Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
PSY 445: Learning & Memory Chapter 8: Short-Term Retention Short-Term Retention Retention over short intervals of time Some History James (1890) Primary Memory • Memories that have never left consciousness Secondary Memory • Memories that have been absent form consciousness and therefore belong to the psychological past Short-Term Retention Waugh & Norman (1965) • Reintroduced the primary-secondary distinction Primary Memory • Holds only a few items for only a few seconds; forgetting occurs rapidly if rehearsal is prevented • Addition of new items requires displacement of some other item already stored Secondary Memory • Information that is available for future recall These researchers proposed the following: • The fact that you can recall something immediately after presentation does not mean it has entered secondary memory • Recall can come from primary memory, secondary memory, or both Two Memory Stores Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968, 1971) • Dual-Store Theory (1968) renamed Modal Model (1971) • Renamed because it became the prototype of other theories • Short-Term Store (STS) • Long-term Store (LTS) Atkinson & Shiffrin’s (1971) Modal Model Sensory Registers • Detect sensory input from the various modalities • Visual, auditory, haptic, etc. • Memories are held for only a few hundred milliseconds Short-Term Store Lasts a few seconds and is made up of: • Temporary working memory • Control processes: • Rehearsal • Coding • Decisions • Retrieval strategies Long-Term Store • Permanent memory store Two memory stores are not enough… Baddeley & Hitch (1974) • Proposed a model of working memory – a system that supports complex cognitive activities like reasoning instead of just short-term storage STM Tasks Brown-Peterson Distractor Task (Brown, 1958; Peterson & Peterson, 1959) Procedure • Read three letters, then a number • Begin counting backwards by 3’s • Counting backwards prevented the rehearsal of the letters • After a set time, recall three letters Results • Recall drops dramatically after just a few seconds See next slide Brown-Peterson Distractor Task Peterson & Peterson (1959) 3 sec delay recall rate 80% 18 sec delay recall rate 10% Brown-Peterson Distractor Task Why the quick forgetting? • Memory trace vanished because of decay during the passage of time after hearing the letters • Closely spaced trials lead to poorer recall; susceptibility to interference Proactive Interference seems to be a problem • Cumulative memory seems to be occurring as memory form previous lists may be hampering recall • Information learned previously interferes with learning new information: seems to build up across trials Types of Interference Proactive Interference • The disruptive effect of prior learning on the recall of new information (old materials increasing the forgetting of new materials) Retroactive Interference • The disruptive effect of new information on the recall of previous information (new materials increasing the forgetting of old materials) Time 1 Time 2 Study French Study Spanish Study French Study Spanish Test Recall Spanish Recall French Interference Proactive Retroactive Brown-Peterson Distractor Task Why the quick forgetting? • Similarity of items causes additional interference with recall • If the words come from the same semantic category , performance declines even more across trials • HOWEVER, if after several trials the category of target words is changed, recall increases dramatically: Release From Proactive Interference • When previously learned information no longer interferes with new information See next slide 12 Wickens et al. (1976): Procedures 13 Wickens et al. (1976): Results Trial 4: There is a release of Proactive Interference Memory Span The longest sequence of items that can be recalled after a single presentation Recall is attempted immediately; no delay or distractors Typically letters, numbers, or words are used George Miller (1920-2012) Miller (1956): “The Magic Number” 7 +/- 2 items His book Memory Span Conrad (1958) Procedure • Asked postal workers to listen to and then recall 7, 8, and 9 digits Results • 80% recall with 7 digits • 50% recall with 8 digits • 25% recall with 9 digits Interpretation • Successful replication of Miller’s basic research as average human memory is approximately 5 to 9 items Memory Span: The Word-Length Effect Baddeley, Thomson, & Buchanan (1975) • Memory for lists of words is better for short words than for long words • It takes longer to rehearse long words and to produce them during recall Characteristics of Verbal Short-Term Retention There are several objective features of STM that distinguishes it form LTM • Acoustic Encoding • Limited Capacity • Limited Duration • Susceptibility to Forgetting • Transfer to LTM Acoustic Encoding Short-term memory relies primarily on an acoustic rather than semantic or visual code • Word are remembered as they sound – as if they were being verbally rehearsed If words are encoded by sound sound-alike substitutions (errors) are likely • In serial-recall tasks errors occur when participants substitute letters that sounded like the correct letters (e.g. B for P) 19 Acoustic Encoding Conrad (1964) • Showed participants letters on the screen to remember • Errors made were close to the letter’s sound, not appearance • Example: F was mistaken as S or X, not P Limited Capacity Miller (1956) Posited that we could enlarge the “magic number” by increasing the amount of information contained within each item Not absolute digits or letters that you remember but groups (chunks) of things that you remember Chunking Organizing information into meaningful units so that it can better be remembered Chunking Helps Increase Limited Capacity Chase & Simon (1973) Procedure • Chess master vs. beginners • Memorize chess pieces positioned for a real chess game for 5 seconds • Reproduce the arrangement shortly after Garry Kasparov is best known as the world's greatest living chess player But he lost to Deep Blue Click on picture for video Chunking Helps Increase Limited Capacity Procedure • You have 5 seconds to memorize as much as you can • Then, draw an empty chess board and reproduce the arrangement of pieces Chase & Simon (1973) Procedure Actual Game Random Game Chase & Simon (1973) Chase & Simon (1973) Results Results (a) The chess master is better at reproducing actual game positions (b) Master’s performance drops to level of beginner when pieces are arranged randomly Chunking Helps Increase Limited Capacity Chase & Simon (1973) Results • Chess master did much better than novices on actual game board • The chess master’s advantage vanished when the board was arranged randomly – familiar patterns were destroyed Interpretation • Chess master did not have a superior STM (as some had suggested); rather he had stored many of the patterns that occur in real chess games in LTM • He saw the layout of chess pieces not in terms of individual pieces but in terms of 4-6 chunks, each made up of a group of pieces that formed familiar, meaningful patterns • The chess master’s advantage vanished when the board was arranged randomly – familiar patterns were destroyed Chunking Helps Increase Limited Capacity Ericcson et al. (1989) • College student had an initial digit span of 7 • After 230 one-hour training sessions for 2 years, he could remember up to 79 digits How did he do it? • By combining the numbers with meaningful sets: • 3 4 9 2 record for mile (3 min 49.2 sec) • 8 1 1 0 almost emergency (9 1 1) • 8 9 3 very old man, 89.3 Limited Duration • Without maintenance rehearsal, something stays in STM for between 15-30 seconds Forgetting: STM is Sensitive to Disruption Forgetting from STM is believed to be due to spontaneous fading of the memory trace over time or to the displacement of old items by new items • Does not take much to disrupt STM See next slide Forgetting: STM is Sensitive to Disruption Crowder (1972) Procedure • Hear list of nine items • Final auditory stimulus as cue to recall • “Suffix”: zero or buzzer Results • Zero-suffix: 50% more errors on last item Interpretation • Zero-suffix: Increases list length referred to it as the “suffix effect” Note: Other studies have seen the suffix effect take place among participants with hearing loss who are using sign language Transfer to LTM STM appears to help in the transfer of information into LTM • Several multistore theories suggest that retention in STM allows the opportunity for information to be transferred or copied into LTM – much consensus on this Other Modalities of STM Most STM testing in auditory and verbal material Here are some other modalities used to test STM • Visual STM • Spatial STM • STM for Actions • STM for Odors • STM in the Hearing Impaired Visual STM To study visual STM: Typical Procedure Acquisition Phase • Stimuli are presented as short lists of images (pictures, slides, etc.) • Images may be meaningless or meaningful Typical Test Phase • A test picture is presented and the participant decides whether it was in the previous list Spatial STM To study Spatial STM: Procedure Typical Acquisition Phase • Spatial positions illustrated by using computer screen • Asterisk is presented in one square at a time (random sequence) Typical Test Phase • Participants attempt to point to locations in the same order in which they appeared STM for Actions To study STM for Actions: Procedure Typical Acquisition Phase • Movement triplets are presented to participants • Varying delays; varying distractors Typical Test Phase • Participants attempt to recall in order the actions STM for Odors To study STM for Odors: Procedure Acquisition Phase • List of odorants is presented Test Phase • Participants attempt to recognize test odorants STM for the Hearing Impaired People sometimes recode from one modality to another • Hearing impaired participants are used to test this Procedure Typical Acquisition Phase • Hearing participants will be tested using words; hearingimpaired will be tested using signs Typical Test Phase • Compare the two groups to determine differences Limitations: varying levels of hearing impairment; amount of training in oral speech; varying degrees of expertise in different types of sign language Working Memory (WM) Refers to the system for temporarily maintaining mental representations that are relevant to the performance of a cognitive task in an activated state • More than just a storage system Reading span measures the capacity of working memory when attention must be paid to comprehension of sentences and to remembering a list of words 38 Working Memory: Modern STM Baddeley & Hitch (1974) Updated the STM model Working Memory • Limited capacity system for temporary storage and manipulation of information for complex tasks such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning 1. 2. Working memory consists of a number of parts Working memory helps us manipulate information to carry out complex tasks, not just store information Models of Working Memory Baddeley & Hitch (1974) Original model proposed a phonological loop and a visualspatial sketch pad coordinated by a central executive Models of Working Memory Later Baddeley added a fourth component (episodic buffer) • The phonological loop stores and rehearses verbal representations whereas the sketch pad does the same for visual/spatial representations. • Central executive focuses and switches attention, supervises and coordinates the storage components, and retrieves representations from long-term memory • Episodic buffer connects WM to LTM Baddeley (2001) 41 Phonological Loop Brief storage of verbal material Remember: STM primarily uses auditory coding Made of two parts: Storage • Passive, holds information • Decays in about 2 seconds without rehearsal Rehearsal • Active • Repeats information in storage to prevent decay 42 Visuospatial Sketch Pad Holds visual and spatial information • Used in doing anything visual - puzzles, drawings, etc. 43 Central Executive Pulls information from LTM and coordinates tasks • Uses information from the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad • Focuses on specific parts of task • Switches attention from one part to another 44 Episodic Buffer This integrates information across: 1. The phonological and visual stores 2. The operations of the central executive 3. Information entry and retrieval from LTM Is there really a separate STM? Neuropsychological Dissociations • Studies of individuals with impairment of auditory-verbal STM indicate they have different sites of brain injury than do patients without STM losses Mishkin & Appenzeller (1987) • Found that damage to the combined hippocampus and amygdala impaired short-term retention of objects recently shown to a monkey, but did not prevent long-term learning of objects • They gave food reward for correct response • STM task – monkey could not remember which of two objects had just been shown • LTM task – monkey could learn which of two objects was paired with food A Single-Memory Approach? An alternative explanation to the two-store memory theories suggests that we have a single set of memories – but memories can differ between those that are currently active and those that are inactive • This idea has not gained acceptance Credits Some of the slides in this presentation prepared with the assistance of the following web sites: www.csupomona.edu/.../PSY335%20PPTs/Baddeley/BChap3....