Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

COGNITION LECTURE 6 EPOSDIC
MEMORY – ECONDING AND RETREIVAL
OBJECTIVES








Examine the variables that influence encoding and retrieval
Introduce Levels of processing (LoP) theory of encoding
Examine and evaluate theories of LoP effects:
o Semantic vs
...

Most important is the type of processing that we carry out at encoding
Key idea introduced in the Levels of Processing (LoP) theory…
...
size, case, colour

HOLIDAY, holiday, Holiday
DEEP = Semantic features (meaning-based) e
...
valency (pleasant), associations (beach),
synonyms (vacation)
Deeper processing leads to better recall

Levels of Processing Experiment – Craik and Tulving (1975)
Read a list of unrelated words, e
...
bat, coffee, shield, coin
...
For each word, did
you see it on the list?
Manipulated type of study at encoding:
Shallow – upper or lower case judgement, e
...
is the following word in upper or lower case? BAT
Intermediate – rhyme judgement e
...
does the following word rhyme with hat? BAT

Deep – sensible or not judgement e
...
does the following word make a sensible end to the sentence
‘The man ate the …
...
g
...
g
...
But recent work suggests different types of processing occur in parallel
Can we suppress semantic processing?
Benefit of semantic processing depends on the nature of the test used to examine memory, e
...

Morris, Bransford and Franks (1977)…
...
Semantic – generate associate, e
...
bat – suitcase
2
...
g
...
Standard (study and new words) – select old words
2
...
g
...
Craik and Lockhart (1972) – semantic processing lasts longer than non-semantic?
No – Morris et al
...
Craik and Tulving (1975) – semantic processing produces more elaborate encoding?
Elaboration = relating the to-be-remembered item (e
...
word) to other information known about the
item

e
...
Dog – is an animal, a pet, wags tail, etc
...
Semantic processing producing more distinctive/ unique encoding? (Hunt and Elliot, 1960)

Elaboration Hypothesis
Key concept in Elaboration Hypothesis is that we are more likely to remember something if we can
relate it to other things that we already know
The argument is that semantic processing always produces more elaboration than non-semantic
To examine the elaboration hypothesis, look again at the Craik & Tulving (1975) study…
Craik and Tulving (1975)
People in the semantic (deep) condition were asked if a word made a sensible or nonsensical
completion to a sentence
E
...
the man caught the BALL (Y) The house was sold to a SPACESUIT (N)
Found not only a LoP effect but also a Congruity Effect
Memory for words that appeared in sentences judged to be sensible (congruent) was better than
memory for words in sentences judged nonsensical (incongruent)

Congruity effect explained
Congruent information elaborates (enriches) the encoding of the word in a way that nonsense or
incongruent information can’t
Semantic processing is needed for both congruent and incongruent sentences (i
...
you need to
know what a ball and a spacesuit are in order to answer both questions)
But congruent information provides more elaboration because it ties the item more closely to stored
knowledge – you get more elaboration if you process correct semantic information about the item
during encoding

Distinctiveness: Hunt and Elliott (1980)
Memory depends on the distinctiveness of the encoded information – how well it stands out from
other items in memory
Evidence – Bransford et al (1979):



'A mosquito is like a doctor because both draw blood'
'A mosquito is like a racoon because they both have a head,legs and jaws'
...
g
...
g
...
g
...
e
...
Scan each face (encoding lots of features) and rate the most distinctive feature = elaboration
+ distinctiveness OR
2
...
g
...
Randomly sorted items (unorganised) OR
2
...
Words generated at study are better recognised than words read at study (standard Generation
Effect)
2
...
Recognition is best if the same (rather than different) fragments are presented at both study and
test (transfer appropriate processing)
-lep---t to -lep----t is better than -lep---t to e--p-a-t

Self-Reference Effect: Rogers,Kuiper & Kirker (1977)
The personal relevance of information has a powerful effect on memory
Used a list of adjectives and asked Ps to use one of three different types of encoding:
1
...


Semantic (Does it mean the same as …?)

3
...
g
...
g
...
Free recall (recall items from list) OR
2
...
g
...
Only difference is the recall test
used - cued or free recall
Suggests that information that is available in memory may not be accessible under some test
conditions but can be accessed under other conditions
Failure to recall doesn’t necessarily mean failure to learn – it depends on the cues present at
retrieval

Practical applications
Making medical instructions more memorable – retention of medical information is vital but often
poor
Ley (1988) – patients forget 50% of information given to them by their doctor
High positive correlation between amount of information recalled and:
o
o
o
o

understanding of information
satisfaction with consultant
taking prescriptions (compliance)
recovery from illness

Asked some doctors to change presentation in line with findings from lab studies, e
...
to organise
the way in which information was presented:
‘First, what is wrong with you; I think you have bronchitis
...
Third, what the treatment will be…’
Found that explicitly categorising the way information is presented nearly doubled patients recall of
information given

Mnemonic techniques (retrieval cues)
e
...
One is a bun, two is a shoe, three is a tree
Bottle – bun
Table – shoe
Chimney - Tree

Use mental imagery to associate first to-be-remembered item (e
...
bottle) with a bun, second with a
shoe, etc
...
LoP: focus on meaning better than focus on perceptual features – for standard tests
(increases distinctiveness?)
2
...
Self-generation better than simply noting (reading) what’s presented
4
...
Storage failure (decay, interference) – information lost
2

---