Cognitive, Learning, WEEK 10 Flashcards
Law of Repetition for making it stick
• Ebbinghaus’ law of repetition suggests the more time you spend on repeating information, the more likely it will be retained (with each repetition, more info is remembered until there is no more info left to learn > around 5th repetition
- This does generally works but not always + there may be better ways for optimising learning
- Distributed Practice
• This is where you practice content “little and often” where you do different study sessions frequently with long breaks between them > is suggested to be better than cramming for complex tasks (complex tasks could be revising for the cognitive psych exam etc..)
• Related to the benefit of rest and sleep > sleep is important for consolidating info in declarative memory + potentially preventing interference from other things in the surroundings
○ E.g. cramming hours of info is not as efficient as spreading work out over a number of days leading to the exam (e.g. cramming 4 hours a day before an exam as opposed to doing an hour every few days leading up to the exam)
- Cramming is less efficient because you require sleep to support you in consolidating info and interference may also have an impact
- Value of simple repetition
• This can be referred to as rote learning or type I learning
• Refers to rehearsing + maintaining info > is a low level mechanical process of recycling information which is requires low effort and typically there is no interest in meaning
• Is the time spent on the STM and WMM (recycling info for it to go to the LTM) crucial? Does the time you keep something in your working memory affect the likeliness of being able to recall items?
○ Craik & Watkins (1973) > Ppts listen to long lists of words + at the end, had to report the last word beginning with G > E.G. daughter, oil, rifle, garden, grain, table, football, anchor, giraffe
○ A surprise question was then asked > “recall all words beginning with G” > so from before, you knew you had to recall the last word beginning with G so you actively try to remember the final word with G > daughter, oil, rifle, garden, grain, table, football, anchor, giraffe > when you see garden, you hold it in your WM until you see grain because then grain becomes the last word with G, you hold grain for the next 3 items because they don’t start with G so grain was held longer than garden
○ RESULTS: show that the amount of time something is spent in WM does not affect recall rate much > rote learning + processing in a superficial way does not help much
• We see pound coins very often but if I ask in the side of the queen, is she facing left or right, most would not know > repetition itself is not enough
This does not conflict with Ebbinghaus’ law of repetition because what is most important is how deeply the information is being processed > Ebbinghausian learning is different in the sense it is more elaborate, deeper processing so you learn more with time whereas mere repetition w/o deeper processing is not useful
- Importance of testing and feedback
• It is better to test yourself and have a test trial than have an additional learning trial > relates to generation effect
• Generation effect: better memory if you came up with the answer yourself. > Feedback necessary so (self-generated) errors do not persist.
• The ability of generating info is more beneficial for being able to add + keep info in LTM than spending more time learning
• Karpicke & Roediger (2008) asked ppts to learn foreign vocab such as word pairs + had repeated study test trials where they study the word pair and tested themselves on being able to generate the foreign words + then tested 1 week later
○ Had typical study test trials so repeating studying then testing consistently > had other trials where when the ppt could successfully recall the foreign vocab they removed the item from either the learning phase, the test or both
• RESULTS: when you keep both learning + testing of the items correctly recalled, proportion of recall is around 80% one week later.
○ Contrastingly, when the item is removed from the learning AND testing phase after successfully recalling it once, the recall is much lower at around 30-35%
○ If you drop the item from testing only and keep it during learning to be studied, they recall around 35-37%, similarly to when there is neither
○ Importantly, when people are repeatedly tested on the word pair but the item is removed from learning, recall is the same as when you keep items in learning and testing (80%)
• Suggests, once you know something, you can stop studying it but you should keep testing yourself on this info > shows importance of retrieving info through testing yourself if it wants to be kept in LTM
- Motivation
- Is motivation important for learning and making things stick?
- Goran-Nilsson (1987) had 3 study groups; 1st group: there was no motivation or pressure given, 2nd group: no motivation during studying. At time of recall, substantial cash prize offered for best learner and 3rd group: cash prize mentioned before learning.
- RESULTS: there was no difference in how well groups learned thus there was no direct effect of motivation
- Motivation is likely to have indirect effects because if you are motivated to do well in an exam (e.g.) then you will likely spend more time and attention on the work towards it + engage with it to understand the material (intention to memorise info contributes little to performance) > consistent motivation can enable a deeper understanding of info
- Arousal
- Yerkes-Dodson law relates arousal levels to the efficiency of memory
- Different levels of arousal > low, optimal and high > optimal arousal is where memory is most efficient whereas low or high arousal leads to less efficiency in terms of memory
- Low arousal/low stress refers to states of sleep or being very tired which isn’t good for memory
- High arousal is not good for memory either > refers to being highly anxious or stressed
- It is not the case that you cannot learn at all anymore during high/low arousal + this curve is more specific to declarative memory and not non-declarative memory
- Implicit learning depends a lot less on arousal > even been shown some learning is left during + even when under anaesthesia whereas explicit memory relies on arousal more
- Meaningfulness
• Material is easier to learn + maintain in LTM if they are meaningful + can be related to other info which is already known
• Sharps et al. (1999) present ppts with list of 40 words and are presented either in random lists or categories (e.g. all animals together)
• Performance is a lot lower for scrambled lists than categorised lists > present for both young and older adults
• This is important in relating to principle of organising info > your memories in regards to how info is stored in relation to other info is important as it allows meaningful information + links to be found between different things so we remember it better
The more meaningfulness you give to information the more you can connect certain information to other information > the more ways you can do this, the easier it is to keep information in your LTM
- Dual (re) coding theory
- This theory suggests it is easier to retain something if it represented in more than one code > Verbal information stored in a “symbolic” verbal code + Visual information represented in an “analogue” mental image > better retention of info if it is presented in both codes
- Some evidence shows that we have better memory for concrete words rather than abstract words because you have a mental image for concrete words but not abstract > e.g. we have a mental image for table (concrete) but not trustworthiness (abstract)
- We also have better memory for words when they are paired with a real or imagined visual image > better able to retain words
- Better retention if something is represented in more than one way
- Study with a friend
• Explain things to each other (active role); listen to new insights: new connections between ideas > new retrieval paths > easier to recall.
- Helpful because you can explain this to each other so you play an active role in generating info > listening to your friend explain things also helps you get a new insight too
- Levels of Processing
• Amount of info in LTM depends on how “deeply” it is processed during learning.
• There is a continuum from shallow and superficial perceptual learning to deeper and meaningful processing
• Level/depth of processing affects how successful you are at keeping it in LTM
• shallow processing produces fragile memory traces which are susceptible to rapid forgetting whereas deeper processing (emphasising meaning, understanding) produces more elaborate, longer lasting, and stronger memory traces.
• Important to focus on meaning, understand relationships between info + an organised way to lay down info into elaborate long lasting memories
• Craik & Lockhart (1972) looked at ppts who would see 60 words and then see a question > e.g. see the word plum, and ask is this a type of fruit?, see the speech + ask does it rhyme with shark? Sees cheek, does it start with p?
○ Is it a type of fruit would be a different kind of processing to does it rhyme with shark because the fruit one is about semantic and meaning whereas rhyming just needs the phonological information for speech
○ Does it start with P? would need the orthographic processing but not deeper meaningful processing
• The different questions probe a different level of processing > at the end there is a surprise task where the 60 original words are mixed with 120 new words + asked which of these words did you see before? If based on guessing you would get 33% correct > this is chance level
• RESULTS: For the orthographic words people are just below chance level at detecting those when mixed with other words. For phonetic questions which have slightly more meaning, they perform slightly better than orthographic. Ppts detect semantic questions best because it requires deeper processing.
• The amount of time spent on the question had no effect > just about how deeply the info was processed.
• Elaborative rehearsal (Type II rehearsal): helpful type of repetition > memory only gets better when the context is more elaborate > if there is precise context with rehearsal then memory should improve
• Also related to number of connections you can make with existing information in your LTM > attach new info to existing info to lay it down firmly in LTM > called the elaboration principle
• Elaboration principle: The more you can connect with existing knowledge, the better your memory.
Evaluation of Levels of Processing theory:
+ Places emphasis on memory processes rather than memory structures
+ True in general that elaborative processing leads to better retention.
- Processing needs to be transfer-appropriate: generally if study procedures match test requirement, performance will be better > Morris et al. (1977): pick out the words that rhyme with the words you studied in the previous study, would perform better after sound-based task. in general: if study procedures match test requirements, you’ll do better (cf. encoding specificity).
- LoP pattern in implicit memory tests: is there level of processing in implicit memory tests? Pattern quite clear in explicit memory tests, much less so in implicit memory tests (e.g. word fragment test).
- Encoding Specificity Principle - Tulving
• This principle emphasises the importance of the relationship between acquisition, learning information and retrieving that information > is because each item is encoded with respect to the context which it was learnt in
• When you lay down info in long term memory, it is laid down as a memory trace > this is unique because it has info what you are learning but also the context in which you are learning it > generally, there is better retrieval when cues (e.g. qs in test) matches the information in the memory trace from context (in learning)
• When the cue matches the context it was learnt in there is better memory (Better memory when more accidental features match between encoding and retrieval)
• There are 4 sub-types of features in context dependant memory: generally look for a match in these categories between encoding and retrieving the info (better for there to be a match than mismatch)
○ External, spatio-temporal environment.
○ State-dependent (physiological).
○ Mood-dependent.
- Cognitive context-dependent.
Environmental context-dependant memory
• Memory is environmental context dependant > there is an influence of external factors
• Goedden & Baddeley (1975) > experiment on scuba divers who encoded and retrieved information > different conditions
○ Learn words on land + recall on land
○ Learn words underwater + recall underwater
○ Learn words on land + recall underwater
○ Learn words underwater + recall on land
Found that more words were recalled when the context of retrieval matched context of encoding
State-dependant memory
• Includes your physiology + internal environment such as heart rate, drugs and alcohol
• Goodwin et al (1969) looked at recall errors after drinking either 10oz of vodka or a placebo > different conditions
○ Learn words while sober + recall while sober
○ Learn words while intoxicated + recall while intoxicated
○ Learn words while sober + recall while intoxicated
○ Learn words while intoxicated + recall while sober
• Found that there were the least recall errors when sober learning + sober recall > the influence of state is important in memory > matching states are better than mismatching states
• This is found in recall tasks but not much in recognition
• This is similarly found for aerobics > e.g. exercising while revising means high heart rate so heart rate should also be high at the time of examination.
Mood-dependant memory
• Your mood such as being positive or negative should be the same at encoding + retrieval for better recall > shown for memory of emotionally non-neutral material (positive or negative)
• Memory was better if they were learned in a mood that was congruent to the positivity/negativity of the material
• There needs to be a match between the mood and material such as a pleasant mood with merry music instead of a unpleasant mood with merry music
Experiments typically induce a mood using music or movies
