Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Sensory Memory
Document related concepts
Transcript
Introductory Psychology Lectures A series of PowerPoint lectures to accompany the introductory psychology textbooks offered by Worth publishers Editor: Harvey G. Shulman, Ph.D. Memory Joe Williams The Ohio State University Department of Psychology © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 1 Modal Model of the Mind Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 2 Modal Model of the Mind Three memory store that differ in function, capacity and duration Control processes - control movement of information within and between memory stores Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 3 Sensory Memory Store Sensory Input Sensory Memory Function - holds information long enough to be processed for basic physical characteristics Capacity - large can hold many items at once Duration - very brief retention of images .3 sec for visual info 2 sec for auditory info © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 4 Sensory Memory Store Sensory Input Sensory Memory Divided into two subtypes: iconic memory visual information echoic memory auditory information Visual or iconic memory was discovered by Sperling in 1960 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 5 Sperling’s Experiment Presented matrix of letters for 1/20 seconds Report as many letters as possible Subjects recall only half of the letters Was this because subjects didn’t have enough time to view entire matrix? No How did Sperling know this? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 6 Sperling’s Experiment Sperling showed people can see and recall ALL the letters momentarily Sounded low, medium or high tone immediately after matrix disappeared High Medium Low tone signaled 1 row to report recall was almost perfect Memory for image fades after 1/3 seconds or so, making report of entire display hard to do © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 7 Sperling’s Iconic Memory Experiment © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 8 Sperling’s Iconic Memory Experiment © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 9 Sperling’s Iconic Memory Experiment © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 10 Sperling’s Iconic Memory Experiment © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 11 Sperling’s Iconic Memory Experiment G A V M K U X L S F Q J O N U A N Z © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 12 What Letters Do You See? ….. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 13 What Letters Do You See? ….. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 14 What Letters Do You See? ….. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 15 What Letters Do You See? ….. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 16 What Letters Do You See? ….. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 17 Sensory Memory Store Sensory Input Sensory Memory Sensory memory forms automatically, without attention or interpretation Attention is needed to transfer information to working memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 18 Working Memory Store Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Working or Short-term Memory 19 Working Memory Store Function - conscious processing of information where information is actively worked on Capacity - limited (holds 7 +/- 2 items) Duration - brief storage (about 30 seconds) Code - often based on sound or speech even with visual inputs Sensory Input Attention Sensory Memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Working or Short-term Memory 20 Working Memory Store What happens if you need to keep information in working memory longer than 30 seconds? To demonstrate, memorize the following phone number (presented one digit at a time)... 8 5 7 91 6 3 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 21 Working Memory Store What is the number? 857-9163 The number lasted in your working memory longer than 30 seconds So, how were you able to remember the number? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 22 Maintenance Rehearsal Mental or verbal repetition of information Allows information to remain in working memory longer than the usual 30 seconds Maintenance rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Working or Short-term Memory 23 Maintenance Rehearsal What happens if you can’t use maintenance rehearsal? Memory decays quickly To demonstrate, again memorize a phone number (presented one digit at a time) BUT, have to count backwards from 1,000 by sevens (i.e., 1014, 1007, 1000 … etc.) 6 2 8 50 9 4 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 24 Working Memory Store What is the number? 628-5094 Without rehearsal, memory fades © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 25 Peterson’s STM Task Test of memory for 3-letter nonsense syllables Participants count backwards for a few seconds, then recall Without rehearsal, memory fades © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 26 Working Memory Model Baddeley (1992) 3 interacting components Visuospatial Sketch Pad Central Executive © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Phonological Loop 27 Working Memory Model Visuospatial sketch pad - holds visual and spatial info Phonological loop - holds verbal information Central executive - coordinates all activities of working memory; brings new information into working memory from sensory and long-term memory Visuospatial Sketch pad Central Executive © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Phonological Loop 28 Long-Term Memory Store Once information passes from sensory to working memory, it can be encoded into long-term memory Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 29 Long-Term Memory Store Function - organizes and stores information more passive form of storage than working memory Unlimited capacity Duration - thought by some to be permanent Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Encoding Attention Sensory Memory Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 30 Long-Term Memory Store Encoding - process that controls movement from working to long-term memory store Retrieval - process that controls flow of information from long-term to working memory store Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 31 Summary Modal model of memory three memory stores (sensory, working and long-term memory) control processes (attention, maintenance rehearsal, encoding and retrieval) govern movement of information within and between stores © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 32 Review of Long-Term Memory Organizes and stores information Capacity unlimited Thought by some to be permanent Encoding transfers info from STM to LTM Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Encoding Attention Sensory Memory Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 33 Elaboration Focus on meaning of information to encode it into LTM don’t simply repeat items over and over tie item to other info in memory also called elaborative rehearsal © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 34 Ways to Use Elaboration Actively question new information Think about its implications Relate information to things you already know Generate own examples of concepts Don’t highlight passage as you read focus on the ideas in the text © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 35 Which Level is More Effective? Elaboration leads to better recall than shallow processing Type of Processing Deep 0 Shallow -Acoustic Shallow - Visual 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percent of words recalled © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 90 100 36 More Evidence for Elaboration Positive correlation between grades and use of elaboration in 5th grade students In an experiment, college students assigned to use elaboration received higher grades than students not taught elaboration © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 37 Organization Chunking Hierarchical organization 1492181219982 0 01 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 38 Chunking Grouping small bits of information into larger units of information expands working memory load Which is easier to remember? 4 8 3 7 9 2 5 1 6 483 792 516 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 39 Hierarchical Organization Related items clustered together to form categories Related categories clustered to form higher-order categories Remember list items better if list presented in categories poorer recall if presented randomly Even if list items are random, people still organize info in some logical pattern © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 40 Hierarchical Organization Mammals Dogs German Shepherds Cats Scottish Terriers © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Siamese Calico 41 Visualization Dual coding theory Key word method Method of loci © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 42 Review of Long-Term Memory Retrieval transfers info from LTM to STM Forgetting - inability to retrieve previously available information Why do people forget? Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 43 Forgetting Theories Encoding failure Role of time Interference theories © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 44 Forgetting as Encoding Failure Information never encoded into LTM X © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 45 Encoding Failure Demonstrations What letters accompany the number 5 on your telephone? Where is the number 0 on your calculator? According to this theory, objects seen frequently, but information is never encoded into LTM © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 46 Forgetting as Retrieval Failure Not all forgetting is due to encoding failures Sometimes information IS encoded into LTM, but we can’t retrieve it X © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 47 Role of Time : Decay Theory Memories fade away or decay gradually if unused Time plays critical role Ability to retrieve info declines with time after original encoding Problem: Many things change with time. Something else may change and actually cause forgetting: Interference © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 48 Interference Theories “Memories interfering with memories” Forgetting NOT caused by mere passage of time Caused by one memory competing with or replacing another memory Two types of interference © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 49 Two Types of Interference Types of interference Retroactive Interference © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Proactive Interference 50 Retroactive Interference When a NEW memory interferes with remembering OLD information Example: When new phone number interferes with ability to remember old phone number © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 51 Retroactive Interference Example: Learning a new language interferes with ability to remember old language © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 52 Proactive Interference Opposite of retroactive interference When an OLD memory interferes with remembering NEW information Example: Memories of where you parked your car on campus the past week interferes with ability find car today © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 53 Proactive Interference Example: Previously learned language interferes with ability to remember newly learned language © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 54 Review of Interference Theory Retroactive Interference Learn A Learn B Recall A, B interferes Proactive Interference Learn A Learn B Recall B, A interferes Interference reflects competition between responses. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 55 Review of Long-Term Memory Retrieval transfers info from LTM to STM How is information organized so that it may be easily retrieved? Maintenance Rehearsal Sensory Input Sensory Memory Attention Encoding Working or Long-term Short-term memory Memory Retrieval © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 56 Are Memories Organized? Demonstration: recite the days of the week recite the days of the week in alphabetical order demonstrates that long-term memory is organized not just a random jumble of information How are memories organized? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 57 Demonstration List of words will be read one at a time Recall as many words as possible © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 58 Demonstration Look at your sheet Is there a pattern to your answers? Most list several fruits, then vehicles, then furniture (or vice versa) © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 59 Types of Mental Associations Association by contiguity concepts are associated because they occur together in a person’s previous experience Association by similarity concepts with shared properties are associated © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 60 Network Model Attempt to depict structure of memory as concepts linked by associations Car Truck Bus Fire Engine House Fire Ambulance Red Hot Stove Rose Apple Cherry Pot Pan Violet Flower Pear © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Pie 61 Network Models Links between concepts common properties provide basis for mental link Shorter path between two concepts = stronger association in memory Activation of a concept starts decremental spread of activity to nearby concepts Also known as the spreading-activation model © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 62 Retrieval Cue Theories Retrieval cue - a clue, prompt or hint that can help memory retrieval Forgetting is the result of using improper retrieval cues © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 63 Encoding Specificity Principle Learn word list generate ‘cue’ when see word (jam - jelly) at recall cues given as retrieval aid (jelly or traffic) Cues generated during learning (jelly) more effective during retrieval than new cues (traffic) © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 64 Context-Dependent Memory Improved ability to remember if tested in the same environment as the initial learning environment better recall if tested in classroom where you initially learned info than if moved to a new classroom if learning room smells of chocolate or mothballs, people will recall more info if tested in room with the same smell compared to different smell or no smell at all © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 65 Context-Dependent Effects Compare words learned underwater vs on land Words heard underwater are best recalled underwater Words heard on land are best recalled on land © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 66 Context Dependent Effects Time of day is also important Learn at 3 pm Perform better at 3 pm Than 9 pm 12 12 12 9 3 6 9 3 6 © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 9 3 6 67 State-Dependent Memory Recall improved if internal physiological or emotional state is the same during testing and initial encoding Context vs State dependent Context-dependent - external, environmental factors State-dependent - internal, physiological factors © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 68 State-Dependent Effects Mood or emotions also a factor Bipolar depressives information learned in manic state, recall more if testing done during manic state information learned in depressed state, recall more if testing done during depressed state © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 69 State Dependent Effects If drink during learning May recall better with drink Than without But not as well as sober all the way! © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 70 Memory Construction Recall not an exact replica of original events Recall a construction built and rebuilt from various sources Often fit memories into existing beliefs © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 71 Schema Theories Schema - mental representation of an object, scene or event example: schema of a countryside may include green grass, hills, farms, a barn, cows, etc. Scripts - type of schema mental organization of events in time example of a classroom script: come into class, sit down, talk to friends, bell rings, instructor begins to speak, take notes, bell rings again, leave class, etc. Schemas & scripts provide framework for new information © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 72 Eyewitness Testimony Memory can be distorted as people try to fit new info into existing schemas Eyewitnesses usually see something complex just once then have to remember it Sometimes new information is distorted by fitting into an existing schema subsequent information (famous experiment by Loftus) © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 73 Loftus Experiment Subjects shown video of an accident between two cars Some subjects asked: How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other? Others asked: How fast were the cars going when they hit each other? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 74 Loftus’s Results Speed estimates depended on how the question was phrased Subjects memory for broken glass also depended on the phrasing of the speed question. But this was a false memory: there was no broken glass © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 75 Long-term Memory Systems Long-term Memory Explicit Memory Episodic Memory Semantic Memory Implicit Memory Procedural Memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Classical Conditioning Priming 76 Explicit Memory Also known as declarative or conscious memory Properties: memory consciously recalled or declared Can use to directly respond to a question Two subtypes of explicit memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 77 Subtypes of Explicit Memory Explicit Memory Episodic Memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Semantic Memory 78 Episodic Memory Memory tied to your own personal experiences Examples: what did you have for dinner? do you like to eat caramel apples? Why are these explicit memories? Because you can actively declare your answers to these questions © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 79 Semantic Memory Memory not tied to personal events General facts and definitions about the world Examples: who was George Washington? what is a cloud? what is the climate at the north pole? These are explicit memories because you can describe what you know about them. Unlike episodic memories, your knowledge does NOT include your personal experience i.e., You may never have been to the north pole but do know about it. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 80 Implicit Memory Also known as nondeclarative memory Influences your thoughts or behavior, but does not enter consciousness Three subtypes © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 81 Subtypes of Implicit Memory Implicit Memory Classical Conditioning Procedural Memory © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Priming 82 Classical Conditioning Studied earlier Implicit because it is automatically retrieved © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 83 Procedural Memory Memory that enables you to perform specific learned skills or habitual responses Examples: Riding a bike How to speak grammatically Tying your shoe laces Why are these procedural memories implicit? Can’t readily describe their contents try describing how to tie your shoes They are automatically retrieved when appropriate © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 84 Priming Priming is influence of one memory on another priming is implicit because it does not depend on awareness and is automatic Here is a demonstration © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 85 Priming Demonstration Unscramble the following words: O R E S L T E P A K T A L S TSME L O B S O M S ELAF © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. ROSE PETAL STALK STEM BLOSSOM 86 Priming Demonstration ELAF = LEAF Why not respond FLEA? Because flower parts were primed (flower power) © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 87 Priming Activation of one or more existing memories by a stimulus Activation not a conscious decision BUT, can effect subsequent thoughts and actions Two types of priming © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 88 Two Types of Priming Priming Conceptual © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. Perceptual 89 Conceptual Priming The semantic meaning of priming stimulus influences your encoding or retrieval Thought to involve activation of concepts stored in semantic memory Example: Flower power priming demonstration Does not depend on sense modality: pictures can conceptually prime sounds AS THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 90 Priming across modalities Look at the picture . Then when the instructor says a word, write it down. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 91 Perceptual Priming Prime enhances ability to identify a test stimulus based on its physical features Does not work across sense modalities © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 92 Perceptual Priming Can you identify the fragmented stimulus to the right? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 93 Perceptual Priming What if you were shown the following slide earlier in the lecture? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 94 Perceptual Priming Can you identify the fragmented stimulus to the right? © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 95 Evidence for Separate Implicit/Explicit Systems Neurophysiological evidence Patient H.M. life-threatening seizures originating in temporal lobe surgically removed portions of temporal lobe © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 96 Temporal Lobe Includes: hippocampus amygdala © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 97 Patient H.M. Surgery was effective in reducing seizures BUT, had other side effects as well Can remember explicit memories acquired before the surgery e.g., old addresses, normal vocabulary Cannot form NEW explicit memories e.g., remembering the name of someone he met 30 minutes prior cannot name new world leaders or performers can recognize a picture of himself from before his surgery but not from after and doesn’t recognize himself in a mirror © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 98 Patient H.M. H.M. has severe explicit / declarative memory disorder H.M. is almost normal on procedural or implicit memory tasks including priming, classical conditioning, and learning motor skills This shows that explicit memory depends upon the temporal lobes and implicit does not © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 99 Patient H.M. Summary Temporal lobe damage led to deficits in explicit, but not implicit memory H.M. had both episodic and semantic memory deficits Damage to the hippocampus alone produces episodic, but not semantic memory deficits Why did H.M. show both types of explicit memory deficits? He had damage not only to hippocampus, but to other structures as well © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 100 Hippocampal Damage Deficits in forming new explicit memories © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 101 Copyright Copyright 1999 by Worth Publishers, New York, NY and by The Ohio State University. All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission of the copyright owners. © 1999 The Ohio State University & Worth Publishers. 102
