Memory and State dependence Flashcards

1
Q

Forgetting curve

A

Ebbinghaus
Serial learning task
Himself as participant
Forgetting initially rapid then levels off

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Excitatory conditioning

A

Conditioned suppression of licking procedure
Irrespective of US intensity, hardly any forgetting after 60 days
So, memory traces can last as long as 60 days
Remember tone is paired with shock

Hendersen, 1985

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Inhibitory conditioning

A

Fear conditioning procedures with shock US
So, in a more complex learning situation, some forgetting seen within 35 days
Compared to just excitatory CS with excitatory and inhibitor
Inhibitor suppresses fear after 1 day, no longer after 35 days

Hendersen, 1978

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Forgetting can be reduced by a reminder

A

Avoidance learning procedure
Memory performance improved by a reminder (apparatus and CS exposure) 24 hr or 10 min prior to test
Very little retention 72 hours later or without reminder

Gordon et al., 1979

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Reminder duration

A

Krechevsky maze (Deweer & Sara, 1984)

Rapid learning seen by decrease in number of errors
Forgetting when tested 25 days leater
Reminder of (secs) 10,30,90 or 300
Memory performances restored by a reminder of 90 secs prior to test
300s not as good as 90s, too long exposure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Trace decay theory

A

Information storage is reflected by physical changes in the brain and in the absence of rehearsal these memory traces become weaker with the passage of time

if a trace “disappears” (or weakens), the memory is not there

Fails to explain the effect of reminders

  • Describes well the forgetting curve
  • It is simple
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Interference theory

A

McGeoch 1932
Argued that human memory is fundamentally associative
Recall is guided by cues or stimuli to which items in memory are associated

Multiple items may become associated with the same cue

Other responses may have been learned before or after the target response (proactive and retroactive interference

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Theoretical implications of experimental observations

A
  • Memories can last a lot longer than you might think if trace decay were the cause of forgetting
  • The fact that reminders can jog memories suggests that memories can be forgotten without necessarily having decayed
  • Temporary retrieval problems point to the importance of interference as a cause of forgetting
  • Associative learning can explain how reminders work
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Encoding specificity

A
  • Tulving & Thomson (1973)
  • Encoding in context provides memory triggers
  • Category names (e.g., animal) for word lists (e.g., cow, rat, etc.)
  • Effective cues enable the retrieval of items that would not be retrieved under non-cued recall conditions (Tulving & Pearlstone, 1966)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Internal states - Mood

A
  • Bower and colleagues used hypnosis to induce either happy (H) or sad (S) moods in their participants.
  • Participants learned 2 lists one following H induction and one following S induction. They were tested on both lists after either H or S induction.

Better when learnt in same state

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Classic experiment: Overton (1964)

A
  • Rats trained to escape from unavoidable shock in a T-maze
  • Sodium pentobarbital produced ‘dissociated learning’ in rats
  • Seen when performance of tasks learned in the drug state does not transfer to the non-drug state
  • But learning can be reactivated if the drug is re-instated
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

State dependent extinction (Bouton et al., 1990)

A
  • Context fear conditioning preparation (measured freezing)
  • Chlordiazepoxide (a benzodiazepine) was administered during extinction learning, as it happens during treatment of anxiety
  • Rats were conditioned and then experienced extinction (or not) drugged.
  • Rats were tested both sober and with the drug (on separate days)
  • Effect of drugs much stronger with extinction
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Goodwin et al. (1969)

A

(non-alcoholic) subjects can’t remember, when sober, what happened when drunk. May remember when next drunk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Eich et al. (1975)

A

marijuana produced state-dependent effect when no (external) cues to recall were available

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Hurst et al. (1969)

A

amphetamine ineffective (but paired associate task!)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Bustamante et al. (1970)

A

amphetamine did result in state-dependency (free recall task, drawing geometric shapes)

17
Q

State-dependency unreliable? Overshadowing effects

A
  • Eich (1980)
  • 88% studies showing evidence for state-dependent effects used free recall tasks
  • 90% studies that did not show state dependency used cued recall or recognition tests (familiar?)
  • Suggests internal state more important cue in the absence of ‘observable’ retrieval cues
  • State-dependent effects consistent and reproducible only when contextual cues are not overshadowed by more explicit reminders

CRITIQUES

18
Q

Parker et al (2001)

A

Smell experiment
Mean recall higher when lemon matched with lemon and lavender matched with lavender compared to opposites matched

19
Q

What is extinction learning

A

gradual decrease in response to a conditioned stimulus that occurs when the stimulus is presented without reinforcement

20
Q

Ramanathan et al., 2018

A

State-dependent due to intracerebral inactivation

Nucleus reuniens (RE) is a midline thalamic nucleus that interconnects the mPFC with the hippocampus

Context fear conditioning in rats

Train in Context A, and tested in Contexts A (target) and B (generalization)

State dependent learning activated by certain brain region