University:
Amherst College
Course:
PSYC 233 | Cognitive Psychology
Academic year:

2024
Views:

456

Pages:

34
Author:

zavihanqle

Narrative and Autobiographical Memory ________________________________________ 1) Distinguish content accuracy from technical accuracy. 2) Distinguish reconstructive from reproductive memory. 3) Discuss the role of schemata in recall and recognition. 4) Describe classical experiments on eyewitness testimony (misinformation effect) and discuss the factors that do/do not promote accurate reports. 5) Describe classical experiments (flashbulb memories) on autobiographical memory and discuss research related to the accuracy of such memories. 6) Provide a brief overview of amnesic syndromes. a. TV amnesia vs. the real thing b. What does the study of amnesia tell us about ‘normal’ memory? When (if ever) is memory accurate? ______________________________________________ Technical Accuracy – word for word verbatim accuracy (surface structure) vs. Content Accuracy – getting the gist of the message correct (deep structure) ______________________________________________ Reproduction – our memories faithfully record events down to the very last detail, much like a tape recorder, video camera, or VCR. vs. Reconstruction – our memories gather together bits and pieces of events and bind them together using general world knowledge, expectations, and information gathered since the time of the event Bransford & Franks: an example of Reconstruction ______________________________________________ 7 "Old" Responses 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 Idea Units Semantic integration – we simplify messages by combining information into unified representations. Bartlett's "War of the Ghosts": ______________________________________________ Three types of errors: 1) Things that were changed Normalization - details became more modern ▪ canoe becomes sailboat ▪ death less mystical ▪ ghosts details dropped 2) Things that were left out: Specific details ▪ Name of the Town: ▪ Number of men in canoe: ▪ Other town name: 3) Things that were added (intrusions) Sharpening ▪ Native American theme ▪ Totem poles, scalping, war paint ______________________________________________ What interfered with memory in Bartlett’s experiment? Types of Schemata ______________________________________________ Schema – an active organization of past reactions and past experiences ▪ Native American schema ▪ Gangster movie ▪ Physics major ▪ Williams Student schema ▪ "Melvin"/"Bernice" Scripts – special type of schema organized around familiar activities • going to the doctor • dinner at a fancy restaurant • dinner at McDonald's • ballgame • beach Consists of: Characters, Plots, Settings, Timing, Dialogue What do scripts predict about story memory? ______________________________________________ If we use our general world knowledge to understand, interpret and make inferences about a story, then: Recall Intrusions Schemaconsistent Schemainconsistent What are your predictions for recognition? • Vivid Inconsistent Actions/Details • Pallid Inconsistent Actions/Details • Consistent Actions/Details Omissions Sulin & Dooling (1974) ______________________________________________ At learning: ‘Gerald Martin strove to undermine the government. Many people in his country supported his efforts.’ or ‘Adolph Hitler strove to undermine the government. Many people in his country supported his efforts.’ Recognition test: ‘Gerald Martin was obsessed with a desire to conquer the world.’ or ‘Adolph Hitler was obsessed with a desire to conquer the world.’ Results: • Eyewitness Testimony - Real Life Example ______________________________________________ In 1979, Father Bernard Pagano was facing trial for several armed robberies committed in the Wilmington, DE area. He maintained his innocence, but 7 eyewitnesses testified that he was the robber. The trial was nearing conclusion, and Father Pagano was certain to be convicted when another man Ronald Clouser confessed to the crimes. Mr. Clouser knew details that only the true robber could know. Q: Did Robert Pagano resemble Ronald Clouser? A: Q: Why then was Pagano arrested and almost convicted? A: Eyewitness Testimony in the Laboratory ______________________________________________ Janitor/radiator study Correct Judgment Actually saw the event Never saw the event Incorrect Judgment 83% 17% 70% had no memory 29% "remembered" janitor Staged assault of a professor. 6 weeks later, 60% (including the professor) of the witnesses couldn't identify the attacker. 25% chose an innocent bystander Grocery store robbery No Eyewitness Eyewitness 18% 72% Discredited Eyewitness 68% Loftus & Palmer (1974) ______________________________________________ Experiment 1: Theoretical Question: Empirical Question: Method: • Video of a multi-car accident • Answered a number of questions. • Key variable was the verb. About how fast were the cars going when they _____ each other? Results: Implication: Response bias vs. change in memory Loftus & Palmer (1974): Experiment 2 ______________________________________________ Theoretical Question: Empirical Question: Method: Three groups: Smashed vs. Hit vs. control DV: Vehicle Speed? Any broken glass? Results: Did verb influences reports of broken glass? Smashed Hit Control Yes 16 7 6 No 34 43 44 Was effect of verb mediated by speed? Estimated Speed 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Smashed .09 .27 .41 .62 Hit .06 .09 .25 .50 Implications: • Event and PEI are fused into a single memory • Verbal information dominates perceptual information Loftus & Palmer (1974): Discussion ______________________________________________ 1. Is it a problem that people are abominable at estimating the speed of motor vehicles (the dependent measure in E1)? a. Are we really studying memory if speed estimates are wildly varying constructions (Air Force study)? 2. Quote on pg. 586. What does it mean? What are the data that yield this conclusion? 3. Is there a difference between statistically reliable and meaningful experimental effects? 4. Do the data from E2 really eliminate bias as an explanation? 5. According to Loftus and Palmer (1974), of what two components do memories consist? Related Eyewitness Testimony Experiments ______________________________________________ Definite vs. indefinite articles: • Did you see the broken headlight? • Did you see a broken headlight? Results: Subjects much more likely to say "YES" with the Time is a factor: One week post-event, subjects were twice as likely to say "YES" to any as if they originally heard smashed, as opposed to hit. ______________________________________________ Two sources of information influence memory: 1. Perceptual information from witnessing the event 2. Information from external sources following the event (e.g., wording of questions; subsequent attempts at retrieval) Interpretation: • Errors results because people combine these two sources of information into a single memory Misinformation Effect ______________________________________________ Three-stages: 1. Witness an event • Stop sign vs. yield sign 2. Receive post-event information (PEI) • Consistent • Inconsistent • Neutral Critical question: "Did another car pass the red Datsun while it was stopped at the stop/yield sign?" <<>> 3. Memory test Recognition task 20 Minute Delay 2 Week Delay Consistent 75% ?? Neutral 59% ?? Inconsistent 41% 20% Note: chance would be 50% correct!!! Barn Study Why does the misinformation effect occur? ______________________________________________ 1) Overwriting hypothesis Computer file analogy Evidence: 2) Interference hypothesis Accurate information available, but not accessible Evidence: 3) Response Bias Not memory impairment, but “if you say so” Evidence: Change the recognition test so that people are choosing between the correct slide and a new unrelated slide. No effect of misinformation. Practical Implication of Eyewitness Research ______________________________________________ 1) Overcoming misinformation • Force people to make a public statement • Explicit Warnings • Timing • Plausibility • Limit attempts at retrieval • Presence of authority figures • Reinstate the context • ‘Dummy’ suspects and ‘dummy’ witnesses 2) Beware leading questions. 3) Avoid multiple interview technique. 4) “The jury will kindly disregard that information.” Recovered Memories vs. False Memories ______________________________________________ Susan Kay Nason was an 8-year old girl who was murdered in 1969. The case went unsolved for 21 years until a childhood friend named Eileen Franklin began to remember events about the murder. After some work at recovering the relevant information, Eileen remembered her father sexually abusing and then murdering Susan. Based on Eileen’s testimony, her father was convicted of the crime. The Problem ______________________________________________ Therapists perspective: 1) They see case after case of abuse and the fallout that results. Therefore, biased to believe. 2) However, some therapists strongly encourage patients to seek memories of abuse. If you have symptoms like: • depression • low self-esteem • suicidal thoughts • sexual dysfunction Then, you probably were abused. ______________________________________________ Cognitive Perspective 1) In most cases, we cannot objectively determine whether a "remembered" event actually occurred. 2) The more times you search memory, the more likely you are to believe something inaccurate. 3) Imagination inflation. 4) It is possible to “plant” false memories. Therefore, any recovered memory is suspicious. Example of a Planted False Memory ______________________________________________ Subjects were told four stories about their life. Three were true (as provided by family members) and one was false. Example: “You, your Mom and your brother and sister went to KMart. You must have been 5-years old. Your mom gave each of you some money to get a blueberry Icee. You ran ahead to get into the line first, and somehow lost your way in the store. Your brother found you crying to an elderly woman in the store. Then, your brother, sister and you went ahead to get the Icees.” Subjects remembered 68% of the true events, but also misremembered 29% of the false events. Other implanted memories include: • being hospitalized for an ear infection • birthday party • spilling punch at a wedding • being left in a parked car Implications from Implanted Memory Research ________________________________________ Does that mean false memories can be implanted easily? Evidence: False memories for religious rituals Does this mean that false memories of abuse are implanted by the suggestions of a therapist? No. Just because memories can be implanted doesn’t mean that all recovered memories are inaccurate. ______________________________________________ A Related Problem: Children as witnesses ______________________________________________ Children often serve as key witnesses in these cases, which is problematic because: 1) Highly susceptible to suggestion Example: Sam Stone experiments. 2) Have difficulty separating fact from fantasy. 1) Children were told to imagine getting their fingers caught in a mousetrap. 2) Interviewer came in once a week for 10 weeks. 3) New Interviewer asks if child ever got finger caught in a mousetrap. If the answer was “Yes”, child was prompted for details. Results: Large percentage of kids not only said, “Yes”, but provided elaborate details, as well. 3) Susceptible to coercion Hard to talk about so police say, “If you tell us what you want to know, we’ll give you some ice cream.” Exploiting the False Memory Controversy ______________________________________________ Deese / Roediger / McDermott (DRM) Procedure 90 80 Percent 'Old' 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Target Unrelated Lure Trial Type Critical Lure Other important findings: • Remember/Know • Warnings about what to expect • Relation to false memory controversy? Autobiographical Memory: Definition ______________________________________________ Memory for the events of one’s life • The time I met Charles Barkley in a record store • When I got married • When my Dad knocked me off my bicycle • When I had oatmeal for breakfast this morning Key Issues: • Types of events that we remember/forget • Distribution of memories • Accuracy of memory content • Accuracy of memory dating Distribution of Autobiographical Memories ______________________________________________ Proprtion of Memories Typical Retention Function 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Age at Event Proprtion of Memories Autobiographical Memory Function 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 Age at Event 50 60 70 Why do we observe a reminiscence bump? ______________________________________________ 1) Identity formation Events take on special significance because this is the period of life when we determine who we are. Prediction: 2) Biased Search Strategy We prefer to think about this time period. Prediction: 3) Nature of ‘bump’ events Lots of important things occur then. Prediction: 4) Evolutionary explanation Our brains work best at this time: IQ scores peak, brains are biggest, most neural material, fastest. Prediction: 5) Cognitive markers Many life changes to serve as retrieval cues Prediction: Why Childhood Amnesia? ______________________________________________ 1) Brain development I Brain not developed enough to lay down stable long term memories. Prediction: 2) Brain Development II At some point post-infancy, our brain radically changes the way we store and retrieve information making us unable to use the old code. Prediction: 3) Language development Little memory because poor language skills. Prediction: 4) Repression Our earliest memories are so traumatic and emotional, that we block them out. Prediction: Accuracy of AM ___________________________________________ The data are mixed. • Beepers studies: not too good. • Diary studies and Personal Semantics: not too bad. Two biggest determinants of accurate recall 1) Uniqueness • Rotten milk • One-off events • Life-changing events 2) Cues Method: Results: 6 year-olds go to a museum 2 retention intervals: 6 months, 6 years No cues: remembered very little With cues: remembered a lot McCloskey, Cohen & Wible (1988) _________________________________________ Flashbulb Memories – Unusually distinct memories for surprising and/or important events that are particularly resistant to forgetting. ________________________________________ Theoretical Question: Is a special memory mechanism responsible for flashbulb memories? Empirical Question: Do multiple re-tellings of flashbulb memories show perfect (high levels of) agreement? Questions: 1. What triggers the special mechanism? 2. What concerns have been raised about the special status of flashbulb memories? Method: • Space Shuttle Challenger: • Canonical questions (who, where, when, etc.) • Two groups: ▪ Repeated group ▪ 9-month group McCloskey, Cohen, & Wible (1988): Results ___________________________________________ General Agreement with original story: Was there forgetting? Same More Less Specific Specific 65 7 20 .61 .07 .19 Inconsistent 9 .08 Don’t Know 6 .05 • 7 of 27 subjects reported inconsistent details; mean confidence ratings of 5.22. • Confidence ratings decreased. • Who ate lunch with who? Ex: Aunt Emily and Uncle Jack Reagan assassination data: • Fewer flashbulbs than Pillemer reported • Time slice errors (TV report salience; patient) McCloskey, Cohen, & Wible (1988): Implications ___________________________________________ 1) Why would a special mechanism evolve? 2) Are flashbulb memories more accurate than regular memories? Are they complete fabrications? • Neisser example • Maylor study 3) Could it be that these results obtained because only a subset of the subjects in the experiment experienced a flashbulb memory? 4) Demand characteristics – what would happen if I asked you about your experience of the Challenger and you said, “I dunno”? 5) What else could explain data? 6) How do these data relate to those reported by Loftus and Palmer (1974) and/or the overwriting hypothesis? The Final Word ______________________________________________ Q: Is episodic memory accurate? A1: Broad outlines? Yes A2: Details? Not so much. Q: Why? A: Perhaps, this is because we store the gist of the event, but not the ancillary information. Q: Why do we see so much distortion in episodic tasks relative to autobiographical memory tasks? A: relative importance of details Episodic tasks: details are somewhat arbitrary Autobio tasks: crucial to our sense of self, so may rehearse more Amnesia ___________________________________________ The day I had my wisdom tooth removed… "Soap Opera" Kelly Taylor "Real World" Frederick Episodic Semantic Procedural Temporal Direction H.M. • • • • Father passed away Aging of his wife Lunch experiment Clock-watching experiment Typical Causes • Closed-Head Injury (Motor cycles, fencing) • Oxygen Deprivation (stroke, heart attack) • Tumors • Herpes Transient Global Amnesia Cardinal Symptoms ___________________________________________ 1) Discrepancy between IQ & memory performance • Dementia: both are compromised 2) Declarative memory across a delay is ruined • Verbal and non-verbal • All sensory modalities 3) Spared implicit and procedural memory • Korsakoff’s patient and pin doctor • But no memory for previous experiences 4) Semantic memory • OK on old information, but very difficult to learn new vocabulary 5) Little confabulation • Distinction from dementia 6) Cognitive mediation • Simple: Yes; Complex: No 7) Binding • Integrating item and context Consolidation ___________________________________________ Consolidation - memory encoding; the process of transferring information from STM (WM) to LTM. Two time courses Short-term consolidation - Hippocampus Long-term consolidaton - Frontal Lobes Evidence: 1) H.M. Hippocampi removed to treat epileptic seizures. He cannot learn new information, but retains old information quite well (Frederick). 2) Patients with damage to certain areas of the frontal lobes, show the opposite pattern. They lose more remote information but can retain new information. Other patients show evidence of a loss of semantic information (semantic dementia).

Description

Related Documents

Free up your schedule!

Take 5 seconds to unlock