psy 368 human memory working memory cont. demos and reviews
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
PSY 368 Human MemoryWorking Memory cont.
Demos and reviews
![Page 2: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Baddeley’s Model
ArticulatoryControl
Visual scribe
![Page 3: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Two parts: Phonological Store (PS) and
Articulatory Control Process (ACP)• PS - stores auditory info for 1-2 s and then it starts to
decay• ACP - recodes visual info into auditory code for
storage and controls rehearsal
• 4 Main Effects in Serial Recall Task to account for• Phonological similarity effect• Articulatory suppression effect• Irrelevant speech effect• Word length effect
![Page 4: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Demos
Listen to list, recall words in order
RhinocerosZincGorillaTuberculosisMeaslesCalciumUraniumCarbonHippopotamusMumps
Listen to list, recall words in order
PlanetMusicianLandPropertyTrumpetHouseStarCometOrchestraMoon
Listen to list, recall words in order, while I read the words say ‘the’ aloud
BlockBrickStickBlueChewTrickPrickClueClickBlimp
Read list, recall words in order, while I read the words say ‘the’ aloud
GoldCodeBoldHoldToldColdModeSlowedHopeGoad
Listen to list, recall words in order, while I read the words say ‘the’ aloud
BronzeBookMagazineBikeCopperDressCopierSodaShoeRock
![Page 5: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Phonological Loop
• Memory worse for items that sound alike than those that look alike or have similar meanings
• Visual items are recoded to auditory for storage and rehearsal by ACP
• List 1 (Easy to remember/dissimilar phonology and semantics): • PIT, DAY, COW, PEN, HOT
• List 2 (Only slightly harder than List #1/similar semantics) :• HUGE, WIDE, BIG, LONG,
TALL• List 3 (Much harder than List
#1/similar phonology) :• CAT, MAP, MAN, CAP, MAD• What happens if you prevent the recoding of
visual information into auditory information?
• Works for both auditory presentation and visual presentation of the letters.
• Phonological Similarity Effect
e.g., Baddeley (1966)
![Page 6: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Articulatory Suppression Effect
• Engaging in an auditory task after study removes phonological similarity effect for visual items• Procedure: Say “the” aloud over and over
• No re-coding of visual info by ACP• Phonological info gets in directly, doesn’t need re-coding
Auditory presentation: PGTCD (similar sounding) harder to recall than RHXKW (different sounding)Visual presentation: PGTCD (similar sounding) recalled equally as RHXKW (different sounding)No re-coding, so no chance for
similar sounds to interfere
With suppression
![Page 7: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Irrelevant Speech Effect
• Background speech presented during study decreases memory for visual items
Salame & Baddeley (1982)
96 7 8 32
‘one’ ‘four’ ‘five’ Semantically similar‘tun’ ‘sore’ ‘fate’ Phonologically similar
‘tennis’ ‘double’ Phonologically differentQuiet control
![Page 8: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Irrelevant Speech Effect
• Background speech presented during study decreases memory for visual items
Salame & Baddeley (1982)• Amount of disruption is determined
by phonological similarity• In other experiments
• showed no word-length effect for irrelevant speech
• If rehearsal is prevented, irrelevant speech effect disappeared
Conclusions:• Irrelevant speech interferes with recoding of visual info
to auditory
![Page 9: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Phonological Loop• Word-length Effect
Results• Recall decreases as the
length of time it takes to say a word increases.
• Rehearsal takes longer for longer words - can’t rehearse as many times
Baddeley, Thomson, and Buchanan (1975)
• Retrieval from PS also takes longer due to auditory coding of items
• Reading rate correlated with memory ability• Digit span depends on language - how long it takes to
say numbers
![Page 10: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
• Potential Problems with the model• Some of the supportive results can’t be
replicated (e.g., irrelevant speech effect)• Model can’t explain all results:
• why word-length effect is larger for visual than auditory items
• why it differs based on serial list position• Why some effects persist after extended delays
(e.g., 5 mins)
• Model is not precise in explanation of effects
Baddeley’s Model
![Page 11: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Cowan’s Activation Model
• Cowan (1999)
• WM = info that is currently highly activated from STM or LTM
• Focus of attention• Emphasizes attention’s
role in activation• Activation of info when
attention is oriented to it
• Activation will decay to cause loss of info from WM (also interference)
STM
WM
![Page 12: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Cowan’s Activation Model
• Central Executive • Focuses attention and
other control processes• Capacity of about 4 chunks
• Duration of 20s without reactivation
• STM• activated items that
are just outside of attention - passive store• Things within attentional
focus are available to consciousness
STM
WM
![Page 13: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
• Potential problems with the model• Only general descriptions so specific
predictions are hard to make• Activation is not operationally defined very
well - when is something is “activated”?• What causes decay? Passage of time isn’t
causal
Cowan’s Activation Model
![Page 14: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Nairne’s Feature Model
• Items represented in WM as individual features (e.g., color, length, etc.)• Features indicate
• presentation info (e.g., font, size, gender of voice, etc.) • meaning info (e.g., what the item means, category,
etc.)• Stays the same regardless of presentation
• Features represented by -1 or +1 when studied (yes or no for a feature, 0 if no info for feature)
• Interference: Later items with same features overwrite feature info for previous items
![Page 15: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Nairne’s Feature Model
Bold Lower Upper Blue
SCHOOL +1 -1 +1 -1
fish +1 +1 -1 -1
• “fish” presented after “SCHOOL”
- features in common can be overwritten - SCHOOL can become 0, -1, +1, 0
- interference
During retrieval, item features are compared with items in memory - lost features can be updated and restored
![Page 16: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Nairne’s Feature Model
• Quantitative model - numerical predictions are possible - can simulate data to generate predictions for studies• Simulations show that model can predict:
1) Recency effect2) Suffix effect
3) Phonological similarity effect
4) Word length effect
![Page 17: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Summary of WM
(1) Focus on processing (vs. storage)
(2) Three main modern models- Baddeley model
- Central executive controls VS, PL, EB- Cowan activation model
- WM = attention focus, STM = activated- Nairne feature model (quatitative)
- Items coded as features with overwriting interference
![Page 18: PSY 368 Human Memory Working Memory cont. Demos and reviews](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062517/56649ebc5503460f94bc455b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Exam 1 review