Popular in Course
Popular in Psychlogy
This 31 page Class Notes was uploaded by Mrs. Gracie Heathcote on Wednesday October 21, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 373 at Syracuse University taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 19 views. For similar materials see /class/225618/psy-373-syracuse-university in Psychlogy at Syracuse University.
Reviews for Human Memory
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/21/15
Primary Memory PSY 373 Human Memory February 1 2007 Housekeeping 0 Hand in experiment reports 0 Hand back quiz 0 First exam Tu Feb 20 will try to have review 215 0 Next experiment report is Serial Position due 213 What i remember from last time Echoic memory 1 The modality effect 2 The suffix effect 3 What makes a suffix sheeps and trumpets Followup to question oDid not find evidence addressing bilingual question 0 Did find evidence for modality effect when list silently mouthed o and corresponding suffix effect 0 Attenuation of recency effect for musical notes by chords but not white noise Overview of today s material 0 Primarysecondary memory 1 Miller 1956 and the JamesBroadbent model 2 The Brown Peterson Task 3 The Waugh Norman task The Modal Model External Ingut U SENSORY REGISTER Y Y IV i i 39 I I IVISUAL I LOST FROM sn 1 1 39L J I t K w I SHORTTERM STORE I I j TI W I I v VERBAL I I 39 l l mumsquot 39 LOST FROM STS W L I L l L A l l J r 39 O I l V 5312 LONG TERM STORE quotI I v M Big i mtm ggngms AVL v sum nu 1W mo ms I I LEZ FET SIquot 33 J L L FIG 1 Structure of the memory system Primary memory 0 Primary Memory The set of things we re currently aware of including the recent past 0 Secondary Memory The set of things we could remember if we wanted to James 1890 Primary memory The objects we feel in this directly intuited past differ from properly recollected objects An object which is recollected in the proper sense of the term is one which has been absent from consciousness altogether and now revives anew But an object of primary memory is not thus brought back it never was lost its date was never cut off in consciousness from that of the immediately present moment In fact it comes to us as belonging to the rearward portion of the present space of time and not to the genuine past Miller 1956 The magical number 7 i 2 o Noted memory span was approx 7 i 2 items 0 Noted that limits of absolute identification were about the same 0 Did these two things have something in common with each other Absolute Identification 0 Name a unidimensional stimulus 0 When the number of stimuli is about 7i 2 this becomes impossible to do perfectly 0 Doesn t depend on the range of the stimuli 0 An example Chunking oThought experiment Learn list absence hollow then recall the letters You ll get way more than 7i 2 o This is possible because you ve recoded the letters into chunks called words 0 Amazing feats of memorization Other contributions of Miller 1956 o Introduced notion of quotchunkquot o Popularized information theory for the study of memory Broadbent s 1958 model 0 S system like iconic and echoic memory 0 P system conscious awareness o secondary memory long term storage 0 S I P are primary or immediate memory limited capacity 0 Rehearsal necessary to maintain information in immediate memory The Brown Peterson Task 0 Brown 1958 0 Peterson and Peterson 1959 0 Recall trigrams after a delay BrownPeterson task Methods 0 No shocking 0 Present consonant trigram 0 Count backwards by threes or distinguish even odd 0 Variable delay to recall What is the purpose of the secondary task What is the purpose of the secondary task 0 Prevent rehearsal o If Broadbent s theory is correct then we should be looking at decay from primary memory Decay versus interference We forget over time but why 0 Decay postulates that forgetting happens because of time per se 0 Interference means that other information comes in and obscures or displaces older information oThink about our snowman and those evil squirrels or about rust Waugh and Norman 1965 Interference vs decay in primary memory 0 Probe digit task Q74 89215 A 8 0 Different rate of presentation oAIIows to distinguish decay from retroactive interference How would these results look if decay were the cause of forgetting How about interference Waugh and Norman 1965 Results 1 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 0 Proportion C onect l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 Num berofmtervenjng 113m 3 Interference wins Broadbent s idea about decay from primary memory was wrong Definition Retroactive Interference oRetroactive interference is a decrement in performance attributable to subsequent learning 0 Often shows up as a decrease in memory as a function of recency Definition Proactive Interference oProactive interference is a decrement in performance attributable to prior learning 0 Often shown as a decrement in performance with practice 0 How can you distinguish from fatigue BrownPeterson and PI from longterm memory 0 No forgetting with delay for one trial 0 Release from PI 0 Graphics from Delosh and Merritt httpamarcoostateedu bcleggPY453STMpdf Keppel and Underwood 1962 Perfect performance on first trial even with long delay Proportion Correct 095 09 085 08 075 07 065 06 055 05 El El ltgt 3 Seconds 9 Seconds EI 18 S econds Trhl Release from Pl paradigm 0 Word trigrams from a category 0 Eg CAR BIKE SHIP 0 Some 55 get a category shift after a few trials 0 Eg shift from methods of transportation to vegeta bles Release from Pl results 1 09 i 08 07 06 05 04 03 Proportion C omect E39 C onttol 0 2 01 39 Expen39n ental O I l 2 3 4 Trial Summary 0 Primarysecondary distinction o Decay vs interference o Proactive and retroactive interference o Waugh Norman task and implications Things to know about the BrownPeterson task 1 Procedure 2 Basic finding and interpretation 3 Keppel and Underwood 4 Release from PI Assignments 0 Should have read through Chs 1 3 already 0 Optional reading Miller 1956 0 First exam Tu Feb 20 will try to have review 215 0 Next experiment report is Serial Position due 213