Memory: Temporal Effects, Subjectivity, Retrospectivity-Prospectivity, and so much more!

1. Memory: Temporal Effects, Subjectivity, Retrospectivity-Prospectivity, and so much more!

2. Overview of talk • Background and Introductions • Temporal aspects of memory • Activity • Prospective memory • Overview • Activity • Experiment 1 review

3. Temporal Aspects of memory • What is memory? • What is forgetting • Encoding? • Retrieval? • What happens in between memories? • Interference? • What is interference? • Emotion? • Information?

4. Temporal Aspects of memory Activity (10 minutes) Write about an experience (1-2 paragraphs for each) that occurred or will occur: • 5 years ago • 5 day ago • 5 days from now • 5 years into the future Once you are done, lets hear from you all!!!

5. Temporal Aspects of memory • Episodic memory • Memory of autobiographical events…A type of declarative memory • Solomon Asch: • “the very meaning of a message can change as a function of the source to which it is attributed.” • The meaning of the statement is dependent on not only who says it, but also on how the recipient of the message interprets it. • How subjective are our memories? Trope & Liberman, 2011

6. Construal Theory • Solomon Asch: • “that the very meaning of a message can change as a function of the source to which it is attributed.” • “A little rebellion….is a good thing”

7. Construal Theory • Solomon Asch: • “that the very meaning of a message can change as a function of the source to which it is attributed.” • “A little rebellion….is a good thing”

8. Temporal Aspects of memory • Construal: person perceives, comprehends, and interprets the world around him or her. • Construal level theory (CLT) proposes that we do so by forming abstract mental construals of distal objects. • we cannot experience what is not present, we can make predictions about the future, remember the past, imagine other people’s reactions, and speculate about what might have been. • Predictions, memories, and speculations are all mental constructions, distinct from direct experience. What are mental constructions? Trope & Liberman, 2011

9. Temporal Aspects of memory • Psychological distance is egocentric • Its reference point is the self • Transcending the self in the here and now entails mental construal, and the farther removed an object is from direct experience, the higher (more abstract) the level of construal of that object. • Similar distances from reference point are related to each other • “Subjective reality impacts person” Trope & Liberman, 2011

10. Mental Construals – Temporal Aspects 5 years ago 5 days ago 5 days from now 5 years from now More abstract Less abstract More abstract Trope & Liberman, 2011

11. Prospective Memory • Overview (Give me a description…It seems you all know by now) • Activity (in groups of 3-5 people) • Develop a theory of prospective memory • Draw a diagram of how it might work • Create an experiment • Dependant variables? • Independent variables?

12. Prospective Memory • Typical paradigm • Multiple Blocks • Block 1 (Baseline) • Ongoing task (LDT) • Block 2 (PM Blocks) • Ongoing task (LDT) • PM task • What makes it difficult? • Types of processing • Semantic • Orthographic • Effort = Depletion of cognitive resources • Dependent Measures • Response Times • (in ms) • Low Effort • High Effort • Ongoing Task Accuracy • (in proportions) • Low Effort • High Effort • PM Task Accuracy • (in proportions) • Low Effort • High Effort

13. Prospective Memory Theories of PM - What we know? • Multiprocess Theory (Einstein & McDaniel, 1995) • Cue focality • Monitoring • Spontaneous Retrieval

14. Prospective Memory Theories of PM - What we know? • Multiprocess Theory (Einstein & McDaniel, 1995) • Cue focality • Monitoring • Spontaneous Retrieval • Transfer Appropriate Processing (TAP) • Match in processing • Mismatch in processing

15. Prospective Memory Theories of PM - What we know? • Multiprocess Theory (Einstein & McDaniel, 1995) • Cue focality • Monitoring • Spontaneous Retrieval • Transfer Appropriate Processing (TAP) • Match in processing • Mismatch in processing • Effects of Effort (Marsh et al., 2005) • High Effort = lower performance • Low Effort = high performance

16. Prospective Memory Theories of PM - What we know? • Multiprocess Theory (Einstein & McDaniel, 1995) • Cue focality • Monitoring • Spontaneous Retrieval • Transfer Appropriate Processing (TAP) • Match in processing • Mismatch in processing • Effects of Effort (Marsh et al., 2005) • High Effort = lower performance • Low Effort = high performance Why so many theories?

17. Prospective Memory Experiment • BAM! Let’s throw all of these ideas together! • Why? Because we can?.....Well yes, and it might provide insight into what ACTUALLY happens in the real life??? • That is called ecological validity! • Transfer Appropriate Processing & Effort • What happens when we manipulate: • Difficulty (processing types) • Cognitive resources/depletion (effort)

18. Flow of Experiment • Baseline LDT (Block 1) • Semantic Instructions LOW EFFORT • Distractor (2 min) hatch Always first block sploof • Semantic PM Block (Block 2) house MED EFFORT • Orthographic Instructions roos • Distractor (2 min) front Counterbalanced Within-subjects bail • Orthographic PM Block (Block 3) HIGH EFFORT blue shirt shorr

19. Flow of Experiment • Baseline LDT (Block 1) • Semantic Instructions LOW EFFORT • Distractor (2 min) hatch • Dependent Measures • Response Times*** • (in ms) • Low Effort • High Effort • Ongoing Task Accuracy • (in proportions) • Low Effort • High Effort • PM Task Accuracy • (in proportions) • Low Effort • High Effort sploof • Semantic PM Block (Block 2) house MED EFFORT • Orthographic Instructions roos • Distractor (2 min) front bail • Orthographic PM Block (Block 3) HIGH EFFORT blue shirt shorr

20. Results – PM Accuracy * Main Effect of Condition: F(1,38)=22.88, p<.001, η2=.376 TAP conditions (M=.78, SE=.03) regardless of effort have significantly higher PM accuracy than TIP conditions, M=.59, SE=.03, p<.001.

21. Results – Ongoing Task Performance What distribution do we typically use? Hint hint…Central Tendency….

22. Results – Ongoing Task Performance What distribution do we typically use? Hint hint…Central Tendency…. Two Parameters: MEAN and VARIANCE (STANDARD DEVIATION)

23. Results – Ongoing Task Performance According to the Worst Performance Rule (Coyle, 2003), slower RTs are more predictive of cognitive functioning (e.g., IQ) The ex-Gaussian Distribution Three Parameters: MEAN and VARIANCE (STANDARD DEVIATION) AND TAU

24. Results – Ongoing Task Performance A main effect of Effort, F(1,28) = 10.03, p = .004, hp2 = .264 . No other MEs or Interactions were significant.

25. Results – Ongoing Task Performance A main effect of PM Task Type was significant, F(2,56) = 19.09, p < .001, hp2 = .405. No other MEs or Interactions were significant.

26. Results – Ongoing Task Performance

27. Conclusions Match in processing resulted in higher PM cue detection. Monitoring occurred during MATCH in processing ONLY when cognitive resources were depleted (High Effort) AND for all MISMATCH conditions. The t parameter showed differences between PM conditions that the m ands did not. PM performance and processes are affected by processing type and the amount of available cognitive resources.

28. Critical Question(s) Is this really how the brain/mind works? Seriously??? Any other questions??? Drew Abney dhabney@ilstu.edu