Cog Psych Final Flashcards
Hippocampus
Medial temporal lobe
Close to amygdala which is involved with emotions
Receives highly processed information from cortex
Memory formation
See visual experience and info makes it to frontal lobe. Links all these features of the memory together so everything is linked in the episode
Event Retrieval: Reconstructing Past Neural Patterns
Vivid remembering reactivates sensory-specific cortex
Hippocampus & memory consolidation [memory transfer]
Hippocampus transfers information to get consolidated in cerebral cortex and becomes less critical for memory
Hippocampus: importance of sleep
Sleep consolidates memory. Play experience throughout days during sleep so it replays memories from hippocampus to cerebral cortex. You wake up so cortical modules have strengthened connections within or between them so hippocampus is now less important for memory
Anterograde amnesia (common)
Unable to recall events after an accident. Improper transfer from short term memory to long term memory
the inability to remember events you experience (episodic memory) and facts you encounter (semantic memory) after the brain injury without hippocampus.
Retrograde amnesia
Unable to recall events prior to accident
MTL damage impairs not only new learning, but also disrupts memories acquired before the injury. Gradient over time. More likely to lose memories closer to damage such as days before compared to years ago
MTL = medial temporal lobe
Ribot’s Law & ‘time graded’ amnesia
The vulnerability of a given memory is inversely related to the time of its initial formation.
Patient Henry Molaison (H.M.) & the Amnesic Syndrome
First major seizure at age 16. Had epiliepsy develop in teen years. Seizures coming from medial temporal love
Bilateral medial-temporal lobe resection (hippocampus & nearby structures) to stop these seizures.
Recovered from neurosurgery. Seizures stopped but something different about him. First report of pervasive & profound amnesia.
Neuropsychological examinations characterizing the amnesic syndrome
Recollections of HM’s distant past are still available. Retained all memories up until time of surgery. Anything that not yet been consolidated by hippocampus was lost including any new memories made past the surgery
Hippocampus ‘teaching’ cortical
Play experience throughout days during sleep so it replays memories from hippocampus to cerebral cortex. You wake up so cortical modules have strengthened connections within or between them so hippocampus is now less important for memory
Hippocampus “teaches” the cortex during sleep
Double dissociation between episodic
memory (hippocampus-dependent) and
procedural memory (e.g.,
cerebellar-dependent in mirror tracing task)
Patients with damage to the cerebellum are impaired at mirror-tracing (but perform normally on declarative memory tasks)
Patient H.M. could learn new skills (procedural memory) despite amnesia
Precision of human memory (e.g. recall a
penny/apple logo)
Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm
Participants presented with lists following common theme. 90% of participants were likely to recall these words but also likely to recall words that were the list theme
Memory
We often remember only the ‘gist’ of what we experience rather than the veridical details
Memory is a reconstructive process
memory errors
We take whatever comes back to mind and fill in the gaps with best guesses. Often, we get details right but sometimes it is wrong or you can switch details. Retrieving a past event engages the same brain mechanisms as imagining a future event. Overlapping brain regions, almost indistinguishable
Hippocampus damage + future
Patients with hippocampal damage show an impaired ability to envision the future
Source monitoring error
Subjects must commit a source monitoring error, wrongly attributing their memory construction to personal experience
Type of memory error where the source of a memory is incorrectly attributed to some specific recollected experience
Misinformation effects
The tendency for postevent information, especially misleading information, to interfere with the memory of the original event
Misleading information can affect memory for the actual event.
Misinformation effects: Car accident studies
Loftus & Palmer (1974): Subjects watch a film on traffic safety that contained an accident.
Subjects later answer questions about the accident.
On one question, subjects asked: About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
Other subjects given same question, but with “hit” replaced by: contacted or smashed.
Did the question affect memory for other aspects of the accident?
If the word was more intense, then subjects thought car was going faster
Subjects given misleading information after encoding had more false memories for the details of the visual scene
Misinformation effects: Planted memories (e.g., lost in the mall study)
Loftus & Pickrell (1995): Lost in a Shopping Mall
Participants read one-paragraph stories about three events that actually happened to them and one that did not (lost in a shopping mall)
Then interviewed about each of these memories.
6 of 24 subjects developed false memories for the mall scenario by the third interview.
Hyman, Husband, & Billings (1995): Accident at a family wedding. Spilling punch on somebody’s dress
3% of participants provided false recall in 1st interview
27% of participants provided false recall in 2nd interview
Porter et al. (1999)
Planted memory study: Viscous animal attack
26% of participants “recovered” a complete memory for the false experience, and an additional 30% of participants recalled some aspects of the experience
Wade et al. (2002) Doctored photos of hot air balloon ride
After 3 interviews, 50% of participants created completely false or partial false memories
Braun, Ellis, and Loftus (2002): Met Bugs Bunny at Disneyland
Not even a disney character
Misinformation effects: Implications
False memories can even lead to confessions to a crime one didn’t commit
Rapport-building, social pressure, guilt-presumptive questioning, leading questions, presenting suspects false evidence, typically intermixed with true details, memory retrieval techniques associated with memory distortion (e.g., guided imagery)
Categorization/category
Categorization is the process through which ideas and objects are recognized, differentiated, classified, and understood
Category: a set of items that are grouped together on the basis of something*
You see a slide of cats and dogs. Can group them based on animal type, color of fur, etc.
Concepts
Concepts are our mental representations of categories
Natural categories
groupings that occur naturally (birds, trees)
Artifact categories
designed/invented (computers, sports cars)
Stable categories
natural/artifact are typically stable
people generally agree on what goes into them, and what are the criteria of inclusion
Ad-hoc categories
unstable categories defined for a special purpose or within a specific context
e.g., “things to write on”, “things to take with you in a fire”
Basic level of categorization (Eleanor Rosch)
Eleanor Rosch argued that there is a basic level of categorization
Neither too general nor too specific
Tends to be used in speaking and reasoning about categories
Here, “chair” is the basic-level category, as opposed to “furniture” (more general, or superordinate) or “wooden desk chair” (more specific, or subordinate). Picture was of wooden desk chair
Naming an airplane “airplane” vs aircraft or specific airplane model type
Naming a dog “dog” rather than mammal or poodle
It is easier to explain what features are common to members of basic-level categories than for other levels
Superordinate levels of categorization
“chair” is the basic-level category, as opposed to “furniture” (more general, or superordinate)
Subordinate levels of categorization
“wooden desk chair” (more specific, or subordinate)
Classical theory of categorization
Explicit rules for category membership
A category is defined in terms of necessary and sufficient features
Necessary: has to be there
Sufficient: all that you need
These features define the category. Such as describing geometric shapes
This representation is abstract
It does not store any information about specific exemplars
Classical theory of categorization criticism
Defining features often can’t be found for example with cat.
You can often remove any particular feature and some object will still be a category member
Non-necessary features affect categorization
Asking people about parallelograms but they pick one specific shape despite there being more examples
For many categories there are no clear defining features
Prototype theory of categorization
Prototypes (mental average of all category members)
The prototype is an ideal category member or average of the various category members. The category representation is abstract.
Some categories are highly variable
Assumes that information about individual instances is not stored, or at least is not used to guide categorization
However, people do seem to store information about individual exemplars, and can sometimes be influenced by these specific exemplars
Also, prototype theory doesn’t have a way of taking into account the variance of a given category
Prototype theory of categorization criticism
Also, prototype theory doesn’t have a way of taking into account the variance of a given category
Prototype Theory Problem: Assumes that information about individual instances is not stored, or at least is not used to guide categorization
Prototypes and Graded Membership
Objects closer to a prototype are “better” members of the category than objects further from the prototype.
Example: Some birds are “birdier” than other birds
Exemplar theory of categorization
Individual instances
Category judgments are made by comparing a new exemplar to all the old exemplars of a category or to the exemplar that most readily comes to mind
Concepts are represented by all of the exemplars that have been experienced
When we categorize something, we compare it one or more exemplars retrieved from memory, and decide the category based on the most similar exemplars
The category representation is concrete: There is not necessarily a summary of the category
Exemplar theory of categorization criticism
Problem: Assumes that many individual exemplars are stored in memory without “blending”
Problem: Has trouble accounting for people’s ability to extract general properties of categories to allow classification of new instances
Problems with both prototype and exemplar views
Both rely heavily on the idea of similarity & Similarity is always relative: There are an infinite number of ways in which two things can be similar and We require some way of knowing what features are being compared
When there is high variability within a category, a new potential category member may have both: Low similarity with all instances of that category (Exemplar model) or Low similarity with the averaged prototype of that category (Prototype model)
Theory-based categorization
We know much more about categories than a list of their features or their values in dimensional space. Categories provide explanations for how things work in the world
The same way that theories provide explanations for scientific phenomena
They center on causal relations between entities in the world
Theories guide perception by leading us to believe that particular features are interesting and others are not
Theory-based Theory
Center on causal relationship between things. Categories provide explanations of how things work. Categories include causal explanations!
Family resemblance + Ludwig Wittgenstein
Ludwig Wittgenstein proposed that members of a category have a family resemblance to each other
Dark hair, glasses, a mustache, and a big nose are typical for this family but do not define the family.
Cloud of features that tend to be there but not always
Typicality effects
Some members of a category are more “typical” than others
They are verified more quickly (sentence verification task)
But, these differences are related to non-necessary features (e.g., ability to fly), which are not included in the classical theory
Typicality ratings may be based on the total number of typical features
Typicality effect: Malt & Smith, 1984
reated typicality scale with higher number correlating to more typicality
Production task: How many examples of fruit can you name in the next 30 seconds?
More likely to name apple and orange vs kiwi, tomato, olive, avocado
Graded membership: some fruits are “fruitier” than others”
sentence verification task
a procedure in which participants are briefly presented with simple sentences and asked to make quick judgments about them
Levels of Language: Phonology (phonemes)
the smallest unit of speech that can be used to distinguish an utterance from another (in a given language).
In English, phonemes are made of a consonant or a vowel
Different languages employ different sets of phonemes (and different types, such as “clicks”)
Phonemes are produced by modulating the flow of air from the lungs to the mouth and nose.
Phonemes can be classified according to specific features
Coarticulation
the pronunciation of a phoneme is changed by the following phoneme
Between phonemes in a word: truth vs. tooth
Between phonemes in different words: “can’t handle”
Sequences of Phonemes
Only some are acceptable in a given language.
For example, the sequence [tl] is not acceptable in English
Adjustments for certain phoneme sequences
For example, the [s] sound becomes a [z] in words like “bags”
Voice onset time (VOT)
The time between the beginning of the pronunciation of the word and the onset of the vibration of the vocal chords
“ba” your vocal chords vibrate right from the start
“pa” your vocal chords do not vibrate until after a short delay
Continuous = Actual sounds
Discrete = Actual perception
segmentation errors
A major challenge for speech recognition is phoneme/word segmentation
Word segmentation, also known as decompounding, is the process of splitting a word into its constituent parts
Categorical perception of phonemes
(voice onset time (VOT))
Liberman et al. (1957) manipulated the VOT, in systematic increments
Our categorization of phonemes shows abrupt boundaries, even when there is no corresponding abrupt change in the stimuli themselves.
This phenomenon is referred to as categorical perception
McGurk Effect
an auditory-visual illusion that illustrates how perceivers merge information for speech sounds across the senses. For example, when we hear the sound “ba” while seeing the face of a person articulate “ga,” many adults perceive the sound “da,” a third sound which is a blend of the two.
Properties of Language: Symbolic
make us of arbitrary relation between sounds and meaning
A referent is the actual object, action, or event in the world that a word refers to.
We even use different words to refer to the same thing within the English language (dialects)
Association between the sound “dog” and the object is arbitrary. Could be any other sound (e.g., perro). We often use different words to refer to the same thing
Properties of Language: Discrete Infinity (generativity)
the capacity to create an endless series of new combinations, all built from the same fundamental units (words in dictionary)
finite set of elements can generate a (potentially) infinite set of ‘meanings’
(generativity)
It really bothered me that Professor Rissman spent way too much of his lecture talking about how I was amazed that it disturbed Mary when I told her that my roommate heard a rumor that John hates cheese
Properties of Language: Structure dependence
meaning is conferred through a specific arrangement of symbols
Language is governed by rules that impart meaning and define which combinations of elements are acceptable and which are not
John kissed Mary
Mary kissed John
Kissed John Mary*
John Mary kissed*
* indicates grammatically incorrect
Properties of Language: Displacement
Language allows us to think of and communicate about things that are beyond what is currently being sensed (or things that may not exist)
language allows referring to ideas/elements that are not “there”
Language allows us to think of, and communicate about, ‘things’ beyond what is immediately ‘sensed’
“On Sunday night, your next quiz will be due.”
“Dark matter is a type of matter which neither emits nor scatters light or other electromagnetic radiation and is estimated to constitute 83% of matter in the universe”
“Imagine no possessions. I wonder if you can. No need for greed or hunger. A brotherhood of man. Imagine all the people. Sharing all the world…”
Properties of Language: Organized at multiple levels
sounds, words, sentences, paragraphs, and text
Morphemes
Morpheme: smallest unit of meaning within a language
Morphemes can be divided into: root words and affixes (i.e., prefix, suffix)
“dog” single morpheme (dog)
“dogs” 2 morphemes (dog & -s [number])
“studied” 2 morphemes (study & -ed [tense])
“restudied” 3 morphemes
“related” only 2 morphemes
Dog (single) vs. Dogs 2 morphemes (dog & -s [number])
Syntax
the systematic way in which (categories of) words can be combined and sequenced to generate meaningful phrases and sentences
Rules apply to grammatical categories (nouns, verbs, prepositions, adjectives, adverbs)
One kind of syntactic rule is a phrase-structure rule, a constraint that governs the pattern of branching in a phrase-structure tree.
One such rule specifies that a sentence must contain a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP).
Transformational grammar
a sentence can be rearranged to express new meanings (relates to structure dependence)
E.g. “Mark drank a cup of tea” vs. “a cup of tea drank Mark?”
Recursion
sentence = noun + verb + sentence
E.g. Sentence: “He went to the park” * Recursive sentence: “I thought that he went to the park”
Syntax first approach
the theory that the parsing of a sentence is first derived based on principles of grammar alone, without regard to the meaning of the words but experiments show that we do not rely on grammar alone to parse sentences
Late Closure - garden path sentences
as long as it makes sense, we keep attaching the incoming words to the phrase we are processing
When we perceive a sentence, we must parse the sentence’s syntactic structure
A garden-path sentence initially suggests one interpretation, which turns out to be wrong.
Syntax Ambiguity
a sentence may be interpreted in multiple ways due to ambiguous sentence structure. Extralinguistic context can help with understanding of sentence. Factors outside of language itself can affect sentence understanding/comprehension
Ex: “Squad helps dog bite victim”
The girl looked at the boy with the telescope
Context [extralinguistic]
Extralinguistic context: factors outside of language itself can affect sentence parsing
The extralinguistic context refers to factors outside of language itself
The sentence “Put the apple on the towel into the box” is a garden-path sentence, unless the sentence is uttered with the appropriate visual context.
Prosody
patterns of pauses or pitch changes that characterize speech production. Used for emphasis, highlighting sentence’s intended structure, assert question/statement. Ex: I never said she stole my money.
Signal the difference between a question and an assertion
Pragmatics
how we use words, context in which we say them, and what’s left unsaid
Syntax v. Semantics
“Colorless green ideas sleep furiously” (Noam Chomsky)
compare with “Furiously sleep ideas green colorless.”*
“Twas brillig and the shlithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe” (L. Carroll ‘Jabberwocky’)
Illustrates that sentences can be syntactically correct, even when meaningless
Descriptive rules
characterize the language as it is ordinarily used by fluent speakers
Linguistics aims to provide a descriptive grammar of language
Prescriptive rules
standards for how language “ought” to be used
For example:
Don’t start a sentence with And or Because
Don’t end a sentence with a preposition
Don’t split an infinitive
We should keep a healthy dose of skepticism about prescriptive rules
This type of English I just can’t put up with
Up with this type of English I just cannot put.
Language acquisition & development
ages 2-11
people raised with wolves lose ability to learn language