sensory memory iconic memory echoic memory

47
Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Upload: gray-shields

Post on 03-Jan-2016

231 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory. Iconic Memory What is the evidence? Subjective experience Objective measurements Judge duration of a light Interference Sperling’s (1960) work capacity decay (forgetting). Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Sensory Memory

Iconic Memory

Echoic Memory

Page 2: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Iconic Memory

What is the evidence?

Subjective experienceObjective measurements

Judge duration of a lightInterferenceSperling’s (1960) work

capacitydecay (forgetting)

Page 3: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Sensory Memory Iconic Memory

Echoic Memory also called Precategorical Acoustic Store (PAS)

Page 4: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

What is the evidence?

InterferenceDarwin, Turvey & Crowder’s (1972) work capacity (auditory span of apprehension) decay (forgetting)Modality Effect (in terminal list positions)

Page 5: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Demo

Page 6: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

What is the evidence?

InterferenceSuffix Effector Stimulus Suffix Effect

Page 7: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Proportion of Items Recalled as a Function of List Position and List Type

List Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Page 8: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Proportion of Items Recalled as a Function of List Position and List Type

List Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

No suffix(tap or tone control)

Suffix

Page 9: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Proportion of Errors as a Function of List Position and List Type

List Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

No suffix(tap or tone control)

Suffix

Page 10: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

What is the evidence?Interference

Suffix Effector Stimulus Suffix Effect

suffix cue to recall hurts performance--a sort of backward mask

affects only end positionsparticularly the final position

Page 11: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

What is the evidence?

InterferenceDarwin, Turvey & Crowder’s (1972) work capacity (auditory span of apprehension) decay (forgetting)Modality Effect (in end list positions)

Page 12: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

Darwin, Turvey & Crowder’s (1972) work

present auditory matrix of letters (quickly)

task—report letterswhole report

partial report

Page 13: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Headphones

Page 14: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Headphones

“L 2 K” “4 F 8”

“9 G X”

Page 15: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Headphones

“L 2 K” “4 F 8”

“9 G X”

Letters/numbers sound like they are coming from 3 different locations

Page 16: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Report all of the letters/digits—whole reportparticipants do okay (but not great)

Page 17: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

“L 2 K” “4 F 8”

“9 G X”

Partial report --Light cue signals

report from 1 location

Page 18: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Whole report – 4.2 letters/digits

Partial report – about 1.63 letters/digits x 3 locations = 4.9 letters/digits

Partial report superiority

Why?

Page 19: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Whole report – 4.2 letters/digits

Partial report – about 1.63 letters/digits x 3 locations = 4.9 letters/digits

Partial report superiority

Why? Relatively fast forgetting.

Page 20: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Darwin, Turvey, & Crowder’s (1972) work

Partial reportdelay report of row (w/ delayed cue)track performance as a function of delay

(retention interval)

Page 21: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Probability of Report as Function of Time  

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Time (s)

0 1 2 3 4

Page 22: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Probability of Report as Function of Time  

P(r)

1.00

0.0

Time (s)

0 1 2 3 4

.60

Page 23: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Probability of Report as Function of Time  

P(r)

1.00

0.0

Time (s)

0 1 2 3 4

.60 4.9 letters/digits

4.3 letters/digits(whole report

about 4.2)

Page 24: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Conclusion: Acoustic info or echo decays quickly(in about 4 s)

Important point: Acoustic info fades more slowly than visual info

This difference in decay rates is consistent with idea of different visual and acoustic stores

Page 25: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory

What is the evidence?

InterferenceDarwin, Turvey & Crowder’s (1972) work capacity (auditory span of apprehension) decay (forgetting)Modality Effect (in terminal list positions)

Page 26: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Demo

Page 27: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

6

Page 28: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

1

Page 29: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

9

Page 30: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

3

Page 31: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

7

Page 32: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

4

Page 33: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

2

Page 34: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

8

Page 35: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

5

Page 36: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

5

Page 37: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Demo

Page 38: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Proportion of Items Recalled as a Function of List Position and Presentation Modality

List Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Page 39: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

P(r)

1.0

0.0

Proportion of Items Recalled as a Function of List Position and Presentation Modality

List Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Auditory

Visual

Page 40: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic MemoryWhat is the evidence?

Modality Effectperformance for stimuli presented in one modality better than performance for stimuli presented in a different modality

In this case: auditory > visualIn this case: Effect occurs only in the end

(terminal) list positions

Page 41: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

What is the evidence?

InterferenceDarwin, Turvey & Crowder’s (1972) work capacity (auditory span of apprehension) decay (forgetting)Modality Effect (in terminal list positions)

Page 42: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

A few problems:

Page 43: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

A few problems:

1) Reasoning:

Acoustic info fades in about 4 sAcoustic interference should occur for

suffixes presented up to roughly 4 s after the final item

Suffix effect should disappear after about 4 s

Page 44: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

A few problems:

1) Suffix effect obtained after 20-s delay(Watkins & Todres, 1980)

Page 45: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

A few problems:

2) Reasoning: Acoustic info fades in about 4 s

Modality effect should occur for retention intervals of 4 s or less

Modality effect should not occur after 4-s retention interval

Page 46: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Echoic Memory(Precategorical Acoustic Store)

A few problems:

1) Suffix effect obtained after 20-s delay(Watkins & Todres, 1980)

2) Modality effect obtained after 20-s retention interval (Watkins & Watkins, 1980)

Page 47: Sensory Memory Iconic Memory Echoic Memory

Have a good day!