Memory Pt 2

1. Memory Pt 2 Later Years Development Lecture 11

2. This lecture Q1. What determines which memories are retained? Q2. What are the implications of memory impairment for skilled performance? Q3. Can declining memory be improved?

3. Which memories are retained in old age? Older people often able to recall events from 40+ years earlier... but not remember something that happened yesterday.

4. Which memories are retained in old age? Older people often able to recall events from 40+ years earlier... but not remember something that happened yesterday. One reason for this is that those remembered events have been ‘rehearsed’ over the years. Rehearsal also serves to ‘automatize’ activities (i.e., rehearsal is habit-forming).

5. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance - Pt. 1 ‘Automatic’ recollections can be identified using time as a response constraint. Jacoby (see 1996 book) [1] Ss shown a list of words (List 1 - visual) - words appeared 1, 2 or 3 times [2] Ss then heard separate list of words (List 2 - auditory) [3] Recognition test list (yes/no task) - identify only words from List 2.

6. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance - Pt. 1 Ss allowed different responding time - 700ms or 1200ms. Q. Would answer be affected by: a) number of times a word appeared in List 1?, and b) the time allowed to respond? With 700ms to respond: probability of answering ‘yes’ to List 1 word increased with the number of presentations of that word. With 1200 ms to respond: probability decreased with the number of presentations.

7. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance - Pt. 1 So....with 700ms to respond: probability of error increases with number of presentations. But with 1200 ms to respond: probability decreases with number of presentations. Why? with only 700ms to respond, no time to ‘think’ - recollection is ‘automatic’ and ‘implicit’ with 1200ms to respond, time to recognize the word as belonging to visual list - memory is ‘explicit’.

8. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance - Pt. 1 Example:Famous names vs non-famous names (Jacoby, Woloshyn & Kelley, 1989) [1] Ss read a list of non-famous names (List 1) [2] Ss shown a second list containing all the names from List 1 plus (a) some new famous names and (b) some new non-famous names (List 2) Ss told that all the names on List 1 were non-famous before being asked to judge whether a name from List 2 is famous. Potential conflict between a) fame and b) familiarity.

9. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance Potential conflict between a) fame and b) familiarity. Hypothesise that: [1] conscious recollection will discriminate famous from non-famous names [2] conscious recollection will result in no difference between the number of ‘old’ non-famous names (i.e., from List 1) and ‘new’ non-famous names from List 2 . [3] Lack of conscious recollection (i.e., greater ‘automatic’ recollection) will result in more ‘old’ non-famous names being identified as famous because of their greater familiarity.

10. Distinguishing automatic from ‘controlled’ performance Proportion of names identified as ‘famous Young SsOld Ss [1] Famous .54 .70 [2] New N-F .25 .14 [3] Old N-F .14 .20 Interest lies in comparing [2] and [3] Young Ss: Old N-F > New N-F Old Ss: New N-F > Old N-F

11. Dissociation of processes Return to word-stem completion task (Jacoby, Toth & Yonelinas, 1993) [1] Present words [2] Present stem to be completed ‘inclusion’ tasks - stem accompanied by ‘old’ ‘exclusion’ tasks - stem accompanied by ‘new’ i.e., completing stem + ‘new’ with word from list = fail

12. Dissociation of processes Young SsOld Ss [1] Inclusion .70 .55 [2] Exclusion .26 .39 Probability of recollecting accurately: 0.44 (Young SS) 0.16 (Old Ss) Probability of automatically responding: 0.46 (Young SS) 0.46 (Old Ss)

13. Summary so far Performance on memory-retrieval tasks determined by: [1] Automatic responding (influenced by familiarity) [2] Recollection (conscious ‘searching’ of memory for word, including context in which word appeared) Findings from the ‘Fame’ and ‘Inclusion/ Exclusion’ tasks suggest that [1] remains intact over the lifespan while [2] deteriorates. Thus, in old age, more likely to respond ‘habitually’

14. So What? Implications? Performance (e.g., skilled performance) constrained by context. E.g., Ss with Alzheimer’s vs Control Ss Sentence completion task (Nebes, Boller & Holland, 1986) [1] “Father carved the turkey with a ____” [2] “They went to see the famous ____” [1] Alzheimer’s = Controls [2] Alzheimer’s < Controls

15. Making Memory Work Q. Is it possible to ‘train’ old people to acquire new habitual responses? Q. Do older (i.e., previously-learned) responses interfere? How to test? Word-fragment completion tasks (e.g., Jacoby & Hay, 1993)

16. Jacoby & Hay (1993) Phase 1. Word fragment Knee b_n_ Choice of 2 words 75% of trials - ‘bend’ + one invalid alternative 25% of trials - ‘bone’ + one invalid alternative Thus strength of association between knee and two relevant words (bone and bend) was manipulated.

17. Jacoby & Hay (1993) Phase 2. [1] List of pairs of words to be remembered [2] Pair completion Half the trials - the list in [1] included the most commonly presented pairs in Phase 1 (i.e., 75%) Therefore... automatic responding (i.e., completing the pair with the word presented most often in phase 1 would be the correct answer) - response congruent with explicit recollection

18. Jacoby & Hay (1993) Phase 2. On the other half of the trials - the list included the least commonly presented pairs in Phase 1 (i.e., 25%) Therefore... automatic responding (i.e., completing the pair with the word presented most often in phase 1) would produce the incorrect answer) - response incongruent with explicit recollection.

19. Jacoby & Hay (1993) Results Probability of completing a pair [2] of in Phase 2 associated with the strength of association (i.e., 75% vs 25%) manipulated in Phase 1. Most importantly... ... no age effect for ‘automatic’ responses i.e., the probability for responding with a particular word-pair was correlated with the degree of exposure in Phase 1 regardless of whether Ss were young or old. Old people acquire/learn new automatic responses just as well as younger people....

20. Summary When we’re young, familiarity helps us to discriminate between responses that are appropriate and responses that are not (e.g., famous vs non famous names task) In old age, familiarity can ‘work against us’ - greater familiarity can lead us to give an inappropriate response.

21. Summary Implicit memories (i.e., those that we recollect automatically, without recourse to conscious effort) remain intact in old age... (e.g., word-stem completion task) ... but conscious recollection deteriorates. Therefore dissociation between implicit and explicit memory

22. Summary Recollection in old age constrained by context particular contexts ‘prompt’ particular responses regardless of how appropriate or inappropriate those responses are.. Thus possible to ‘train’ older people to make appropriate responses (e.g., WCST).... .... just as easily as training younger people. Downside is that once responses are ‘set’, they are resistant to change... .... old people likely to persist in newly-learned response-set.

23. Reading Essential Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., & Walker, N. (Eds.). (1996). Aging and skilled performance: Advances in theory and application. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. (pp. 113 - 137).