Cognition: Week 2 PDF

PSYC21081 Cognition: &21181 Week 2 1 Last week 2  Episodic vs Semantic Memory Overview Different memory systems? Episodic memory Role of meaning, schemas and organization Leve...

PSYC21081 Cognition: &21181 Week 2 1 Last week 2  Episodic vs Semantic Memory Overview Different memory systems? Episodic memory Role of meaning, schemas and organization Levels of processing 3  Asynchronous content S EPA RAT E , IN DEP EN DEN T OR Episodic and Semantic IN TE RAC TIN G S YST EMS ? memory 4 Endel Tulving: Episodic vs Semantic Episodic Memory Semantic Memory Memory for specific events located Memory for facts at a specific point in time ▪ No mental time travel ▪ “mental time travel” ▪ E.g.: World knowledge; vocabulary; rules etc. ▪ Backward to relive earlier episodes ▪ Short delay: information is recalled in episodes ▪ Forward to anticipate & plan ▪ Long delay: the same information is future events integrated into semantic memory Time Machine Knowledge 5  Are these different memory systems? Functionally different: Episodic vs ▪ Different types of information Semantic ▪ Different experiences 6  Are these different memory systems? Neuropsychological evidence: ▪ Spiers, Maguire, and Burgess (2001) → 147 cases of amnesia ▪ Substantial or even dramatic loss of episodic memory ▪ Semantic memory effects more variable and generally smaller Episodic vs Semantic ▪ Damage to the hippocampus (and the MTL) affects episodic memory far more than semantic memory ▪ BUT: Hippocampal amnesia may affect acquisition of new semantic memories more, than retrieval of old (remote) semantic memories (Clark & Maguire, 2016) 7  Are these different memory systems? ▪ Semantic Dementia patients: Severe loss of concept knowledge but intact episodic memory (and intact cognitive abilities) ▪ Damage anterior frontal and anterior temporal lobes Episodic vs Semantic Anterior temporal lobe 8  Are these different memory systems? Semantic deficit Anterior Episodic vs temporal lobe Semantic Episodic deficit 9 Episodic vs Semantic memory: Conclusion Independent systems But many long-term memories consist of a mixture of episodic and semantic aspects They dynamically interact and affect each other 10  E FFECT S ON E PIS ODIC MEM ORY Meaning and Schemas 11 Meaning and Schemas: Bartlett’s approach ▪ Recall of complex materials (e.g., drawings and folk tales) ▪ Examined recall errors ▪ Unlike Ebbinghaus, he stressed participants’ effort after meaning ▪ Give meaning to studied materials as a better way of organizing thought and eventually memory 12  ▪ Structured representation of knowledge about the world, events, people or actions Schemas ▪ Can be used to make sense of new material, to store and later recall them ▪ Are influenced/determined by social and cultural factors 13 A Typical Restaurant Script/Schema Bower, Black, and Turner (1979) 73% of respondents reported these common 48% also included: events when going to a restaurant: Enter restaurant Sit down Give reservation name Order drinks Look at menu Discuss menu Order Talk Eat Eat appetizer Pay bill Order dessert Leave Eat dessert Leave a tip 14 “The war of the Ghosts” ▪ Native American folk tales ▪ People committed many errors and distortions when they asked to recall these ▪ In their recall made the story more coherent and omitted details ▪ These distortions were more consistent with their own semantic knowledge ▪ Recalled stories were “Westernised” ▪ Criticism: vague instructions 15 Activity: Read story and remember it 16 The procedure is actually quite simple. First you arrange things into different groups. Of course, one pile may be sufficient depending on how much there is to do. If you have to go somewhere else due to lack of facilities that is the next step, otherwise you are pretty well set. It is important not to overdo things. That is, it is better to do too few things at once than too many. In the short run this may not seem important, but complications from doing too many can easily arise. 17  Bransford & Johnson, 1972 ▪ Participants read the passage, in the absence of title, recalled around 2.8 different units (ideas) ▪ Those supplied with the title “Washing clothes” recalled 5.8 ideas ▪ Previous schematic knowledge is beneficial for later recall as it helps comprehension of the passage and Stock photo from organization of its elements https://www.123rf.com/ 18 Role of Schemas Sulin and Dooling (1974) ▪ Story about dictator – “Gerald Martin” (unknown) or “Adolf Hitler” ▪ Test sentence: “He hated the Jews..”: ▪ Short delay (5 mins): No difference between the groups. ▪ Long delay (1 week): Participants who read about Hitler were more likely to incorrectly agree. Schematic knowledge may affect memory especially at longer intervals. 19 Role of Meaning Ascribing meaning to stimuli affects encoding and storage Carmichael et al. (1932) Bower, et al. (1975) 20 Activity Read the words 21  Read these words: apple lamp desk pants shoe grape sofa hat plum melon chair table cherry gloves coat Activity 22  Activity Cover the words and write down as many of / What do you them as you can observe? remember 23  Read these words: apple lamp desk pants shoe grape sofa hat plum melon chair table cherry gloves coat Activity 24  Read these words: apple table plum chair cherry pants grape shoe melon hat desk coat sofa gloves lamp Activity 25  Related words within the list tend to be recalled as a Jenkins & Russell study cluster/together (Jenkins & Russell, 1952) 26 Meaning and memory: Conclusion When participants are given the opportunity to organise information in a meaningful way, memory performance is guided by meaning. 27  Meaning and Memory: Visual Imagery Paivio’s Dual-coding hypothesis: More imageable words (e.g., concrete nouns) are more memorable High imageability Low imageability church, beggar, arm, apple virtue, history, silence, hope Can be encoded in terms of: Can be encoded in terms of: ▪ Visual appearance ▪ Visual appearance 1 route 2 routes ▪ Verbal meaning ▪ Verbal meaning Multiple encoding routes improve the chance of successful recall! 28  E FFECT S ON E PIS ODIC MEM ORY Levels of processing 29  Levels of Processing Theory Why does meaning facilitate long-term memory? Craik & Lockhart (1972): Levels of processing hypothesis Visual (structure) Input Phonological (acoustic) LTM Semantic (meaning) 30  Levels of Processing Theory Why does meaning facilitate long-term memory? Craik & Lockhart (1972): Levels of processing hypothesis Visual LTM (structure) LTM Input Phonological (acoustic) LTM Semantic (meaning) 31  Levels of Processing Theory Why does meaning facilitate long-term memory? Craik & Lockhart (1972): Levels of processing hypothesis Visual (structure) Input Phonological (acoustic) LTM Semantic (meaning) 32  Levels of Processing Theory Why does meaning facilitate long-term memory? Craik & Lockhart (1972): Levels of processing hypothesis Visual (structure) Input Phonological (acoustic) Semantic (meaning) LTM 33  Craik & Tulving (1975) Task: ▪ Words studied and participants asked to make 3 judgments: Visual processing (e.g. “Is TABLE in upper case?” Y/N) Levels of Phonological (e.g. “Does DOG rhyme with LOG?” Y/N) Processing (LOP) Semantic (e.g. “Does FIELD fit in the sentence: ‘The horse lived in a ___.”Y/N) Test: ▪ Recognise the words (old or new). 34  Craik & Tulving (1975) Results: Levels of Processing (LOP) ▪ Deep processing better recognition – particularly for “YES” responses ▪ Studies with matched RTs across tasks observed the same effect 35  Deeper coding is better! § Replicated in numerous studies (various encoding tasks) Levels of § Affects both recognition and recall Processing (LOP) § Incidental or not memory test 36  Limitations and Criticism § Difficult to define and measure § Processing speed ? Levels of § Levels of processing (features) are not processed in a serial Processing order but simultaneously (LOP) § Deeper is not always more memorable! 37  Principle: Memory retrieval is best when the cues available at testing are similar to those available at encoding. Transfer- Example: appropriate processing Study: pictures of objects (a dog, a house etc.) (TAP) Test: pictures or words Memory is better if format is the same at encoding as at testing (e.g., Köhler, et al., 2000). LOP effect can be explained in terms of TAP: deep encoding more similar to the way memory is tested. 38 TAP Support Morris, Bransford, and Franks (1977) Task: ▪ Incidental learning: participants were not told that they would be tested later ▪ Phonological or Semantic judgments about words Test: ▪ Standard recognition test for the encoded words ▪ Rhyming recognition test for the encoded words – e.g., was there a word that rhymed with ”bar”? 39 TAP Support Morris, Bransford, and Franks (1977) Results: ▪ Standard recognition test: same as LOP theory ▪ Rhyming recognition test: Phonological led to better performance Conclusion: ▪ Learning more efficient when tested the same way was learned 40 Why is Deeper Coding Better? Despite criticism deeper processing of information is advantageous Craik & Tulving (1975): Richer and more elaborate encoding leads to better memory Elaborative rehearsal enhances delayed long-term learning more than maintenance rehearsal Maintenance rehearsal: As something was learned vs Elaborative rehearsal: Linking it to other material 41 Hierarchical organization Bower et al. (1969): Recall is better when words are organised than when presented in scrambled order 42  ▪ Tulving (1962) memory is benefited by subjective organization: ▪ Chunking together separate words for recall, even if those words weren’t encoded together ▪ Items are often chunked together if they: Organization ▪ linked to a common associate e.g. SYRINGE, POINT, HAYSTACK, and KNITTING are all linked to NEEDLE ▪ Come from the same semantic category (e.g. professions) ▪ Form a logical hierarchical structure or matrix 43  Mandler, 1967 Task: ◦ Deck of cards with a word on each Intention to ◦ Four groups: Learn 1. Learn the words 2. Sort the cards by meaning Is organisation more Higher recall important? 3. Sort the cards by meaning – will be tested later 4. Arrange the words in columns Results: ◦ Sorting by meaning with or without knowledge of the test produced similar recall ◦ Worst recall in the fourth group Conclusion: ◦ Attention to the material and organise them meaningfully is more important ◦ Intention has minimal effect, while level/type of processing matters more 44 Summary FACTORS THAT AID ENCODING Create connections Active creation Imagery Generate Meaning Test Organisation LOP/TAP Recall by groups Deeper processing Present in an organised way Similar encoding – retrieval procedures 45  This week’s reading Baddley, Eyesenck, Anderson (2020). Memory. Chapter 6 (pages 163 – 179) 46