothkopf You will be shown 72 paintings for 3 seconds each. The paintings will be by twelve artists, with six pictures per artist. Try to learn to recognize which artist painted which picture based on their style. Later, you’ll be shown 48 new paintings, which you haven’t seen before. You’ll have to identify who painted each one. Kornell and Bjork (2008)  ONE AT A TIME (Blocked/Massed) Lewis All mixed up together (Interleaved/Spaced) Pessani Wexler Schlorff Stratulat Hawkins Mylrea Test Feedback Kornell and Bjork (2008) Results 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Blocked Interleaved Kornell and Bjork (2008) Kornell and Bjork (2008) Asked participants: Which do you think helped you Results learn the artists’ styles better? Blocked About the same Interleaved Actual Results Participants’ Predictions 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 0 Blocked Same Interleaved Blocked Same Interleaved Interleaving benefits differentiation  Original hypothesis: Blocking/massing highlights similarities Lewis Lewis Lewis Lewis  New hypothesis: Interleaving/spacing highlights differences Lewis Schlorff Hawkins Lewis Interleaving benefit is robust  The interleaving benefit has now been repeatedly demonstrated  In children (Vlach, Sandhofer, & Kornell, 2008)  In older adults (Kornell, Castel, Eich, & Bjork, 2010)  Induction of bird families (Wahlheim, Dunlosky & Jacoby, 2011)  Induction of human voices (Yan, Vetter, & Bjork, in prep)  Mathematics concepts (Rohrer & Taylor, 2007; Taylor & Rohrer, 2010) Summary: Spacing and Interleaving  Distributing and interleaving practice is beneficial for learning  Spacing benefits learning by promoting retrieval, variability, and sustaining attention  Interleaving benefits learning by highlighting differences between categories, enabling discrimination ◼ Interleaving concepts within a topic is good ◼ Evidence is less clear for interleaving different topics Bringing it all together  Desirable difficulties: “good” learning shouldn’t feel easy!  Activities that make learning feel easy (e.g., rereading) often are relatively ineffective  Activities that make learning feel difficult (e.g., testing yourself instead of rereading, spacing instead of cramming) are often very effective What this means: Learning shouldn’t feel easy! Other Factors that Aid Encoding  Forming visual images  Deep processing  Making info self-relevant  Organizing to-be-remembered information Visual Imagery Gordon and Winzenz (1970) Levels of Processing Theory Self-Reference Effect Rogers et al.(1979) Self-Reference Effect Leshikar et al.(2015) Effects of Organization on Memory Bower et al.(1969) Retrieval: Getting Information Out of Long-Term Memory Mantyla (1986) Encoding Specificity Godden and Baddeley (1978) Encoding Specificity Grant et al. (1998) Encoding Specificity Elch and Metcalfe (1989) Transfer-Appropriate Processing Morris et al. (1979)