advertisement

lrn11retrieval

83 %
17 %
advertisement
Information about lrn11retrieval
Entertainment

Published on November 15, 2007

Author: Laurie

Source: authorstream.com

advertisement

Retrieval of memories:  Retrieval of memories I. Explicit measures of recall II. Study-test interactions III. Implicit memories I. Are the memories there?:  I. Are the memories there? Nelson (1978) and savings Learn paired associates, such as 43-dog Wait until both recall and recognition memory fail Measure trials to learn 43-dog vs. 43-house Is all forgetting retrieval failure? Why is recognition memory easier than recall memory?:  Why is recognition memory easier than recall memory? Cued recall vs. free recall: Access to cues as category labels: Tulving and Psotka (1971) Recognition memory: two context cues Recall memory: One context cue Recall vs. recognition: Memorize the following words:  Recall vs. recognition: Memorize the following words then that also list each word more just much need call them ones food only sofa eggs cats test dart duck pill scat miss free Recognition test: Select the words from the following list::  Recognition test: Select the words from the following list: too good they also free more tend that there just test holy word much call ones each then dogs into eggs spill dart list that need thou them food hats only sofa will cats pill duck sips scat mister stuck unto miss Mnemonic methods:  Mnemonic methods Generate-recognize: Stories Pegword method Cue reliability is crucial Method of loci Is recognition easier than recall?:  Is recognition easier than recall? Mnemonic methods affect recall more than recognition. Intentional memory shows a similar effect relative to incidental memory. The difference is due to the availability of cues and the difficulty of the distractors. II. Study-test interactions:  II. Study-test interactions Context-dependent memory State-dependent memory Mood-dependency and mood-congruency Encoding-specificity hypothesis (Tulving, 1975) Memories are associated to specific cues. Memory is best if the learning cues are present at test. A different model:  A different model The variants on the encoding-specificity hypothesis focus on cues. Bransford’s transfer-appropriate processing focuses on processes rather than cues. Semantic associates vs. phonetic rhymes Target word: run Study jog-run vs. bun-run Test race-? vs. sun-? Morris, Bransford & Franks (1977) results:  Morris, Bransford & Franks (1977) results 1. Semantic processing (race-?) showed better recall. 2. Recall was better when test process matched study process than when study and test processes were reversed. Reconstructive and inferential memory:  Reconstructive and inferential memory We infer what we cannot recall about a story from what we can recall. As we make inferences, we engage in elaborate processing. As the elaborately processed inferences are available at recall, we benefit from transfer-appropriate processing. Elaboration must happen while learning. A danger in inferential processing:  A danger in inferential processing Once we process inferences, we find it difficult to remember whether an item was actually studied or inferred: a sort of positive transfer. Intrusions can be added at test (Helen Keller) Failure to distinguish inferences from experiences distorts eyewitness testimony and clinical recollection. DID and inferred abuse experiences III. Explicit vs. implicit memory:  III. Explicit vs. implicit memory Feeling of knowing/ Tip-of-the-tongue Accurately predicts eventual recognition TOT words recalled better than non-TOT words when primed with the initial letter TOT words have a shorter tachistoscopic threshold Jeopardy effect Hit the buzzer in 1.7 sec, begin answer in 2.5 sec Feeling of knowing is 90% accurate. This is an example of implicit memory. Familiarity:  Familiarity Experiencing an item creates record strength Items with record strength are subjectively familiar Familiarity speeds recognition of targets Familiarity slows rejection of distractors Familiarity breeds false alarms Familiarity increases belief : Mere exposure effect and propaganda Priming effects:  Priming effects Prior exposure increases retrieval accuracy Priming helps implicit memory more than explicit memory Priming may strengthen records without strengthening associations Procedural memory:  Procedural memory Effective solutions without conscious processing Procedural knowledge without declarative knowledge Motor memory: Typewriter keyboard Amnesia:  Amnesia Brain damage areas Cortex: Specific agnosias Hippocampus: Anterograde amnesia Surgery cases: H.M. Alzheimer’s disease Korsakoff’s syndrome Selective amnesia:  Selective amnesia Hippocampal damage produces anterograde amnesia for free recall Primed memory (cued recall and word completion) are not affected, however. Procedural learning is better than declarative learning Hippocampal damage mainly affects explicit, declarative memory Bransford & Franks results:  Bransford & Franks results 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Semantic Rhyme Study Condition Proportion of words recalled Semantic test Rhyme test

Add a comment

Related presentations

Related pages

lrn11retrieval - Ace Recommendation Platform - 1

Retrieval of memoriesI. Explicit measures of recallII. Study-test interactionsIII. Implicit memories
Read more