Unit 5: Memory & Judgment, Semantic Memory Flashcards
What is the implicit memory and memory judgment (mere exposure) study by Zajonc (1969)?
study: view a set of Chinese characters, subliminal exposure (4 msec/character)
test: recognition (2IFC - exposed vs new) or preference judgment (2IFC - exposed vs new)
results: recognition at chance, in preference judgment 65% favored exposed character
What is the explanation of the Zajonc (1969) study?
(even subliminal) exposure facilities subsequent processing fluency, i.e., speed and easy of processing
evidence for fluency: repetition priming effects on tasks like lexical decision and perceptual identification
people are sensitive to between-item differences in fluency, though not necessarily aware of their origins
other things being equal, people tend to attribute positive things, fluently processed stimuli
What memory and perceptual judgments are impacted by fluency effects?
recognition
recency
frequency
loudness
What non-mnemonic judgments are impacted by fluency effects?
liking/preferences
truth
fame
real-world estimates
What is the “availability bias” in populations estimation?
people tend to under estimate populations of large, obscure countries
people tend to overestimate populations of small, well-known countries
What is a possible explanation for availability bias?
domain-specific knowledge and fluency-based intuitions can influence real-world estimation
What is a possible explanation for availability bias for populations estimation?
people use fluency/familiarity/availability to gauge relative population size
assumption: better known countries have larger populations then less-well known countries
What is the terminology of availability?
Tversky & Kahneman (1973) identified the “availability heuristic”
when ease-of-retrieval used to estimate frequency or probability of events
What is a generalization of availability?
ease-of-retrieval does not equal fluency and familiarity
“availability” used in situations in which fluency is found to affect judgment and decision making
What is the logic of the availability (fluency, familiarity)?
assume: propx correlates with memory
goal: propx for itemi?
mechanism: assesses availability of info for itemi, use assessment as index of propx for itemi
What is the study by Brown & Siegler (1992) study on implicit memory and real-estimation?
background: availability might be a good cue for estimating population; but is it used?
reason: population and media exposure highly correlated
prediction: estimated population should correlate strongly with rated knowledge (a proxy for availability)
What was the method of the study by Brown & Siegler (1992) study on implicit memory and real-estimation?
materials: 100 countries
participants: 24 CMU undergrads
tasks: rate knowledge, estimate population
What were the results of the study by Brown & Siegler (1992) study on implicit memory and real-estimation?
important results: as predicted there was a strong bias that is not in line with reality
interpretation: pop-estimates based in availability-base intuitions
What is the interpretation of availability and population estimation?
population estimates based in availability-base intuitions
What is an alternative interpretation of availability and population estimation?
people hold pre-existing beliefs about the size of well-known countries
these beliefs are biased by media coverage
people infer that unknown countries are small
people can and do justify their estimates with reference to task relevant knowledge
size categories are often mentioned
comparisons with other countries also occur
What is the study on availability by Brown, Cui & Gordon (2002)?
aim: determine whether population estimation is sensitive to priming, as availability account predicts
method:
Phase 1 – rate knowledge (52 countries, primed set)
Phase 2 – estimate populations (52 primed countries and 52 unprimed countries)
What were the results of the study on availability by Brown, Cui & Gordon (2002)?
availability prediction: primed > unprimed
results: knowledge rates increased availability/fluency in primed set; availability/fluency influenced estimation process
What is the fatality estimates experiment on availability?
task: how many Canadians died of CauseX last year?
results: reasonable correlation between estimated and true fatality rate
availability bias: holding true frequency constant, more vivid causes elicit increased estimates
What are the determinants of the importance of availability?
actual/perceived correlation between propx and memory
quantity and credibility of competing information
What are judgment/estimation tasks that sometimes display an availability bias?
recency (dates, recognition)
truth
fatality rates
frequency
probability
corporate sales
wealth
population
What are judgment/estimation tasks that do not display an availability bias?
age, distance, area, latitude, longitude
What is the summary of implicit memory and judgement that was discussed in class?
prior exposure (priming) facilitates subsequent processing (increased fluency)
people are sensitive to differences in fluency
fluency/availability (sometimes) treated as important cue to the value of target property
this happens when: prop x correlates with memory, other task-relevant information sparse/non-predictive
use of fluency/availability in judgment often produces biased performance
reason: many factors impact availability
for example: cultural and physical distance, economic power, and group conflict affect rated knowledge, but do not necessarily correlated with actual population
What is the original definition of semantic memory?
semantic memory is the memory necessary for the use of language
it is a mental thesaurus, organized knowledge a person possesses about words and other verbal symbols, their meaning and referents, about relations among them, and about rules, formulas, and algorithms for the manipulation of these symbols, concepts and relations
What are the contents of semantic memory?
we “know” many, many things
word meanings (< 20K), geography, history, sports, pop culture, genealogy, social relations, biological facts, etc, etc,
most of this knowledge: easily and readily accessed, decontextualized
What are the important issues of semantic memory?
how is complex information acquired, revised, represented, organized, accessed, manipulated
some basic elements are understood in a general way: semantic networks, spreading activation, schemata/scripts
potential building blocks for a more complete understanding of the psychology of complex knowledge
What was the Collins & Loftus (1975) definition of a semantic network?
semantic memory is organized as a network of interrelated concepts
each concept is represented as a node
concepts are linked together by pathways
“length” of pathways reflects degree of semantic relatedness/associative strength
concepts close in meaning/highly related (e.g., red, fire) stored close together
unrelated concepts (red, street) are stored far away
What is spreading activation in semantic networks?
accessed node is a source of activation
activation spreads from source to related nodes
the amount of activation received by a give node is a function of path length
the more active a concept is, the more readily it will be retrieved
What is the implication of spreading activation in semantic networks?
retrieving a given concept should be easier when it is proceeded by a related concept than when it is not
What is semantic priming?
implication of spreading activation account
a given concept should be primed - responded to more rapidly/accurately - when it is preceded by a related concept than when it is not
therefore, lexical decisions should be faster when target preceded by related word than when not
What were the methods of the Meyer & Schvaneveldt (1972) study on semantic priming?
task: lexical decision with word pairs
both items are word –> YES
one item is a non-word –> NO
both items are non-words –> NO
What were the stimuli in the Meyer & Schvaneveldt (1972) study on semantic priming?
associated word pairs: nurse - doctor
unrelated word pairs: bread - doctor
word and non-word: bread - treb
non-word and word: treb - bread
non-word and non-word: treb - manty
What were the results of the Meyer & Schvaneveldt (1972) study on semantic priming?
word-word pairs: associated RT < unassociated RT
Is the process of spreading activation automatic?
spreading activation is assumed automatic
do expectancies affect semantic access?
can activation be control?
What were the components being studied in the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
basic premises: 2 components to priming
automatic component: fast, effortless, unaffected by intention/expectation
controlled component: attentional, slow, effortful, benefits (if correct), costs (if incorrect)
What was the design of the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
goal: contrast automatic and controlled priming
task: lexical decision – timed word/non-word decision
trail: prime –> target –> response
What were the no shift trials in the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
see Bird as prime expect a bird name as target
- neutral: XXXX – robin
- no shift: BIRD – robin (80% primed trials)
- shift (unexpected): BIRD –arm (20% primed trials)
What were the shift trials in the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
see BODY as prime, expect a BUILDING part as target
- neutral: XXXX – heart
- no shift: BODY – heart (10% primed trials)
- shift (expected): BODY – door (80% primed trials)
- shift (unexpected): BODY – robin (10% primed trials)
What were the general results of the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
a priming effect: neutral trials - primed trials
two type of priming effects:
facilitation effects – positive priming
priming effect is positive – neutral > primed
inhibition effect – negative priming
priming effect is negative – neutral < primed
What were the results of the no shift expected condition of the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
- no-shift, same-category pairs (bird-robin): substantial facilitation at all SOA
- shift, different-category pairs (bird-arm): inhibition increases with SOA
What were the results of the shift expected condition of the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
- expected shift (BODY – door): facilitation increases with SOA
- no-shift, same-category (BODY – heart): facilitation at smallest SOA, increasing inhibition at longer SOAs
- shift to unexpected category (BODY –robin): inhibition at all SOAs, inhibition increases with SOA
What is the explanation of the results of the Neely (1977) study on semantic priming?
- automatic spreading activation: originates at prime, spreads to related concepts, decays rapidly
- attention required to maintain activation over longer SOAs
- focusing attention on one category: facilitates (primes) processing of category members, interferes with the processing (reading/word recognition) of items from other categories
- in the shift-expected condition, subjects shift attention to and maintain attention for cued category: it takes time to shift attention to new category, once attention is shifted, focus is on the new category
What is the explanation of the results of shifting categories in the Neely (1977) study.
shifting categories takes time
maintaining focus on indicated category
facilitates processing of focal category members
reduces attentional resources required to read and decide whether letter string is a word
What is the definition of a semantic network?
general knowledge representation
based on relatedness, meaning-based similarity
What is the definition of spreading activation?
automatic consequence of processing a related information
preparation for encountering the expected
What is the definition of schemata?
complex, stable knowledge structures
occupations, geographical/architectural layouts, story structures, etc.
What is the definitions of scripts?
schemata representing stereotypical event sequences
What are assumptions regarding schemata and scripts?
this knowledge is represented in semantic memory and used extensive in planning, comprehension, and recall (reconstruction)
What were the methods of the Bartlett (1932) study on the “War of the Ghosts” story?
English undergrads read a North American Indian legend twice
recalled the story once after 15 minutes and then over of the course of several months
What was the analysis of the changes seen in the Bartlett (1932) study on the “War of the Ghosts” story?
the story became shorter and more coherent
“no trace of an odd, or supernatural element is left: we have perfectly straightforward story of a fight and a death”
achieved by:
omissions: ghosts omitted early; the wound became a matter of flesh, not spirit
rationalization: growing coherence among parts
transformation of details into more familiar and conventional
changing order of events
What were the main findings of the Bartlett (1932) study on the “War of the Ghosts” story?
reproduction distorted in ways that brought the story increasing in lines with European: narrative conventions and beliefs
What was the interpretation of the Bartlett (1932) study on the “War of the Ghosts” story?
participants combined fragmentary story memory with schematic knowledge to reconstruct a “sensible” story
What were general findings regarding schematas in the Bartlett (1932) study on the “War of the Ghosts” story?
when present: schema-consistent info is well remembered, schema-inconsistent info is less well remembered
when NOT present: schema-consistent info often falsely remembered (schema-driven reconstruction), schema-inconsistent info generally not falsely remembered
What was the goal of the Hannigan & Reinitz (2001) study on recognizing script-based materials?
schemata that capture general information about routine event sequences: eating in a restaurant, attending a movie, visiting a doctor’s office, attending class, going to the beach
scripts identify central (& less central) actions & typical (& atypical) roles, & props
when not specified (or experienced) central actions & typical roles & props inferred/reconstructed
What were the methods of the Hannigan & Reinitz (2001) study on recognizing script-based materials?
four 13-slide sequences
a sequence represented one script-based activity (e.g. grocery shopping)
including:
HIGH schema-relevant items (e.g. get shopping cart)
LOW schema-relevant items (e.g. put food on belt)
presentation: 5.5s/slide
What was the test phase of the Hannigan & Reinitz (2001) study on recognizing script-based materials?
0-to-5 recognition confidence judgment on each slide:
0 = certain slide not seen
5 = certain slide was seen
What were the results of the Hannigan & Reinitz (2001) study on recognizing script-based materials?
for OLD items: recognition very good, high > low
for NEW items at 15 minute delay: high > low, tendency to infer/reconstruct stronger for high-relevance items
What were the results regarding effect of delay in the Hannigan & Reinitz (2001) study on recognizing script-based materials?
OLD items: memory still very good
false recognition increases greatly for high-relevance items
What are the main points of semantic memory that were discussed in lecture?
semantic networks can represent simple facts and reflect conceptual similarity/relatedness/co-occurrence
semantic priming is well established process serves to prime related information
schemata/scripts - complex, stable knowledge structures
captures generalizations re: complex, but regular features of experience
facilitate/bias perception & memory
What is the challenge of studying semantic memory?
develop detailed extensions of these notions to deal with full range of knowledge domains and modalities
