1 / 29

Opportunities for extra credit:

Opportunities for extra credit:. Keep checking at: www.tatalab.ca. Upcoming. “Types” of Memory. Sensory Memory brief ( < 1 second) preattentive / parallel processing (very large capacity). Overview of Memory. Atkinson-Shiffrin Model. RETRIEVAL. ATTENTION. Sensory Memory.

jennis
Download Presentation

Opportunities for extra credit:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Opportunities for extra credit: Keep checking at: www.tatalab.ca

  2. Upcoming

  3. “Types” of Memory • Sensory Memory • brief ( < 1 second) • preattentive / parallel processing (very large capacity)

  4. Overview of Memory • Atkinson-Shiffrin Model RETRIEVAL ATTENTION Sensory Memory Short-Term Memory Long-Term Memory Sensory Signals REHEARSAL

  5. Characteristics of STM • Limited Capacity • George Miller • Subject is given longer and longer lists of to-be-remembered items (words, characters, digits) • Result: Subjects are successful up to about 7 items

  6. Characteristics of STM • Limited Capacity • What confound must be considered ?! • Recalling takes time ! • It seems that the “capacity” of STM (at least measured in this way) depends on the rate of speech - faster speech leads to apparently larger capacity • Some believe capacity is “2 - 3 seconds worth of speech”

  7. Forgetting from STM • Why do we “forget” from STM? • Does the memory trace decay? • not likely because with very small lists (like 1 item) retention is high for long intervals

  8. Forgetting from STM • Why do we “forget” from STM? • Does the memory trace decay? • not likely because with very small lists (like 1 item) retention is high for long intervals • Instead, it seems that information “piles up” and begins to interfere

  9. Forgetting from STM • Interference in STM is complex and specific

  10. Forgetting from STM • Interference in STM is complex and specific • For example, severity of interference depends on meaning

  11. Forgetting from STM • Interference in STM is complex and specific • For example, severity of interference depends on meaning • Subjects are given successive recall tasks with list items from the same category (e.g. fruits) • final list is of either same or different category - how is good is recall on this list?

  12. Forgetting from STM • Accuracy rebounds if category changes

  13. Coding in STM • How is information coded in STM?

  14. Coding in STM • Clues about coding in STM: • # of items stored in STM depends on rate of speech

  15. Coding in STM • Clues about coding in STM: • # of items stored in STM depends on rate of speech • phonological similarity effect: similar sounding words are harder to store/recall than different sounding words

  16. Coding in STM • Clues about coding in STM: • # of items stored in STM depends on rate of speech • phonological similarity effect: similar sounding words are harder to store/recall than different sounding words What does this suggest about the nature of information in STM?

  17. Coding in STM • It seems that information can be stored in a linguistic or phonological form

  18. Coding in STM • It seems that information can be stored in a linguistic or phonological form Must it be stored this way?

  19. Coding in STM • It is also possible to “keep in mind” non-verbal information, such as a map Are there two different STM systems?

  20. A Modular Approach to STM Central Executive Articulatory Loop Visuospatial Sketchpad Experiment 1 in the article by Lee Brooks demonstrates a double dissociation between Articulatory Loop and Visuospatial Sketchpad

  21. Working Memory “Modules” • Lee Brooks: interference between different representations in STM (Experiment 1) • Memory Representation • verbal task: categorize words in a sentence • spatial task: categorize corners in a block letter • Response Modality • verbal response: say “yes” or “no” • spatial response: point to “yes” or “no”

  22. Working Memory “Modules” • Verbal Task: indicate if each word is or is not a noun • “I went to the store to buy a loaf of bread.” • N N N N Y N N N Y N Y

  23. Working Memory “Modules” • Spatial Task: indicate if each corner points outside Y Y F Y N

  24. Working Memory “Modules” • In both tasks the information needed must be maintained (represented) in working memory

  25. Working Memory “Modules” • Response Modalities: Verbal Spatial Say: “yes” “no” “no” Point to: Y or N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N

  26. Working Memory “Modules” • Both response modalities also engage working memory

  27. Working Memory “Modules” • Prediction: • There should be interference when response modality and task representation engage the same module • if there is only one kind of module, then there should be interference between every pairing of representation to response

  28. Working Memory “Modules” • result: a cross-over interaction (double dissociation Verbal Representation (categorize words) Performance Spatial Representation (categorize corners) Spatial Verbal Response Modality

  29. Working Memory “Modules” • Interpretation: • supports notion of modularity in Working Memory (visuospatial sketchpad / articulatory loop)

More Related