PSY 368 Human Memory

  • Published on
    22-Jan-2016

  • View
    23

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

PSY 368 Human Memory. Reconstructive Memory cont. Announcements. Experiment 3 Report due April 16 If you missed the details of the Experiment, I included them in the lectures last week. Experiment 3. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

<ul><li><p>PSY 368 Human MemoryReconstructive Memory cont.</p></li><li><p>AnnouncementsExperiment 3 Report due April 16 If you missed the details of the Experiment, I included them in the lectures last week</p></li><li><p> Interaction of Episodic and Semantic Memory (Exp 3) (Download detailed instructions form Blackboard)Modification of Anderson, Bjork, &amp; Bjork (1994)(see Blackboard Media Library Optional Readings to download a pdf of this paper if you want to read more)Question: Can the retrieval of some items impact the retrieval of others?e.g., Suppose that you are studying for a test. You decide to study half the material. Does studying half the material have an impact on the half of the material that you didnt study?Experiment 3</p></li><li><p> Interaction of Episodic and Semantic Memory (Exp 3)Scoring:</p><p>Experiment 3 Resultsdrinks v, weapons s, drinks r, weapons r, drinks g, weapons t</p><p>Class Avg. DataPracticed # recalled4.6% (divide # by 6)77.2%Non-practiced # recalled2.9% (divide # by 6)47.7%Control # recalled6.4% (divide # by 12)53.5%</p></li><li><p> Interaction of Episodic and Semantic Memory (Exp 3)Scoring:</p><p>Experiment 3 ResultsANOVA resultsF(2,118) = 59.49comparisons:Practice vs control t(59) = 8.9, p &lt; .05Non-practice vs control t(59) = -2.0, p &lt; .05</p><p>General conclusions: Evidence for retrieval induced forgetting. Items within the same category as those studied, that werent studied were worse than controls. May be due to inhibition of items following spreading of activation.</p><p>Chart1</p><p>77.253.547.7</p><p>Practiced</p><p>Control</p><p>Non-Practiced</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>PracticedNon-PracticedControl</p><p>Category 177.247.753.5</p><p>To update the chart, enter data into this table. The data is automatically saved in the chart.</p></li><li><p> Interaction of Episodic and Semantic Memory (Exp 3)Experiment 3 ResultsGeneral conclusions: Evidence for retrieval induced forgetting. Items within the same category as those studied, that werent studied were worse than controls. May be due to inhibition of items following spreading of activation.</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesMemory is reconstructiveSometimes we may remember things that never actually happenedAnd for these false memories we may be as confident in them as we are with actual memoriesWe are surprisingly unaware of how unreliable our memory can be and overly confident in the accuracy of our memoriesOverconfidence comes from two factors:Source Memory: Memory of the exact source of the information (original event, later information, or general knowledge of the situation)Processing Fluency: The ease with which something is processed or comes to mind (remember sleep too easily for you to have imagined it)</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesWhy do we study them?Real World ImplicationsPerceptual illusions, can give better understanding of normal processesDRM procedureEyewitness testimony credibilityRecovered memories issue</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesRoediger &amp; McDermott (1995) studyDRM paradigm (Deese, 1959; Roediger &amp; McDermott, 1995)Creates false memories in the labDEMO (like the task that we saw Schacter give Alan Alda)</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesA week ago I gave you a long list of words to remember(1) haystack(13) airplane(25) rye(37) thief(2) sandals(14) flow(26) melody(38) hill(3) fright(15) pretty(27) spider(39) power(4) weather(16) ankle(28) music(40) butter(5) sharp(17) awake(29) girl(41) foot(6) hot(18) doctor(30) bread(42) father(7) creek(19) frame(31) sweet(43) jagged(8) king(20) jelly(32) stream(44) door(9) thread(21) top(33) soft(45) throne(10) shoe(22) jazz(34) river(46) money(11) winter(23) sugar(35) jail(47) mountain(12) tide(24) needle(36) glacier(48) steal</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesA week ago I gave you a long list of words to remember(1) haystack(13) airplane(25) rye(37) thief(2) sandals(14) flow(26) melody(38) hill(3) fright(15) pretty(27) spider(39) power(4) weather(16) ankle(28) music(40) butter(5) sharp(17) awake(29) girl(41) foot(6) hot(18) doctor(30) bread(42) father(7) creek(19) frame(31) sweet(43) jagged(8) king(20) jelly(32) stream(44) door(9) thread(21) top(33) soft(45) throne(10) shoe(22) jazz(34) river(46) money(11) winter(23) sugar(35) jail(47) mountain(12) tide(24) needle(36) glacier(48) stealStudied list words - Accurate memories</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesA week ago I gave you a long list of words to remember(1) haystack(13) airplane(25) rye(37) thief(2) sandals(14) flow(26) melody(38) hill(3) fright(15) pretty(27) spider(39) power(4) weather(16) ankle(28) music(40) butter(5) sharp(17) awake(29) girl(41) foot(6) hot(18) doctor(30) bread(42) father(7) creek(19) frame(31) sweet(43) jagged(8) king(20) jelly(32) stream(44) door(9) thread(21) top(33) soft(45) throne(10) shoe(22) jazz(34) river(46) money(11) winter(23) sugar(35) jail(47) mountain(12) tide(24) needle(36) glacier(48) stealStudied list words - Accurate memoriesCritical theme words - False memories</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesRoediger &amp; McDermott (1995)Recall: ~ 40% recalled sleepRecognition: Remembering the lure (sleep) during recall strengthened participants memories of the lure during recognitionParticipants claimed to remember the lure rather than merely know it had been on the list</p><p>Chart1</p><p>0.790.81</p><p>0.570.58</p><p>0.220.23</p><p>Studied</p><p>Critical Lure</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>StudiedCritical Lure</p><p>Overall0.790.81</p><p>Recognize0.570.58</p><p>Know0.220.23</p><p>To update the chart, enter data into this table. The data is automatically saved in the chart.</p></li><li><p>DRM ParadigmHow strong is this effect?Recent studies indicate it is very robustReplicated may timesExplicit warnings fail to eliminate the effectMay see a reduction in the effectAs the number of list items increases, rate of false recollection increases (Robinson &amp; Roediger, 1997)Young children are less susceptible to DRM paradigmHave not yet developed associationsBut they are easily influenced by suggestive questioningOlder adults are more susceptible to the illusionRely more on gist than verbatim traces</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesLook at the original list (different order now)So what is going on in the DRM task?The lists rely on properties of semantic associationWords that are similar in meaning or co-occur in language are associates</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesSo what is going on in the DRM task?Two main theoretical accountsActivation/Monitoring TheoryFuzzy Trace Theory</p><p>Status of the debate: mixed results, with each theory having some support</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesActivation-Source Monitoring Theory: Two componentsPart I. ActivationLure is consciously or unconsciously activatedActivation is automatic High activation results in false recollectionpowercastlejewelrulerprincethroneroyaltyEnglandcrownqueen</p></li><li><p>False MemoriesFuzzy-Trace TheoryInformation is encoded in two formats in parallelGist meaning based representationLonger lasting representationsVerbatim details Are not as well preservedMore sensitive to interference effectsList memory = verbatim + gistLure memory = gist onlyThe verbatim memories for all items may not be there so rely on gist, which may include the lure (since it is consistent with the general gist)</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyEyewitness TestimonyReconstructive memorySchema driven errorsEffect of leading questions</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyPersuasiveness Most persuasive form of evidenceEyewitnesses believed ~80% of the time (Loftus, 1983)Juries cannot tell the difference between an accurate and an inaccurate witnessAccurate witness believed 68% of timeInaccurate witness believed 70% of time</p><p>Type of Evidence% guilty votesEyewitness testimony78Fingerprints70Polygraph53Handwriting34</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyPersuasiveness Juries cannot tell the difference between an accurate and an inaccurate witnessWells et al. (1998)Studied 40 people who were convicted but later cleared by DNAIn 90% (36) of the cases, there was false eyewitness identificationRattner (1988)Studied 205 wrongfully convicted defendants52% were due to inaccurate eyewitness testimonyBrandon and Davies (1973)Described 70 cases of people wrongfully convicted due to inaccurate eyewitness testimony</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyPersuasiveness Experimental studiesBuckhout (1975)Simulated crime on a TV newscast2,145 callers14.7% were accurateBuckhout (1974)Staged assault on professor in front of 141 students7 weeks later, students shown line-up of six photographs40% identified attacker36% identified bystander23% identified person not there</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyWhat do witnesses report?Fashsing, Ask, &amp; Granhag (2004)</p><p>Attribute% Reporting% AccurateGender99.6100Height91.244Clothing (upper body)90.858Clothing (head)89.656Build84.457Weapon76.471Clothing (pants)73.653Age62.438Type of speech46.884</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonySchema Driven ErrorsWitnesses to crimes filter information during acquisition &amp; recallTheir schematic understanding may influence how info is both stored &amp; retrievedDistortions may occur without the witness realizing, based on things like:Past experiencesAssumptions about what usually happensStereotypes &amp; beliefs about crime &amp; criminals</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyExperimental Evidence: Interference paradigmsInformation presented after an event can lead to distortionsPost-event information can be incorporated into the original memoryMisinformation effectsRepeated questioning about an event can enhance recall of certain details and induce forgetting of others (also increases confidence in memory of the event)Repeated exposure to misinformation strengthens memory about the misinformationAre even found when participants are warned that misleading information might be presented</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyEffect of leading questions on recallLeading questions introduce new information Leading info may activate wrong schemas in witness mindConsequently, witness may recall events incorrectlyMost affected by leading Qs when:Witness believes questioner knows more than themWitness does not realize they may be misledLeading information is peripheral, not centralLeading information is not blatantly incorrect</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyEffect of leading questions on recallLoftus &amp; Palmer (1974)Showed film of car accidentEstimated speedHow fast were the cars going when they ____ into each other? (smashed, hit, collided, etc)Smashed led to higher speed estimates</p><p>Did you see a/the broken headlight?The produced more affirmative (incorrect) responses</p><p>Smashed 40.8 mphCollided 39.3 mphBumped 38.1 mphHit 34.0 mphContacted 31.8 mph</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyLoftus, Miller, &amp; Burns (1978)Saw slides of car turning to hit a pedestrianEither saw stop or yield signEffect of misleading information on recallAsked questions including:Did another car pass the red Datsun while it was at the ____ sign? (consistent vs. inconsistent)</p></li><li><p>Eyewitness TestimonyLoftus, Miller, &amp; Burns (1978)Effect of misleading information on recallConsistent while it was at the stop sign?Inconsistent) while it was at the yield sign?</p><p>Consistent while it was at the yield sign?Inconsistent) while it was at the stop sign?</p><p>AccuracyImmediateConsistent75%Inconsistent40%2 week delayInconsistent20%Recognition test for correct photo of car with sign</p></li><li><p>Misattribution &amp; MisinformationGenuine alteration for the original memory may be only one part of the memory distortion explanation</p><p>Three important effects:Overconfidence in the accuracy of the memorySource misattributionMisinformation acceptance</p></li><li><p>Source MisattributionThe inability to distinguish whether the original event or some later event was the source of the information (misremember what we have experienced)</p><p>Did I remember the word sleep because it was actually in the list ?ORBecause I thought about the word when I heard the list?Misattribution &amp; Misinformation</p></li><li><p>Misinformation Acceptance:Accepting additional information as having been part of an earlier experience without actually remembering that information (form memories on the basis of suggestion from some other source)</p><p>Do I remember the car speeding because it was?ORBecause the policeman said it was?</p><p>Tendency grows stronger as more time elapsesMisattribution &amp; Misinformation</p></li><li><p>Recovered MemoriesA person remembers a traumatic event from many years agoThe memory was repressed, but is now recovered in therapyIntentional forgetting of painful or traumatic experiencesLittle empirical evidence for this type of forgetting (could have the opposite effect)</p></li><li><p>Recovered MemoriesIn 1986, Nadean Cool, a nurses aid in Wisconsin, sought therapy from a psychiatrist to help her cope with her reaction to a traumatic event experienced by her daughterPsychiatrist used hypnosis and other suggestive techniques to uncover buried memories of abuse that Cool herself had experienced</p></li><li><p>Recovered MemoriesCool became convinced that she had repressed memories ofhaving been in a satanic culteating babiesbeing rapedhaving sex with animalsbeing forced to watch murder of her 8-year-old friendCool came to believe that she had more than 120 alter personalities: children, adults, angels, duck</p></li><li><p>Recovered MemoriesCool eventually came to believe that false memories had been implantedCool sued psychiatrist for malpracticein March, 1997, after 5 weeks of trial, her case was settled for $2.4 million</p></li><li><p>Recovered MemoriesIncreasing numbers of people believe that they were sexually abused as children, but repressed the memory until it was later recovered, often with help of therapist1990s: A big spike in cases of people in therapy recovering memories of childhood sexual abuse Courage to Heal: General premise that we were all abused as children, we need help to remember Even if there is no evidence and we have no recollection of being abused Therapies includedHypnosis (uses imagery, suggestive questioning, &amp; repetition)Guided Imagery (for now, just imagine that you were abused by your father)Drug Therapies (sodium amytal, mostly)</p></li><li><p>Recovered memoriesCould some of the recovered memories be false?If it is possible to create false memories, then some recovered memories might be falseStakes are highmust find justice and safety for victims of abuse; must prevent perpetrators from harming othersmust protect individuals from false charges that can destroy their lives</p></li><li><p>Recovered memoriesRecovered Memoryall memories recovered in therapy should be taken seriouslyFalse memories are rareIf raise doubts, betray children and support pedophilesPseudomemoryMemories recovered in therapy should be viewed with skepticismFalse memories can be manufactured by nave/unscrupulous therapistsMany false accusations</p></li><li><p>Recovered memoriesLoftuss shopping mall studiesasked subjects to try to remember childhood events that had been told to researchers by their parents, older siblings, or other close family members3 events were real; 1 event (getting lost in a shopping mall at age 5) was false29% remembered false event</p></li><li><p>Recovered memoriesHyman and colleagues (reported in Loftus, 1997)asked college students to recall childhood experiences told to the researchers by their parentseach subject given one false event (either an overnight hospitalization for a high fever and ear infection or a birthday party with pizza and a clown)during first interview, no one remembered false eventduring second interview, 20% remembered false event</p></li><li><p>Recovered memoriesMcNally (2003) review of several studies Identified 4 groupsRepressed memoryRecovered memoryContin...</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >