Memory 2 Flashcards
2 Types of long term Memory
EXPLICIT/Declarative memory (conscious; ‘knowing that’)
PEOPLE CAN DESCRIBE OR REPORT THE CONTENTS
Episodic memory (personal events) Semantic memory (knowledge)
IMPLICIT memory (not conscious; ‘knowing how’)
Repetition priming
Procedural memory (skills)
Conditioning
EXPLICIT/Declarative memory (conscious; ‘knowing that’)
split in to two kinds….
Episodic memory (personal events)
Semantic memory (knowledge)
IMPLICIT memory (not conscious; ‘knowing how’)
three kinds….
Repetition priming
Procedural memory (skills)
Conditioning
Episodic Memory
Memory for personally experienced events (‘autobiographical’)
WHAT WHERE WHEN
Involves ‘mental time travel’ (remembering/self-knowing)
Semantic Memory
Knowledge about the world (facts, vocabulary, numbers and concepts)
Does not involve ‘mental time travel’ (knowing)
Separation of episodic and semantic memories
Neuropsychological evidence (case studies of preserved and impaired abilities of brain-damaged patients)
KC: damage to hippocampus due to motorcycle accident
- Could not relive any events of his past - Could recall factual knowledge
A person referred to as…An Italian woman in the literature : brain damage due to encephalitis
- Could relive events in her life and form new memories after brain damage - Had difficulty with general knowledge, historical facts, word meanings, recognising familiar faces
double dissociation
kc and the italian Woman
explain…..
there are Two Dissociation patterns
KC had OK Semantic Memory
but Poor Episodic Memory
IW had Poor Semantic Memory
but OK Episodic Memory
Because the two dissociations are opposites of each other , together they form what scientists refer to as a Double Dissociation
Traditionally taken as a strong case for the separation of two psychological phenomenons
Levine et al. (2004)
Brain imaging evidence:
IMAGE OF THE BRAIN WITH BLUE AND YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED IN DIFFERENT PLACES.
participants were played recordings of either
1) information about episodes in their own personal lives (episodic)
2) and general knowledge (semantic)
The two types of descriptions activated different areas of the brain
yellow – episodic
blue – semantic
provides evidence that the two areas are FUNCTIONALLY SEPERATE
participants were played recordings of either
1) information about episodes in their own personal lives (episodic)
2) and general knowledge (semantic)
LEVINE ET AL 2004
The two types of descriptions activated different areas of the brain
yellow – episodic
blue – semantic
provides evidence that the two areas are FUNCTIONALLY SEPARATE
Connections between episodic and semantic memories
‘Morphing’ from episodic+semantic to only semantic memory
Memory for learning episode AND what was learned in that episode
Memory for what was learned remains while memory for learning episode fades away
IE YOU CAN REMEMBER THE FACTS BUT NOT THE EXACT CLASS THEY WERE LEARNED IN.
‘Morphing’ from episodic+semantic to only semantic memory
Memory for learning episode AND what was learned in that episode
Memory for what was learned remains while memory for learning episode fades away
morphing shows one way that episodic and semantic memory interact.
another way way is the
enhancing effects they have on each other.
Westmacott & Moscovitch what when?
Semantic memory enhanced by episodic memory
Westmacott & Moscovitch (2003)
Collected norming data on autobiographical significance (AS) of hundreds of famous names from across the 20th century (Remember/Know judgment)
Lists made up of high-R names better recalled and recognised than lists made up of low-R names
High-R names responded to more quickly in fame judgement task
Conclusion: Autobiographical significance (AS) plays a role in semantic memory.
Chase & Simon (1973)
Episodic memory enhanced by semantic memory
Chase & Simon (1973)
Participants either experienced or Inexperienced
Participants were shown a picture of chess pieces on a chessboard for 5 seconds and then required to reproduce the positions from memory
Two types of participants: Masters (with more semantic knowledge about chess) and beginners.
Enhancing effect of semantic memory on episodic memory. who tested this and how
CHASE AND SIMON IN 1973
CHESS BOARD MEMORIZING
5 SECONDS
HOW many seconds did the chess masters and the chess novices get to see memorise the boards in Simon and Chases 1973 study?
5 seconds
Chunking?
Chunking, in psychology, is a phenomenon whereby individuals group responses when performing a memory task. Tests where individuals can demonstrate “chunking” commonly include serial and free recall tasks. All three tasks require the individual to reproduce items that he or she had previously been instructed to study. Test items generally include words, syllables, digits/numbers, or lists of letters. Presumably, individuals that exhibit the “chunking” process in their responses are forming clusters of responses based on the items’ semantic relatedness or perceptual features. The chunks are often meaningful to the participant.
Priming
repetition
and conceptual
Priming: presentation of one stimulus (‘prime stimulus’) changes response to a subsequent stimulus (‘test/target stimulus’)
Repetition priming – response to a test word ‘chair’ is faster after prior encounter with the same word than after no prior encounter with the same word
Conceptual priming – response to a test word ‘chair’ is faster after prior encounter with the word ‘furniture’ than after no prior encounter with ‘furniture’
Are these effects due to explicit (episodic) memory or implicit memory?
Priming - wiki definition
Priming is an implicit memory effect in which exposure to one stimulus influences a response to another stimulus
Priming - Uni definition
Priming: presentation of one stimulus (‘prime stimulus’) changes response to a subsequent stimulus (‘test/target stimulus’)
Repetition Priming
Repetition priming – response to a test word ‘chair’ is faster after prior encounter with the same word than after no prior encounter with the same word
Conceptual Priming
Conceptual priming – response to a test word ‘chair’ is faster after prior encounter with the word ‘furniture’ than after no prior encounter with ‘furniture’
Tulving et al 1982
Priming experiment
Tulving et al. (1982): Evidence for implicit nature of priming
- Participants studied 96 words, each presented for 5s
- Tests conducted one hour or 7 days after study
- Word fragment completion test (C _ R _ _ T): Fragments based on ‘old’ words more likely to be completed successfully than fragments based on ‘new’ words
No requirement to consciously recall words from study phase
- Effect due to implicit memory for the ‘old’ words
What is Tulving’s (1982) Proof that Priming is an Implicit process?
Participants were under NO instruction to CONCIOUSLY recall words from the study phase.
Give the details of Tulving et al’s 1982 priming experiment
Participants studied
96 words, each presented for
5s
- Tests conducted
1 hour or
7 days after study - Word fragment completion test (C _ R _ _ T): Fragments based on ‘OLD words more likely to be completed successfully than fragments based on ‘NEW’ words
No requirement to consciously recall words from study phase
what are the numbers to remember for Tulvings 1982 experiment?
96 words
5 seconds
1 hour
7 days
Word Fragment Completion Test
old and new words
participants completed the “old’ words which were from the study phase. this is Evidence towards Tulvings theory that Priming is an Implicit Process because participants were NOT CONSCIOUSLY TRYING TO RECALL words in the task thus the processes involved were Implicit.
Tulving et al. (1982): Evidence for implicit nature of priming
- Recognition test (‘Did this word occur in the study phase?’): a test of explicit memory
After 7 days, implicit memory for ‘old’ words was still strong while explicit memory for them had FADED AWAY
Warrington & Weiskrantz (1968):
Warrington & Weiskrantz (1968): Neuropsychological evidence for implicit nature of priming
- Korsakoff’s patients, who were amnesic because of brain damage caused by long-term alcohol abuse
Participants asked to complete an
OBJECT FRAGMENT COMPLETION TASK
- Amnesic = poor at explicit memory
Amnesic patients have damaged …………..memory but intact …………. memory.
Amnesic patients have damaged EXPLICIT memory but intact IMPLICIT memory.
Amnesic patients would show priming if priming is due to IMPLICIT MEMORY
Warrington & Weiskrantz (1968): Neuropsychological evidence for implicit nature of priming
process and results
In the Object Fragment Completion Test
the Amnesiac Alcoholics
Improved performance over three days despite inability to explicitly recall training from previous days
Brain damage confined to explicit memory. Implicit memory, as revealed in priming, remained intact.
Perfect & Askew (1994
Perfect & Askew (1994): an example of priming in everyday life
- Participants studied 25 ads ‘deliberately’ or ‘incidentally’
- Recognition test (‘Did you see this ad in the study phase?’): ‘Deliberate’ group recognised more ads than ‘incidental’ group
- Rating task (on a mixture of ‘old’ and ‘new’ ads): Both groups rated the ‘old’ ads more positively than the ‘new’ ads
Conclusion: Implicit memory for incidentally encountered stimuli. Advertising effectiveness can be measured explicitly and implicitly.
Procedural Memory TWO TYPES
how do we know they are separate from explicit episodic memories?
whats the word beginning with D that describes being FUNCTIONALLY SEPARATE
Skill memory – cannot remember when or where a skill was learned; not aware of how a skill is performed
- Motor skills: driving; riding a bicycle; swimming; etc.
- Cognitive skills: reading; speaking; doing arithmetics; etc.
Evidence for separation of procedural memory: DISSOCIATION between episodic and procedural memories in brain-damaged amnesic patients
- Clive Wearing: preserved ability to play the piano
- KC: preserved ability to learn a new skill
describe two brain processes which have been proved to be DISSOCIATED and thus FUNCTIONALLY SEPARATE
IMPLICIT PROCEDURAL V EXPLICIT EPISODIC
eg clive wearing and kc s ability to make new and remember old skills but no ability to form new explicit episodic memories.
SEMANTIC V EPISODIC
eg KC damaged his HIPPOCAMPUS and had no episodic memory facility
the Italian Woman had damaged her ENCEPHILITIS and had no semantic memory facility
Atkinson & Shiffrin’s (1968) modal model of memory (a.k.a. multi-store model of memory)
whats the process they describe.
What are DCC?
input sensory memory short term memory rehearsal; a control process output input to and output from the long term memory
(the three boxes )
Duration: for how long can information be held?
Capacity: how much information can be held?
Coding: in what format is information held?
Murdoch 1962
Behavioural evidence: Serial position curve/effect
Murdoch (1962)
Participants received a list of words, each presented for a fixed amount of time
Participants tried to recall the words in any order (‘free recall’)
Words at beginning of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list (‘primacy effect’)
Words at end of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list (‘recency effect’)
primacy effect
Words at beginning of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list (‘primacy effect’)
Words at beginning of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list
PRIMACY effect
Words at end of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list
RECENCY effect
Participants tried to recall the words in any order
WHAT IS THIS CALLED?
FREE RECALL
RECENCY EFFECT
Words at end of the list were better recalled than words in the middle of the list
explain the serial position curve
in terms of LTM and STM
Recency effect: words at end of list still in STM at time of recall
Primacy effect: words at start of list transferred to LTM after rehearsal
(Words in the middle are not in STM at time of recall, and not in LTM because there has not been enough time for them to be rehearsed and transferred to LTM.)
Rundus (1971): evidence that primacy effect is due to rehearsal and transfer of words to LTM
Participants repeated words out loud during list presentation
Number of rehearsals a word received correlated well with its probability of recall
but not at the end - implying that a different process was at work there - short term memory
Glanzer & Cunitz (1966): evidence that recency effect is due to retrieval from STM at the time of recall
Adding a 30-second delay between end of list presentation and recall killed off the RECENCY effect
No word remained in STM after the delay
Neuropsychological evidence (case studies of preserved and impaired abilities of brain-damaged patients)
Neuropsychological evidence (case studies of preserved and impaired abilities of brain-damaged patients)
Clive Wearing: brain damage due to encephalitis
HM: removal of hippocampus by surgery
- Could remember what had just happened within the most recent one or two minutes - “I have woken up for the first time” – inability to form new memories
KF: brain damage due to motorcycle accident
- Could form and hold new memories - Abnormally low digit span (a measure of STM)
Brain imaging evidence: Talmi et al. (2005)
Brain imaging evidence: Talmi et al. (2005)
List presentation as in standard serial position effect experiment
Instead of free recall, probe recognition test was carried out (“Did this word appear in the list?”)
Participants’ brain activity was measured with fMRI during probe recognition test
Early probes (i.e., words from beginning of list) activated left hippocampus and frontal and parietal cortices
Late probes (i.e., words from end of list) activated frontal and parietal cortices
LEFT HIPPOCAMPUS IS USED IN LONG TERM MEMORY STORAGE.
Early probes (i.e., words from beginning of list) activated ……
Early probes (i.e., words from beginning of list) activated LEFT HIPPOCAMPUS and frontal and parietal cortices
Late probes (i.e., words from end of list) activated
Late probes (i.e., words from end of list) activated Frontal and Parietal cortices
