PYSC 2150 Intro to Cognition Exam 2

Distraction

1 stimulus interfering with processing of another stimulus (i.e.: conversation in library interferes with cell phone game playing ability) --- Internal: mind drifts away External: environment

3 ways to code in WM

1) Acoustically 2) visually 3) semantically Have >1 thing at a time

Major methods to determine cog functioning & the brain

1) Analyze human/animal behavior after brain damage 2) Recording from single neurons in animals 3) Measuring activity of human brain 4) Recording electrical signals from the human brain

Idea of connectionism

1) Based on how info = repped in the brain 2) Explains may diff findings (how concepts = learned, how damage to the brain affects people's knowledge about concepts, etc.) Also called parallel distributed processing models Propose that concepts = repped by activity that's distributed across a network

3 ways to see how info = held in the brain

1) Brain damage: how damage/removal of prefrontal cortex affects ability to remember for short pds of time 2) Neurons: how neurons in monkey prefrontal cortex hold onto info during brief delay 3) Brain activity: areas of brain that's activated by WM tasks

3 problems with Quillian's model

1) Deoesn't explain typicality effect (predicts same rxn times, which is untrue) 2) Question cognitive econ bc people may store spec properties for that concept right at the node for that concept 3) Sentence verification results suggest that by using semantic network, "pig" is closer to "mammal" than "animal". Incorect

Significant problems with thinking memory tests = sensitive

1) Difficulty of recognition depends on difficulty of distractors - all semantics based = difficult 2) Make distractors similar to target, recognition is much harder 3) Type of cue (good vs shitty) also matters - experiment about cues to memory -cues must match way you encoded content (transfer appropriate processing) --> deep processing != better --> type of processing @ encoding = better for trying to retrieve meaning later. No cues that are absolutely good or bad Incompatible with memory strength & memory pride hypothesis

Problem with prototype model

1) Doesn't address idea of gradients between diff models 2) Can't create a prototype of what can be in your pocket, can still understand the way things work 3) Features = only as good as how you define them --- Ad hoc categories Don't have experience, but prototype model is general, tuned by making categorization jdugments Never don'e something before, now you're making up a def of category after the cast Not categorization judgement you are often Another would be the, "what would you rescue from a fire?" Don't have experience, can still make judgment, contradicts model

Measures of memory

1) Free recall 2) cued recall 3) recognition 4) savings in relearning

Problems with probabilistic models

1) How to select features? 2) Similarity & context 3) Categorization based on rules

Modal model

--> (rehearsal) --> Sensory memory --> STM -(storage)-> LTM --> | <-(retrieval)- LTM - | - output ---- Model proposing 3 types of memory (semantic, STM, LTM) = structural features of the model Places sensory & STM at beginning of the process of memory Also proposed control processes (i.e.: rehearsal)

Maybe they're terrible at encoding

-Focusing on wrong thing? -Get them to encode aloud to circumvent, make sure it's deep encoding - get patients to do deep encoding, no effect

Moving beam of attention has 3 separate processes

1) If attention = engaged, have to disengage 2) Moving attention 3) Re-engaging attention --- if 1 is damaged (posterior parietal cortex) - valid trials = cue points to direction we're looking at -->We can do this even when damaged - invalid trials = really bad on contralateral side -->difficult to disengage attention from the invalid side Subject understands something happened somewhere else. In order to do that, must disengage, which they cannot die If 2 is damaged (superior colliculus) - valid trials: slow to show advantage of the cue, do show it (key = length of the delay) - invalid trials: no benefit/cost with short delays (didn't engage attention). If longer delay & engaged attention, much higher cost Longer delay = good at showing you can engage. No real benefit from cue if delay = brief If 3 is damaged (thalamus) -Valid trials: don't seem to use the cue much bc you don't care about cues. Don't feel like trying. -invalid trials: don't seem to use cue much, easily distracted by invalid stimuli --> Have trouble shining attention on anything (huge bc can't engage attention in location they want it to be. It's engaged where you don't want attention to be) --- Sig bc neural evidence & describing a once thought single process into 3 distinct parts

What's the missing process?

1) Maybe they're terrible at encoding 2) Fast forgetting 3) Stuff gets into memory, just can't retrieve it

Connectionist approach to learning

1) Network responds to stimulus 2) Provided with correct response 3) Modifies weights to better match correct response --- Shows how you learn and what learning looks like Whatever output's closest to that's what you'd think it is At first, all weights = 0. Get input, tell which node should be activated, only activate nodes based on the weights --- Model's good for accounting how you generalize

Multitasking hypotheses

1) People who aren't good at regulating attention, you prefer multitasking (opposite also applies) 2) There's an effect of long-term multitasking, used to spreading things around -other things conflict with what you're doing (opposite = also true)

Properties of memory

1) Quantity and speed 2) Near miss 3) Relevant info 4) Resistant to faulty input

Activation of units in a network require

1) Signal that originates in the input units 2) Connxn weights throughout the network

Several ways to get info into LTM

1) maintenance rehearsal 2) elaborative rehearsal Better memory = associated with encoding based on meaning and making connections

Advantages to connectionism approach

1)Advantages of local rep (typicality) and graceful degradation 2)Works best with brain damage 3) Automatically generalizes - not accounted for in local model - grow to see them as separate with inc experiences

Properties of attention

1)Limited - not all sensory stimuli simultaneously get continued processing (can't fully process all the different sensations) 2) Selective - attention must be selective exactly bc it's limited 3) Informs/enables continued cog processing - can direct attention wherever you want

EXP: Godden

1/2 subjects went underwater, studied words Other 1/2 studied words on land. Later tested on words on land. People who studied on land performed best --- Best recall = when encoding & retrieval happen at same location Should study in same environment as test taking environment

Stem completion

1st part = same as tachistoscopic id 2nd part = give stem completion task. Complete stem so it makes a full word, do whichever word comes into mind 30% of people, when see list, finish stem with list of words

STM vs working memory

2 diff models of the same thing STM = storage WM = storage & thinking --- Working memory includes Central exec, which has VS, episodic buffer, phonological loop, semantics, episodic LTM STM = concerned with storing info for brief pd of time

EXP: Colin Cherry

2 different songs, one in each side of ear at equal volumes. When you receive messages in each year, do an experiment involving dichotic listening. Focus attention on words in one ear = attended ear, as you heard the words, repeat them aloud (shadowing). Next, without shifting attention from the attended ear, notice what you can take in from the other ear (was the speaker male/female? etc) --- Dichotic experiments confirm subjects = unaware of info presented in unattended ear People notice physical characteristics, don't know anything about meaning --- Idea that only attended stuff = processed for semantics

EXP: Hyde & Jenkins

2 factors to manipulate 1) Deep = rate pleasantness 2) shallow= does word contain Q or A? Gave incidental & intentional memory tests. --- 1) Depth has a big effect 2) intent doesn't matter Effort has impact only if it prompts you to do things consequential to memory (therefore indirect effect)

EXP: Craik & Tulving

4 levels of depth Structural (shallowest) --> phonemic --> category --> sentence (deepest) Presented word as a stimulus. Recognized more words as processing became deeper

Prototype

A "typical" member of the category Based on avg of members of a category that are commonly experienced Variations in category = rep diffs in typicality

Saccadic eye movement

A rapid, jerky movement from 1 fixation to the next

Procedural memory

Ability to do anything involving muscle co-ordination (riding a bike, etc.)

What are attention techniques concerned with?

Ability to focus attention on a particular image/task Often shift attention from place to place by moving eyes or shifting attention in your mind without moving your eyes

Cocktail party effect

Ability to focus on 1 stimuli while filtering out other stimulus ---- According to early filter model, this shouldn't be true

Attention

Ability to focus on specific stimuli or locations --- Limited. Can't process everything Is continued cognitive processing

Typicality effect

Ability to judge highly prototypical objects more rapidly Affects how quickly you categorize & how you reason When asked to generate examples of a category, always generate v typical examples

Reading span

Ability to juggle info in WM effectively = sign of higher thinking Switch to attention Manipulating info in WM quickly & effectively = sign of higher reading comprehension

Spreading activation

Activity that spreads out along any link that's connected to an activated node Spreads to other nodes in the network, and add concepts that receive this activation become "primed", can be retrieved more easily from matter --- If damage, you can't think about that node again (it gets completely wiped out)

Exemplars

Actual members of the category that a person has encountered in the past --- As we initially learn about a category, may average exemplars into a prototype. Later in learning, same exemplar info becomes stronger Early in learning, we'd be poor at taking into account "exceptions". Later exemplars for these cases would be added to the category

Retrieval cues

Aid memory Significantly more effective when they're created by the person whose memory is being tested --- Retrieval can be increased by matching conditions at retrieval to conditions that existed at encoding: 1) encoding specificity 2) State dependent learning 3) Transfer appropriate processing

Categories

All possible examples of a particular concept --- "Pointers to knowledge", when you know category, can focus energy on specifying what's special about this particular object Helps us understand behavior we may find baffling

Amnesic & repetition priming

Amnesic show benefits sim to reg patients Stem completion: Amnesic perform normally or terribly depending on the instructions 1) fill blanks with words you saw an hour ago = cued recall -Clive wearing would be terrible at this 2) Fill blanks with 1st word that comes to mind = free recall - shows same results as 30% of us People think of amnesia as memory minus some process, say some memories require a process. If there's a process, amnesic can't do that task. If not, amnesic can

Processing capacity

Amount of info people can handle and sets limit on their ability to process incoming info

Task irrelevant stimulus

An unrelated characteristic that's introduced (dog animation when trying to ID letters, etc). Ability to ignore task-irrelevant stimuli depends on load of the task you're trying to do and how powerful task-irrelevant stimuli is

Attenuator

Analyzes incoming message in terms of physical characteristics (high/low pitch), language (how message groups into words/syllables) & meaning (how sequences of words create meaningful phrases)

Saliency map

Analyzing characteristics such as color, orientation & intensity at each location in scene & combining them. Determining influences of saliency requires a saliency map of the scene (i.e.: something highly salient might be something that contrasts with its surroundings) One way to show where we look != determined only be saliency = checking eye movements Large variations in how people scan scenes

Central vision

Area you're looking at

EXP: Egly

As subjects kept eyes on the plus, one end of rectangle = briefly highlighted = cue signal that shows where target would probs appear. Subjects had to press button where target = presented anywhere on the display. Subjects responded most rapidly when target = where it had been presented. See advantage bc it's located within the object that receives subject's attention --- Example of same object advantage

EXP: Treisman & Schmidt with illusory conjunction

Asked subjects to ID the objects. When gave word bank of objects, illusory conjunctions = less likely to occur --- Subjects knowledge of usual colors of objects influenced their ability to correctly combine the features of each object

Studying central exec

Assess people with brain damage Frontal lobe plays sig role in WM (so people with frontal lobe damage have probs controlling their attention) Typical behavior = preservation (have trouble adjusting behavior when rules change) - breakdown in central exec's ability to control attention

Explicit memory

Associated with consciousness Aware of something you just learned Can directly test you

Default values

Assume something has property unless you're specifically told that it does not have that property Assume certain properties = true (occurs bc you have assumptions with that concept) Some concepts = inhibitory If 1 thing is true, then all other conditions must be false (if I eat meat, I can't also eat bugs and nectar)

Memory

Attending to memory doesn't mean you'll remember it (most of what you attend and perceive you don't remember) Some memories get lost, some = retained much longer --- Process involved in retaining, retrieving & using info about stimuli, images, events, ideas and skills after the orig info's no longer present Active any time some past experience has an effect on the way you think

Selective attention

Attending to one thing while ignoring others --- Animal that never diverts its attention from what it's doing in that moment can die/can't just shut off all distractions (i.e.: fire alarm)

EXP: Ericsson

Avg college kid with avg memory ability could memorize & repeat sequences <= 79 without errors Used chunking --- Interaction bn STM & LTM bc chunks = created from info stored in LTM

Differences between filter models

Awareness in early filter model doesn't always need conscious attention Load theory, if little attention = spent, you can understand things at a deep erlevel (meaning), unconsciouslly If something = cognitively tasking, takes a lot of your attention, you're gonna process things you're not attending to at a lower reservoir Only attend to it through physical characteristics (don't process for meaning) Late vs early is accounted for using load theory & attention

4 versions of implicit memory

Basal ganglia, cerebellum, amygdala, visual cortex

Connectionist network learning

Begins with incorrect connection weights, slowly modified in response to error signals Consists of initially week & undifferentiated activation of property units, with many errors Learn exp --> small change in connection weights, only after many repetitions, until canary = assigned correct properties through network Interleaved with other objects, small changed in connection weights made after many presentations

Point of automaticity

Being able to do more things at once (can read letters & understand meaning at once) Can switch attention between 2 tasks

EXP: Sensory memory (instrospectionist method)

Big bowl of black beans. Would scoop black beans and throw into white box on black tray Glance down, writes estimate, counts actual number of beans Meant to see how much info gets into consciousness simultaneously? --- 100% accuracy <= 5 beans 50% accuracy with 9 beans "Span of apprehension", span estimates = always the same

Continuity errors

Blindness to change in films --- Means we're constantly missing things in the environment bc perceptual system only focuses on a few things at a time

Attention can be influenced by stimulus salience

Bottom-up process: Depends solely on pattern of light & dark, color & contrast in a stimulus i.e.: to find blonde people, respond only to physical property of color without considering the meaning of the image

Plasticity

Brain can change, it''s not static Through experience, can get the brain to change so you can learn things

Patient H.M

Brain damage = circumscribed (know where it is) Developed anterograde amnesia post experimental surgery Him & other anterograde patients don't learn: -words -stories -faces -rhythms Has good short-term memory, something longer than 30 seconds Could spend hours with him, leave for 2 mins, come back and he would never remember meeting you

Bottleneck model

Broadbent's model bc filter restricts information flow Slows down flow of info, prevents large amount of info from going through Lets info in based on specific physical characteristics of that info (rate of speaking, pitch, etc.) Also known as early selection model Benefits: gave testable predictions about selective attention

Emotional condition

CR = an emotion (boat horn/rat to anxiety)

With regards to covert attention, some posit?

Can covertly attend to locations and specific objects. 1) Attention can enhance our response to objects 2) When attention = directed to one place on an object, enhancing effect of that attention spreads to other places on the object --- Don't move eyes, still shift attention

EXP: Badeley

Can remember short string of numbers while reading, etc. Concluded WM must be dynamic, consist of diff components that function separately Proposed: 1) phonological loop 2) visuospatial sketch pad 3) central exec

Clive Wearing

Can't get anything from STM into LTM, both mems = intact (knows english, how to play piano, etc.) Can't get knew experiences into LTM (something wrong with storage mechanism)//applies to people with Alzheimer's as well

EXP: Balirut

Cannot find target when conjunction search = required, can find target with feature search

Subordinate level

Categories = less abstract than basic level Don't operate here bc requires spec knowledge from you and other party

How prototypicality affects behavior

Category -Description -Experimental result --- Family resemblance: -Things in a category resemble each other in a number of ways -Hihger ratings for high-prototypical items when people rate how "good" a member of the category it is Typicality - People react rapidly to members of a category that are "typical" of the category - Faster rxn times to statements with high prototypical items than for low prototypical items Naming - People = more likely to list some objects than others when asked to name objects in a cateogry - high prototypical items = named 1st when people list examples of a category Priming - Presentation of one stimulus affects responses to a stimulus that follows - Faster same-different color judgments for high prototypical items

High typicality

Category member closely resembles category prototype (it like a typical member of the category)

Low typicality

Category member doesn't closely resemble a typical member of the category

Probabilistic/similarity models

Category membership = matter of probability, not all or non Sim bc likelihood of being member of category = calc by computing sim of exemplar to the category/concept

Deep processing

Close attention focused on an item's meaning & relating it to something else Harder --> doesn't always lead to better memory Ex: cake makes me think of birthday

Visuo-spatial sketch pattern

Coding by sight/visual-mental imagery Holds visual & spatial info by creating visual images in the mind in the absence of a physical visual stimulus Attached to central exec --- STM: People identify concrete nouns > abstract nouns May generate vis/mental image when seeing concrete nouns

Chunk

Collection of elements that's strongly associated with other elements in other chunks

Illusory conjunctions

Combos of features from diff stimuli. Can occur even if stimuli differ greatly in shape & size --- Happen bc in pre attentive stage, each feature exists independently of the others ("free floating" features) Can be incorrectly combined if 1+ objects

N-back performance test

Compare N number of things in memory to keep track of

Simple connectionist network in brain

Concepts & their properties = rep in the network by the pattern of activity in these units (= neurons found in brain) Lines = connections that transfer info bn units, equivalent to axons in the brain Some units = activated by stimuli from environment, some = activated by signals received from other units = input units

Semantic network approach

Concepts = arranged in networks Focuses on how categories/concepts = organized in mind

Skeletal conditioning

Conditioned response = overt response to motor system (air puff to eye & blinking)

Phonological similarity effect

Confusion of letters/words that sound similar

Trained network

Connectionist network needs to be trained for result to occur, which involved adjusting network's connection weights

Hierarchical model

Consists of levels arranged so that more specific concepts are at the bottom, more general concepts are at high levels

Dictionary unit

Contains words, stored in memory, each has a threshold for being activated

Masking

Contents of sensory memory = replaced by something else See letters, immediately see squiggles Letters = lost/overwritten/masked by weird symbols Knowing what to pluck out of sensory memory = physical cue

Attention and visual perception

Could you have stimulus on fovea that you're not seeing? Color changing card trick --- Just bc something's in visual field doesn't mean you see it Attn = nec for perception, seen as "perceptual glue" Some visual searches = easy, others = difficult

EXP: Rosh & hierarchical organization

Created 3 levels of categories: Superordinate/global level Basic level Subordinate/specific level Have to list as many features as you can that are common to all/most objects in the category --- Basic level = psychologically special bc going above (to global) --> large loss of info Going below (to specific) --> little gain of info

Connectionist networks & damage

Damage to system doesn't completely disrupt operation Graceful degradation often only happens in actual cases of brain damage in which damage to brain --> partial loss of functioning Studying ways networks respond to damage may suggest strategies for rehab of human patients

Multitasking

Data seems to indicate young > old at multitasking. Not true Young > old at working memory bc working mind peaks at 22 --- High multitaskers have worse attentional control Worse at regulating their attention --- Always carries a cost Switching, not sharing (not doing 2 things at same time)

EXP: Gray

Dear Aunt Jane. Subjects shadow message in one ear, ignore the other. Unattended ear was presented: 3, Aunt, 10. Attended ear was presented: Dear, 8, Jane. Subjects reported hearing "Dear Aunt Jane", not "Dear 8 Jane" --- Implies subject's attention jumped from 1 ear to another. Subjects were taking meaning of words into account = top-down processing. Conflicts with Broadbent's model

Definitional approach to categorization

Decide if something's a member of a category by determining whether a particular object meets the definition of the category Concept = list of necessary & sufficient features, defined --- PROB: For many items, defs don't work bc not all members of everyday categories have the same features

EXP: Bower

Decided to test whether visual imagery can create connections that enhance memory Used paired-associate earning where list of word pairs = presented - first word of each pair is presented, subject's task is to remember the word it was paired with One group silently repeats pair, next group forms mental image where 2 items interact --- People who created images remembered x2 as the other group

Imagery

Def helps memory If you engage vis-mental imagery @ encoding, more likely to put that info into your mind

EXP: Karpicke

Demonstrated advantages of testing through the testing effect

Ability to remember

Dependent on how material = programmed into mind Relating words to something meaningful & important (like survival) enhances memory

Connection weights

Determines show signals sent from 1 unit either inc/dec activity of the next unit Correspond with what happens at a synapse that transmits signals from 1 neuron to another

EXP: Neville Moray with Attention

Dichotic listening experiment where subjects shadow message to one ear, ignore the other ear. When Moray presented listener's name to unattended ear, 1/3 of subjects detected it. --- Info presented in unattended ear = processed enough to give listener some awareness of its meaning

Pop out phenomenon

Didn't need to look for target by end of training, could just rest eyes Not actively searching, felt that target letters "popped out". Only seen after training

Change blindness

Difficulty in detecting changes --- Have to actively hunt for a change (pay attention)

Perceptual load

Difficulty of a task based on high load or low load

EXP: Allen

Diggers and builders Told to memorize/figure out the rule itself After they've been trained, people = told to memorize using similarity, others using rule have 2 mechanisms bc difficult to categorize problems in world with inflexibility Lots of variability out there, which categorization doesn't handle very well

Pursuit rotor

Disk spins, you have to hold wand so that it stays in contact with disk the whole time Measures what % of timed interval you touch disk HM improved at same rate as someone without brain damage

Graceful degredation

Disruption of performance occurs only gradually as parts of the system = damaged

Transfer appropriate processing

Dog and the bamboo example When processes are same at encoding and retrieval, memory will be successful

Incidental memory test

Dunno test is coming

Control processes

Dynamic processes ass with structural features which can be controlled by the person & changed for tasks (strategies you use to memorize info better, strategies of attn to keep you focused, etc.)

Early vs Late filter

EARLY: Stimuli from environment --> processing physical characteristics [FILTERS OUT HERE] --> process semantics --> awareness LATE: Stimuli from environment --> processing physical characteristics --> process semantics [FILTERS OUT HERE] --> awareness --- Make different predictions about how much processing happens to stimuli you don't pay attention to

Fixation

Each time you briefly paused on one face

Attended ear

Ear you pay attention to

EXP: Attention with introspection

Early attention studies relied on introspection. Show a person a display consisting of diff patches of color and instructing them to pay strong attention to middle patch. Describe how attention affects clarity of the patch's color. Key characteristic of introspection: Variable results from person to person Behaviorists didn't focus on attention

Untrained network

Effect of activation on each unit depends on connection weights between the units If all connection weights = same, many (incorrect) units in the network would be activated Only correct concept & relation units should activate correct property unit Achieved through a learning process, occurs when error signals = sent back through network through back propagation to hidden & rep units. Give info on how connection weights should be adjusted so correct property unit = activated

Episodic vs semantic

Episodic: - tagged with spatial/temporal context ("I visited family in India 2 years ago) - Learned in single exposure - autobiographical feeling ("I remember this") Semantic: - Factual ("I know") - Not context (dunno when/where you learned what a faucet does) - Possibly learned in single exposure, not always - strengthened by repetition ---- Another example of diversity where there could be unity

Error signal

Erroneous response in property units

Scripts

Event schemas

Peripheral vision

Everything off to side of what you're looking at

Different kinds of knowledge

Exist in form of concepts, usually organized by categories

Worrying

Exp show that worrying takes up capacity Pressure dec ability to recall (errors inc when pressure ins) Writing down worries can free up WM capacity

Episodic memories

Experiences of past (picnics, long ago personal memories, etc.)

Influences on non-amnesic patients

Explicit mem = ass with awareness, implicit = outside awareness (i.e.: air puffs. Not aware that conditioning is occurring with puffs & tone) Tasks don't purely call on one memory system, task performance usually reps 1+ systems operating simultaneously

"Just in time strategy"

Eye movements occur just before we need the info they will provide

Memory failures

Failures of retrieval. You encoded memory, just can't retrieve it when you need it

Repetition priming & research

Feel separate, it's sep in brain, therefore overall should be separate (logic behind why researchers give up with brain and memory vs motor skills)

Early selection model

Filter eliminates unattended info right at beginning of the flow of information

Final output of Tresisman's model

Final output = determined by 2nd stage, when memory = analyzed by dictionary unit Threshold = smallest signal strength that can barely be detected. Common words, "important" words = easily detected (i.e.: listener's name) Words with low thresholds = easily detected. Words with higher thresholds != easily detected

Feature search

Find target by looking for a single feature (find the single - in the picture)

EXP: Derrick Parkhurst

First few fixations = more likely on highly salient areas. After 1st few fixations, were influenced by top-down processing that depends on observer's goals & expectations determined by past experiences

EXP: Keppel & Underwood

First few trials creates interference, diff to remember letters presented on later trials --- Rapid forgetting = due to interference caused by al the info subjects learned earlier Effective duration of STM, when rehearsal = presented = < 15-20 seconds

EXP: Change detection

Flash 2 scenes, spot the diffs bn each scene People often miss scene changes Also used to determine how much info a person can retain from a briefly flashed stimulus --- Perfect results = when 1-3 squares in array. Performance decreased with 4+ squares

EXP: Sensory memory & semantics

Flash digits & letters, report the vowel Can't point to sensory memory and expect it to know what things are and what they mean Sensory mem knows where things are, where they're stored, can diff by colors of letters, can't do vowels vs consonants --- Sensory memory can't do deeper meaning (pull letters out asap, then evaluate if it's a consonant or a vowel)

EXP: R. Conrad

Flash letters on screen, write them down in order they were presented Errors occurred when letters sounded like another letter Subjects saw the letters, mistakes made on how the letters sounded! --- Supports phonological similarity effect & idea that words = processed in phonological store part of phonological loop

EXP: Flash sentences

Flash sentences on screen, verify if true or false Gorilla = mammal, gorilla = animal Slower with mammal than with animal, model predicts the opposite --- Assume: traversing levels takes more time to verify if concept does/doesn't inherit from above

EXP: Sperling

Flashes numbers, say to report as many as possible Try again, report only 1 of 3 rows depending on tone - representative of what you know of the whole array Immediate report (= sensory memory/v complete representation of field that disappeared. Doesn't last long): gets 33% of the array Immediate tone cue for each row: Subjects get 3 correct (75% of row) Tone cue delayed for 1 second: Subjects get 1 correct (25% of the row) Idea of sensory memory = complete rep of visual field, doesn't last long disappears --- STM registers all/most info in our visual receptors, info decays in less than a second. Important bc reveals capacity (large) and duration (brief) of sensory memory Cued using spatial cue = physical characteristic (where in array is it?). Can use colors, etc.

EXP: Tulving

Free recall, then cued recall Cued recall --> 50% more remembered

Measures - difficulty

Generally, free recall = hardest, then cued recall, then recognition, then savings (which is easiest) Est by giving people material, testing them

Tone cue

Get stuff from sensory memory into a stable condition that won't fall apart They don't know the cue, have to guess which row Avg guess = incorrect, don't get many right

EXP: Hart

Give list of words, remember as many words, give test for words don't remember When free recall fails, recognize answer 50% of the time (recognition = more sensitive overall)

Models & brain structures

Gives testable predictions about brain, not precise structures within the brain Collins & Quillian used sentenced verification technique to measure reaction time, learned that "canary is an animal" took longer to answer than "canary is a bird"

Anatomic separability

Giving up on idea that there are two separate systems (implicit vs explicit) Not one chunk that's explicit and another chunk that's implicit Different things activate different areas. Different types of memory systems must be operating in the brain.

Episodic buffer

Goes in between VS & phonological loop Handles meaning for things. Part of working memory model --- Stores info (inc capacity) and is connected to LTM (allowing for interchange bn WM & LTM) Code in terms of meaning Things = filtered through this buffer. Go bn for other types of rep

Perceptual system

Good at taking in info we need to survive (only a small proportion of available size)

EXP: Datto

Had observer covertly shift attention to diff locations on a display while they measured the activity of his brain in an fMRI scanner --- Idea that attention enhances activity at locations on brain's topographic map that represent where subject = directing attention

EXP: Shiffrin & Schneider

Have target set with bunch of letters flipping very quickly Either 1 or 4 figures on each card Showed the pop out phenomenon

EXP: Morris

Heard sentence, one word = replaced by "blank" Meaning condition: answer yes/no based on the meaning of the word when it filled the blank Rhyming condition: answer yes/no based on the sound of the word Subjects had to process words diff Subject's retrieval performance depended on whether the retrieval task matched the encoding task --- Better performance when the type of processing matches in encoding & retrieval. Also shows that deeper processing at encoding != better retrieval as processing theory predicts

Hierarchical vs connectionist

Hierarchical: reps isa/is/can/has properties at network's nodes Connectionist: Has a "property" unit that contains these characteristics, by pattern of activity in rep & hidden units in the middle of the network When concept = activated, activation spreads along connections so some of the rep units & hidden units = activated Connection weights --> some units to be activated strongly, others weakly --- Concept = rep by pattern of activity in all the units of the network

Types of connection weights

High connection weight --> strong tendency to excite the next unit Low weights --> less excitation Neg weights --> dec excitation or inhibit activation of the receiving unit

EXP: Harrison & Tong

Holding info in visual cortex --- Flashed diff patterns with cue telling people which one to remember 11 sec delay, had to say if lines = rotated to left or right Brain activity = measured with MRI, used neural mind reading Could determine which orientation subjects were holding in their mind during delay --- Info about orientation a person is remembering = being held in visual cortex during delay & visual cortex = involved in WM

Sensory memory

Holds all the incoming info for a fraction of a second. Brief persistence of an image, retention of the effects of sensory stimulation --- Introspectionists = interested in how much info = in consciousness at one time --- Large capacity (up to 20 characters) Physical properties, probs little semantic info Semantic doesn't work --- Important bc shows how much info we can take in immediately, how much of that info remains half a second later

Short term memory

Holds info for 10-15 seconds, then transfers it to LTM

Long term memory

Holds info indefinitely

Modal model: LTM

Holds large amount of info for years or decades

What does Tresisman's model describe?

How an aspect of cognition = conceptualized as a problem of information processing (i.e.: info from environment passes through various stages of processing) Treisman's model = early selection model

Binding problem

How object's individual features become bound together EX: When person sees a red ball roll, cells sensitive to shape, movement, depth, and color fire in diff areas, but you still perceive ball as 1 object

Spreading activation model

How semantic memory = organized Have nodes and links, activation = all or none Activation & links = graded. Links only pass activation Heavy emphasis on activation and activation spreading through complex network Some nodes have v strong activation (activates with other nodes, lots of connecting links) Others have weakly weighted links, passes v weak signal to the next thing To access memory, see what's linked to what --- Model allows content addressable storage, default values, retrieval of properties, explains typicality through default values

How to deal with problems from probabilistic model?

Hybrid models Sometimes use similarity, sometimes use rules Use rules when features don't vary

Property inheritance

I inherit any property about me in a hierarchy, can store lots of info Good at lots of storage, good at relevant info Properties with exceptions need specifications for that spec property

EXP: Primary memory - representation

I say list of words, you say them to me After certain number of trials, performance starts to drop bc getting confused if in this trial or last one Demonstrates proactive interference

Proposal of flashbulb = intro of new mechanism with high emotion

Idea = you have qualitatively diff memory storage process that kicks in with high emotion Untrue, bc emotion has an impact, but no sep process from emotion exists Prone to errors/people's memories change after a period of time

Simons & Chabris

Idea that attention can affect perception within a dynamic scene (gorilla video) --- When observers = attending to one sequence of events, they can fail to notice another event, even when it's right in front of them

Family resemblance

Idea that things in a category resemble another in a number of ways --- Allows for some variation within a category Propose that categorization = based on determining how similar an object is to some standard rep of a category

Filter

Identifies message being attended to based on physical characteristics. Lets only this attended message pass through, everything else = filtered out --- Is movables, moves earlier when thing you attend to requires a lot of attention (not done consciously) If not very demanding, more attention to be spread around

Attracting attention

If faces in figure, spend time looking bc high info, attracts attention Must be meaningful

Recall cues & encoding

If recall cue is better at making you think as you did at encoding that a recognition cue, should be better at cued recall than recognition

Transfer from STM to LTM is impossible

If you can't get new things into LTM, how to explain HM's performance? Memory isn't all one thing

Relevant info

If you don't have answer in mind, memory system still produces some info Answer questions you've never thought of (Aristotle's hands) Gives you relevant info that might produce an answer

Repetition priming

If you experience something a second time, you're biased by 1st experience you had with stimulus Diff can be very wide: Tachisto: better at flash ID stem: see part of stimulus at completing word What I do know = influenced by what I did earlier, esp since it's the same stimulus EX: visual system = changeable so you're better at reading a word, measurable. The visual cortex actually changes --- Proved motor skills = diff from other parts of memory (not new idea)

Near miss

If you make mem error, error != random Noticeably related to what you try to remember "Tip of the tongue"

Factors that affect encoding

Imagery Emotion Repetition Thinking about meaning (depth) Effort/desire to learn (has no real impact on if you remember things)

Cued recall

Implicit contextual cue Experimenter gives extra hints relevant to content (might be semantic info) "Remember stuff I told you. I'll remind you all words started with a vowel", etc. --- Cues can include location, sound, smell, etc. (anything that returns you to same state of mind as when memories initially formed)

Distinctiveness

Important for memory

Similarity & context

In 1 context, things = v diff or v sim By changing a bit, similarity changes Models assume similarity = same, regardless of context

Attention as selection

Includes covert & overt attention Link between eye movements, attention and perception (i.e.: scanning photo to find Waldo) Scanning = necessary because good detail vision only happens for things you're looking at directly

Flashbulb memories

Incorrect idea Happen during v high emotion Resulting memory = v complete, accurate, you'll never forget it Mind makes exact copy of the whole scene bc you don't know what's important, just remember the whole thing

Event related potential

Indication of how much space = used in WM during a certain task

STM

Info that says in memory for brief pos of time (10 - 30 seconds) if we don't repeat it over and over again --- Stores small amounts of info (4-9 items). Most = lost, only some reaches LTM Measure capacity using digit span Describe with experiments dealing with recall to test memory Memory performance = measured as % of stimuli that's remembered, if there's a pattern to how items = recalled

Modal model: semantic memory

Initial stage that holds all incoming info for seconds/fractions of a second

Interpretation of memory & retrograde amnesia

Initially, memories = fragile, must be consolidated after they're encoded Insult to brain occurs Fragile memories = lost (for casual, like falling off a bike, and severe, like electroshock therapy) bike: lose last hour shock therapy: lose some consolidated memories

EXP: Broadbent's filter model of attention

Input [sounds of attended/unattended messages] --> Filter [lets attended message through, filters out unattended] --> Detector [Records info that gets through filter] --> To memory Used tape recorder to run experiments that tested people's ability to take in info under different conditions. Proposed filter model of attention, using results of experiments studying selective attention --- Only thing that makes it through = thing you pay attention to

Resistant to faulty input

Input that goes in I give you mem cues, one of them is wrong You still get to the right answer, even though input cue = incorrect

Proactive interference

Interference that occurs when info that was learned previously interferes with learning new info What I learned earlier = messing up what I'm trying to learn now Coding by sound, but meaning has an impact. As meanings = more distant from proactive interference, get better performance

Intention to learn

Irrelevant

Typicality in spreading activation model

Is robin a bird bid? Bird and robin = more active (& connected) bc bird activates typical properties and typical properties activate robin, which activates robin's typical properties which activates bird, etc. Idea of mutual reinforcement (not seen bn is hawk a bird)

Repetition

Just bc you look at it all the time doesn't mean it stays in your head (penny) Sheer rep != memory for the stimulus Needs to be good rep, then it really helps

Immediate tone

Know which row they have to look at and report Couldn't report all letters bc they rapidly faded as initial letters = being reported

Conceptual knowledge

Knowledge that enables us to recognize objects and events and to make inferences about their properties

Problems with Emotion

Lab studies see if people remember emotional photos better Not good bc photos people say give emotions have other properties Photos that don't illicit emotions = things you see everyday, distinctive things cause attention --- Vary from person to person (same materials, emotions vary)

Hierarchical organization

Larger, more general categories = divided into smaller, more specific categories --- To access other nodes, have to poke around more Properties closely associated with 2 sep ideas = tossed into working memory When node = active, surrounding nodes = also active. Activation doesn't spread through network, only goes to neighbors ---- Have to go up through links to access diff nodes (idea of property inheritance) Model = purely linguistic (doesn't deal with images) PROVEN WRONG bc doesn't account for typicality effect

How connectionist networks are created

Learning process that shapes the networks so info about each concept = contained in the distributed pattern of activity across a number of units Rep = more complex, involves more units for each concept Better model what happens inside brain Can sim normal cog functioning for processes such as language processing, memory, cog development

Working memory (WM)

Limited capacity system for temp storage manipulation of info for complex tasks such as comprehensive learning & reasoning

Shallow processing

Little attention to meaning, focus on physical features of word cake (font, caps, etc.)

Distributed representation in Connectionist model

Local rep Each node reps 1 though One node, one concept Need to look at all nodes and patterns or rep to see what's active --- Concepts = distributed across multiple nodes, can house more information

Content-addressable storage

Located items based on their content Concept = actively in use

Stuff gets into memory, just can't retrieve it

Logical problem: amnesic can retrieve older, long-term memories If retrieval = messed up, why can HM remember his 1st grade teacher?

EXP: Shepard & Metzer

Look at 2 objects, determine if they rep 2 diff views of the same object or 2 diff objects Rxn times inc for greater diffs in orientation, they inferred process of mental rotation --- Example of the operation of VS sketch pad bc it involves visual rotation through space

Load theory of attention

Low-load tasks that use few cognitive resources may leave resources available for processing unattended tasks irrelevant stimuli, whereas high-load tasks that use all of a person's cognitive resources don't leave any resources to process unattended task-irrelevant stimuli (think of the empty vs the full circles) --- When carrying out a hard, high-load task, no processing capacity remains, you're less likely to be distracted. If carrying out easy, low-load task, processing capacity that remains = available to process task-irrelevant stimuli Explains data discrepancy from Forster's experiments.

Hippocampus

Main structure for explicit memory Supports episodic vs semantic memory

Encoding specificity

Matching context of encoding & retrieval

State dependent learning

Matching internal mood present during encoding and retrieval EXP: Eich demonstrated this using music, mood & retrieval. Got the same results

EXP: Hiroyuki Shinoda

Measured observer's fixations and tested ability to detect traffic signs as they drove through driving simulator online More likely to detect stop signs at intersections than in the middle of block 45% fixations occurred close to intersections --- Learning about regularities in environment (stop signs = usually at corners) to determine when and where to look for stop signs

Prototype approach to categorization

Membership in a category is determined by comparing the object to a prototype that represents the category Good for large categories --- Prototype model deals with diff levels by suggesting you have diff prototypes for each level (it's clunky though, esp at superordinate level)

EXP: Hirst

Memories of 9/11 Took 4 surveys months and then years after 9/11 Asked where were you, who were you with, etc? Number of planes, airlines Took confidence measures Problems: rehearsing answers with friends over the years (discussing, telling stories, etc.) --- Inconsistent answers, confidence always stays high (make errors, still confident about their answers) Tell you dif things across time No effect of: residency during that time self-rated emotional intensity of event self-rated media attention self-rated ensuing conversation --- KEY: Memory confidence stayed high, accuracy dropped off with time

Semantic memory

Memories of facts (addresses, days, names of diff objects, etc)

Maintenance rehearsal

Memorize without thinking about meaning or making connections with other info Results in poorer memory

Retrieval & schemas

Memory = always a combo of actual event & relevant prior knowledge Memory = just a construction - good at telling you what probably happened Prior knowledge includes scripts & schemas Things that conflict with schema = attended to and remembered (occurs at encoding) Things that aren't part of schema but are irrelevant are not - not super regimented - everything in script doesn't have to happen - things can be omitted from script without a problem At retrieval, remember parts of script that didn't actually happen bc they're consistent with the script Memory gets mixed in with what actually happened (think event happened, even if it didn't actually happen)

Addressing system

Memory = like a storehouse Organizational system = addressing system (each entry associated with system has a corresponding number) Mind doesn't work this way bc: 1) should take longer to find stuff in mem when you're older 2) Small errors should give huge mistakes, not near misses 3) No "relevant info" if answer = unknown 4) No resistance to faulty input

Quantity & speed

Memory = limitless for humans V quick at retrieving memories

Levels of processing theory

Memory depends on depth of processing that an item receives Distinguishes between shallow vs deep processing Says that deep processing --> better memory

Word length effect

Memory for lists of words = better for short words than for long words

Self-reference effect

Memory improves if you can make it relate to yourself Statements that result in richer, more details reps in a person's mind --> better memory

Memory strength & test sensitivty

Memory strength Depends on how you encode things If deep encoding, memory = v strong Both factors of LTM Memory probe Free recall = insensitive, recognition = sensitive Can't pick up weak signals Measuring fever w hand (free recall - only works if v strong) vs thermometer (recognition) --- Seems like memory tests = sensitive to extent that they give you good cues - free recall: context (time & place) - cued recall: context & partial info - recognition: context & all info These are incorrect

Concepts

Mental representation of a class/individual, and the meaning of objects, events, and abstract ideas --- Provide rules for creating categories & process of categorization Allows you to generalize from prior experience

Anne Tresisman's model

Messages --> Attenuator --> attended message & unattended messages --> Dictionary unit --> to memory Proposed selection = in 2 stages (filter = replaced by attenuator). Attenuator reps a process, not identified with a specific brain structure Analysis of message only went far enough to identify the attended message. Once attended & unattended messages = identified, both pass through attenuator. Attended message emerges at full strength, unattended messages = attenuated (present, weaker than attended message) --- "Leaky filter model" bc at least some of the unattended message gets through attenuator

Late Selection Processing

Messages can be selected at a later stage of processing based primarily on their meaning

Free recall

Minimal info from experimenter Experimenter says remember, and context = usually implied, occasionally described Contextual cue

STM - Model 1

Modal model Largely agreed upon (not v accurate) Lots of stuff goes into sensory, only a bit goes into STM (stays longer if you continually refresh), which lasts for 30 seconds Lots of stuff in STM = eventually lost, most things doesn't make it into STM Duration of LTM = potentially forever/some stuff goes from STM into LTM. Info in LTM = chilling there, gets retrieved when you need it, you get to output it --- Brief sensory memory for visual stimuli (iconic memory) corresponds with do a modal sensory memory stage PROBLEM: too narrow to explain many research findings bc STM = only short-term storage mechanism Since STM = involved with dynamic processes (i.e.: transferring info) --> proposal of working memory WM considers how you hold & process info, which STM & modal model don't take into account

Delayed-response task

Monkey holds info in WM during a delay period --- Monkey sees food in tray, close door, guesses which tray holds food Can bc trained to do this//if prefrontal cortex = removed, pick correct food 1/2 of the time --- Supports idea that prefrontal cortex = important for holding info for brief pds of time

Impact of increased cues

More cues you get, more likely to have overlap with what you though about at encoding Free recall: can generate your own cues Not about # of cues, about probability of you thinking about cue in that context

Typicality categorization

More typical examples come to mind first, you're also better at confirming that they're a member of a category Faster to verify more typical instances

Basic level

Most inclusive, members still share most of their features --- People iD things at this level, indicate categories of objects fastest when category = basic level Not the same for everyone People with more expertise in a certain category tend to focus on more spec info ass with the specific level Ability to categorize = learned from experience//depends on which objects we typically encounter & what characteristics of objects we pay attention to

Late selection models of attention

Most incoming info = processed to the level of meaning before message to be further processed is selected

Multiple memory systems

Motor skill (pursuit roter, mirror tracing = procedural) Repetition priming (gollin figures, stem completion) Skeletal conditioning Emotional conditioning --- Systems designed to perform cognitive function The way they operate changed based on how you see/move Often conflict with each other, multiple systems act simultaneously EX: Afraid of snakes Explicit = this is fine Emotional conditioning = run for your life - conflicting & simultaneous

Diversity where there could be unity

Motor skills may not be same type of learning Develop theory of learning, say motor skills don't fall into this Not huge breakthrough, kinda verifies what you already inferred Done through: 1) Gollin figures 2) Tachistoscopic id 3) Stem completion All examples of repetition priming Amnesics = showing savings form relearning, even though they don't explicitly remember these things

Visual scanning

Movements of eye from one location to another (attempt to identify people across a room, look from one person's face to another)

2 factors that determine how people shift attention

Moving eyes (bottom-up) based primarily on physical characteristics of the stimulus. Top-down: based on cognitive factors such as observer's knowledge about scenes & past experiences with specific stimulus

Automaticity

Need consistency between practice & characteristic of task (same stimulus requires same response from you each time) If you change stimulus/include inconsistency, don't get automaticity --- Leads to fluency V important to our lives Everything would take forever otherwise, wouldn't have experience to look back on as references

EXP: McClelland

Network = presented with number of different concepts and relation statements and activity of units and connection weights bn units = calculated by the computer As learning progressed, patters = adjusted so they look diff/same depending on how sim/dissim categories = to each other

EXP: Quillian

Network with nodes that's connected by links Each node reps a category/concept, concepts = placed in network so related concepts = connected Number of properties = indicted for each concept Says there's an ass in mind bn diff things Proposed hierarchical model

Semantic Newtork Models

Networks of nodes From input, node = in diff state than it was before input

Beam metaphor

Neural evidence shows that damage to different parts of the brain support three separate processes: -Disengage -Move -Engage

Neural mind reading

Neural response to determine what someone perceives/thinks using fMRI, depending on task & nature of stimulus being perceived/remembered

EXP: Funahashi

Neurons = helpful in showing why prefrontal cortex matters with WM --- Recorded neuron activity as monkey completed delayed-response tasks --- Found that neurons that responded only when image = flashed in a particular location, these neurons continued responding during the delay

Retroactive interference

New learning interferes with remembering old learning

Issue with missing processes model

No single memory system which is missing a process Can explain why they're bad at things they're bad at, not why they're good at other things

Temporal gradient

Not all mems from past = equally affected Recent mems = v affected, distant memories not so much (due to consolidation) Ex: blow to the head, get retrograde, lose time up to the accident How to prove? Want a mom that's a tagged, public mom where everyone in culture could (and likely did) encode Famous faces test

Inattentional blindness

Not attending to something clearly visible --- Not paying attention to stimulus can cause us to miss things that's out of our field of view & things we're directly staring at

Preattentive stage

Objects = analyzed into separate features independently Before we're completely fully aware --- Analyzing features at a different level, not fully aware of it (part of us analyzes shape, other part levels, etc.) Combine when we get to focused attention

Differences between central & perceptual vision

Objects in central vision fall on fovea (has better detail vision than peripheral retina) on which the rest of the scene falls Parts include fixation & saccadic eye movement (i.e.: moving eye to observe another face) Even when freely viewing object/scene without searching for a target, still move eyes

Retrograde amnesia

Old memories lost Memories up to that moment = lost, weeks before that moment can be as well New memories encoded normally --- Temporal gradient Memories closer to trauma = more easily forgotten than ones farther in the past

Anterograde amnesia

Old memories mostly intact Memories up to that moment = lost, weeks before that moment can be as well Can't encode new memories --- Everyone with anterograde also has some degree of retrograde What's responsible for getting things into LTM also participates in consolidatation. Some mems = fully/partially consolidated. Won't be consolidated any further with anterograde amnesia

Superordinate level

One level more abstract Don't communicate a whole lot of info Don't use bc basic conveys more info about what you're looking at

Disjunctive search

Only paying attention to one feature of the object = parallel search Number of stimulus don't affect rxn times

High load tasks

Other tasks = difficult, not as well practiced. Use more of a person's processing capacity.

Balint's Syndrome

Parietal lobe = damaged Inability to focus attention long enough on individual objects, difficult to combine features correctly Shows how breakdown in brain can reveal processes that aren't obvious when brain functions normally

Load theory

Part of late filter theories Attention = selective & limited if task = very attention demanding, don't have any more attention to monitor your surroundings --> dec cog fuel to devote to other unattended stimuli If task != very attention demanding, might be able to process things for meaning --> increased cog fuel as resources for stimuli

Conjunctive search

Paying attention to 2+ features of the object = serial search Number of stimulus impact rxn time --- In feature integration theory, can't just look at 1 color map (need to look at sev diff maps and know that they look at the same object) Need to know 2 features occupy same place in space, which requires attention

Divided attention

Paying attention to more than one thing at a time (listening on one conversation while simultaneously playing cell phone game)//distribution of attention among 2+ tasks --- Ability to divide attention depends on several different factors (practice, difficulty of the task, etc)

Code auditorily

People say to themselves to remember auditory, not visually, even though it's presented auditorily (change the code) Sound based code to keep info in memory

When people shift their attention

People shift their attention from one place to another as they're doing things and carrying out specific tasks Timing of when people look at specific places = determined by sequence of actions involved in the task Example: Patter of eye movements when someone makes a peanut butter sandwich (shift attention depending on if you're picking up knife or scooping out peanut butter) ---- Person's eye movements = determined primarily by the task. Person fixated on few objects not directly related to task, eye movement usually preceded a motor action by a fraction of a second

EXP: Wood

Phase2: Shock = associated with 3 city names (NY, SF, Dallas) Use galvanic skin response --> more nervous = sweatier palms Phase 2: Person shadows 1 ear, but in unattended hears a buch of city names including one of the 3 participants showed sweaty palms 38% of the time --- Unattended material = evaluated for the meaning Opposite for the unconscious response

Physically salient

Physical characteristic where object = only one in visual field that has it Some type of singular distinction

Stimulus salience

Physical properties of the stimulus (color, contrast, movement)

EXP: Lane & Finch

Present a cross stimulus, viewer IDs which arm flashed (repeat x5) Time 6: small square outline = added to display, only 10% reported seeing the square

EXP: Rensink

Presented 1 pic followed by a blank field followed by same pic but with missing item Alternated until observers could determine differences (had to do several times) --- Importance of attention in determining change blindness = shown when Rensink added a cue indicating which part of a scene had been changed, subjects detected changes much more quickly --- Lack of attention affects perception

EXP: Rosch

Presented subjects with a category title and a list of ~50 members of the category Rate how well they fit into category on a 7 pt scale Demonstrated diffs bn good/bad examples of a category When item's characteristics have large amt of overlap with other items in a category, family resemblance of these items = high Little overlap = little family resemblance --- Strong relationship bn family resemblance & prototypicality

EXP: Kathleen O'Craven

Presented subjects with displays where four & face = superimposed, asked to direct attention to one stimulus or the other (moving or stationary object) She measured activity in certain areas of face & brain. Activity in parts of brain changed depending if it was a moving/stationary house or a moving/stationary face --- Attention caused brain to take possession of the object being attended by increased activity in area specialized to perceive that object.

EXP: Tulving & levels of processing

Presented words to subjects, asked about physical features of the word, rhyming & fill-in the blanks Meant to create diff levels of processing (physical features = shallow, rhyming = deeper, blanks = deepest) Results: deeper processing --> greater memory --- Diff to determine what depth of processing is Can't define in way that's independent of memory test

Precuing procedure

Presenting a cue where test stimulus will appear enhances processing of the target stimulus.

Dichotic listening

Presenting different stimuli to the left & right ears

Priming

Primer will facilitate the subject's response to a stimulus if it has some of the info needed to respond to the stimulus

Memory without awareness

Priming Get priming without awareness = implicit memory If aware, get explicit memory, and performance completely changes

Shadowing

Procedure of repeating what you are hearing

Binding

Process by which features such as color, form, motion and location = combined to create our perception of a coherent object --- Attention = important determinant of what we perceive, brings things to our awareness, can enhance ability to price & to respond & to create binding

Consolidation

Process by which memories become more stable even if not practiced Takes years to be fully consolidated

Categorization

Process by which things = placed in categories Image --> compared to other concepts --> matched to a certain concept --> make inferences about the image (its internal properties, characteristics, etc.)

Encoding

Process of acquiring info & storing it into LTM --- Phase of an experiment when info might go into LTM (time when you think about something that might go into LTM)

Retrieval

Process of transferring info from LTM to working memory

Detector

Processes info from attended message to determine high-level processes of message (meaning). Processes all the info that enters it

Automatic processing

Processing that happens: 1) without intention 2) at cost of only a few cognitive resources --- Many trials of processing require this (going to Kroger, get to stoplight, can't remember going down the hill)

How to access hierarchical model?

Properties of starting point lead you to answer Enter model from wherever cue/environment prompts you to enter (can be from animal or bird node, work your way down to the correct concept from there)

Feature Integration Theory

Proposes 2 step theory to address binding problem (pre attentive stage & focused attention stage) Most involves bottom-up processing (some exceptions) --- Perception happens by tearing apart diff visual features Have parts of cortex that know about orientations, shapes, diff colors, etc Uses disjunctive search (by inspecting activity on map, sees if there's a particular characteristic out there)

Attentional capture

Rapid shifting of attention caused by certain stimulus such as loud noise, bright light, sudden movement, etc. Examples include interception of eavesdropping by noise of overturn book cart When attention due to stimulus science --> involuntary shift in attention Important if it's a warning of something dangerous coming towards us

EXP: Baddeley & articulatory suppression

Read list, recall as many words Read another list, say "the, the, the" out loud as you read --- Reduced ability to remember a list of words, eliminates word length effect Both short & long words = lost from phono store

EXP: Bransford

Read passage that makes no sense. If pic accompanied passage, people understood it better x2 --- Preventing organization from happening reduces ability to remember

Attention as "binder" of experience

Red circle, green triangle How to know which is which? Without attn, can't determine this. Uses conjunctive & disjunctive search --- As number of stimuli in array increase, reaction time also increases

Articulatory control process

Rehearsal that keeps items in phonological store from decaying

Elaborative rehearsal

Remember info by considering meaning or making connections to other information Better memory than maintenance rehearsal

Memory system uses organization to access info

Remembering words in a category might be a retrieval cue Recall list > orig list in terms of organization

How to deal with external distractions?

Remove distracting object from where you are, or remove self Drown it out with something meaningless

Schemas

Rep of gen type of event, characteristics generally true of the event, not of a specific event

Preservation

Repeatedly performing the same action or thought, even if it's not achieving the desired goal

Articulatory suppression

Repetition of an irrelevant sound Disrupts normal operation of phonological loop, happens when someone's prevented from rehearsing items to be remembered by repeating an irrelevant sound Redueces memory bc speaking interferes with rehearsal

Immediate report

Reporting as many letters immediately. As you report, sensory memory = decaying/falling apart. Couldn't see/remember the other letters as they were reporting them

Divided attention experiments

Require subject to carry out 2 tasks simultaneously. 1) holding info about target stimuli in memory 2) paying attention of a series of "distractor" stimuli & determining if at least one of target stimuli = present among distracting stimuli

Relationship bn encoding & retrieval

Respond diff to diff memory cues Mismatch bn what you think at encoding & retrieval, demonstrates "bank" doesn't work

Persistence of vision

Retention of the perception of light in your mind (i.e.: playing with sparklers, looks like there's a trail of light) Continued perception of a perceived visual stimulus even after it's no longer present Isn't obvious in everyday experience when objects = present for long pos, noticeable for brief stimuli

Mental rotation

Rotate an image of one of the objects in their mind

EXP: Peterson & measuring duration of STM

Say a bunch of letters than a number. When you hear a number, count by 3. When I say recall, tell me the last 3 letters before I said the number -counting for 3 seconds: remembered 80% of letter group - counting for 18 sec: remembered 12% of letter group --- Occurred bc memory trace vanished bc of delay from passage of time after hearing the letters

Conjunction search

Search for combo of 2+ features in same stimulus (find - line that is also green) --- Requires scanning to focus attention at a specific location

EXP: Rogers

See question, answer yes or no if word answered the question When testing recall, subjects remembered more words if they're descriptions of you instead of just the size, etc. --- Why? Bc the words = linked to something the subjects know very well - themselves

Explanation of filter model

Sensory memory transfers all the info to the filter through physical characteristics (speaker's tone of voice, pitch, taking speed, accent, etc.) Passes info to detector which is eventually sent to the short term memory. Then transferred to the long term memory

EXP: Vogel

Separate people without brain damage into groups of high & low working memory, tested using change detection procedure Given cue telling them where to direct attention, shown memory display, then had to indicate if test display = same orientation as memory display Recorded event-related potential as they were making this decision Added blue bar as a distraction --> small effect on response of high-capacity group, large effect on other group --- Same WM across the groups High working memory = good at ignoring distractions, central exec was functioning well for these subjects Some people's central exec are better at allocating attention than others More likely to perform well on reading & reasoning ability tests, IQ tests, etc.

Overt attention

Shifting attention from one place to another by moving eyes

Covert attention

Shifting attention from place to place while keeping eyes stationary (i.e.: sports - look to the left, actually pass to the right)

Attention maps

Show how directing attention to a specific area of space activates a specific area of the brain Could predict "secret" place observer was staring at without telling experiment the location

EXP: Treisman & Schmidt

Showed 4 objects flanked by 2 blacks numbers Subjects told to report black numbers first, then repeat what 4 shapes they saw were Many reported objects = combinations of 2 diff stimulus (illusory conjunctions) --- Features appear independently of each other early in perceptual process

EXP: Della Sala

Showed small-large patterns, with half squares shaded in. Subjects could complete patterns with avg of 9 shaded squares before making mistakes

Implicit memory

Shows importance of neuroscientific evidence Generated through study of amnesic patients --- Revealed through indirect testing Perform task, memory shown by performance (goes off of motor skills & priming) Show I remember by demonstrating the task, but don't say that I'm testing your memory

Back propagation

Signals = sent backward in the network starting from the property unit

How to select features?

Sim depends on context At times, do seem to categorize via rules (as def view suggest) Made up arbitrary set of features, which affects sim/dissim, has an enormous impact on if they're the same

Connectionist networks can explain generalization of learning

Sim to how we learn bc learning about canaries enables us to predict properties of diff types of birds we've never seen Since sim concepts have sim patterns, training a system to recognize the properties of one concept also gives info about other, related concepts Limits to what connectionist networks can explain

Amygdala

Site of plasticity with emotional conditioning

Stroop Effect

Situation in which task-irrelevant stimuli = difficult to ignore (can ignore conversation in 1515, fire alarm would attract my attention)

Cerebellum

Skeletal condition Did eye puff

EXP: Cahill

Slide show about kid visit dad (surgeon at work) Kid got there when dad = operating on victims of a car accident Kid got there when dad practices drill of emergency procedures that included fake ops on realistic dolls Heart rate goes up, responds to what you think is real 2 weeks later, were tested again Emotional parts = remembered --- Emotion leads to a significant boost

Chunking

Small units (words, etc) can be combined into larger, meaningful words (phrases, sentences, paragraphs, etc.) --- Chunking in terms of meaning --> inc ability to hold info in STM Allows limited STM to deal with large amt of info involved in many tasks we perform everyday

Categorization based on rules

Some concepts = sensitive to rules Sim: take object 3 inches in diameter. Similar to a quarter or pizza? Categorization: obj = 3 inches in diameter. Is it a pizza or a quarter? There = some features not free to vary that people are sensitive to --- Low sim, high diagnosticity Some features don't happen v often, but when it happens, good sign that object = member of a category EX: drunk people

Advantages to Connectionist distributed rep

Some number of nodes gets you many more reps

Reduction in demands with practice

Some tasks = automatic (little/no attentional cost, with or without intention, not affected by motivation, can happen without awareness), others = controlled (attentional cost, occurs only with intention, affected by motivation, only with awareness) --- Reading letters = automatic for a v experienced reader/little attentional cost i.e.: Stroop effect (supposed to say green, read blue instead) Can go on autopilot for reading, driving, writing, eating, playing musical instruments, etc.

Low load tasks

Some tasks = easy, well-practiced, have low perceptual loads. Use small amount of person's processing capacity

Visual search

Something you do when we look for an object among a number of other objects (where's waldo) --- Can study role of attention through visual search

Bottom up selection

Sometimes things attract attn (color in black & white scale, movement in still frame, etc.) --- Something in environment causes us to think it's important, maybe we should give it some attention

EXP: Spelke, Hirst, Neisser

Sought automaticity for complex tasks Subjects read stories while taking dictation. Initially, huge interference (reading & writing another store someone reads to you) compared to when they're doing just one task Developed automaticity by doing this several times a week Weren't as good as doing single task, still v good//getting good at switching & knowing when to switch attention 1 task = self-paced (reading), the other = paced. When they talk and pause, shift back to reading 1-2 sentences from reading

Phonological loop

Sound based code to keep info in memory/stores things auditorily 2 parts: 1) Phonological store stores 2 seconds worth of aud information (not 4 items). Capacity in terms of time Info can enter store from environment 2) Articulatory control process Process of talking to yourself Another way of putting info into STM ----- Both = attached to central exec Holds verbal & auditory info

Echoic memory

Sounds also persist in mind only lasts for a few seconds after presentation of orig stimulus (when you ask "what?" but then hear it in your mind as soon as you ask)

Topographic map

Spatial map of visual stimuli in the visual context --- Each point on visual stimulus corresponds to activity at a specific location on visual cortex Points next to each other on stimulus cause activity at points next to each other on the visual cortex

EXP: Stroop Effect

Specify the color of the ink of a word not what color the word spells out. Difficult to do. Happens bc names of the words --> competing response, and therefore yields slow response to target. In Stroop Effect, task-irrelevant stimuli = very powerful because reading words = highly practiced & so automatic that's difficult to ignore

EXP: Dot example

Start with dot patterns = 2 prototypes Create exemplars by randomly moving some dots in diff directions & distance = family resemblance (no perfect rep, every exemplar shares some of the same characteristics) --- Prototype experiment: Deck of cards with exemplars A & B Study till correctly categorize 1 week later, categorization test for old, new & prototype Subjects = as good on prototype (which they've never seen before) as on old items, confident about answers

How do you know you're attending to wrong thing?

Stimuli from environment --> processing physical characteristics (loudness, pitch) --> process semantics (meaning, category) --> awareness (see a fox & its physical characteristics/combine the last 2 steps)

EXP: X or N?

Stimulus flashes on screen very briefly. 1) Have an N, put a bunch of o's around the N - fast & accurate response (this is easy) 2) Have an N, put a bunch of other letters around it - slow & inaccurate response (this is hard) Next put a cartoon graphic under. for 1: longer time, for 2: also longer time, not as great as a time diff as there was for 1 --- Fits with idea of load as the primary task Trying to focus attention on primary task. Easy: attn = spread around, captures attention Diff: less attn to monitor environment

Predictions about phonological loop

Store lasts 2 seconds --> people who can talk fast have larger capacity in WM Since store = 2 sec, everyone has larger capacity for short words & smaller capacity for long words (remember more short words than long words) If words sound alike, you'll get them mixed up If you busy articulators, articulatory phonological store can't put anything into store. Can't recode bc articulators = busy, find another way to code (meaning, group them together, visual mental image, etc) --- These effects disappear if you're not coding in sound

LTM

Stores info for long pos of time (minutes to lifetimes) Responsible for episodic, procedural, and semantic memories

Cognitive economy

Storing shared properties just once at a higher-level node Makes network more efficient, can add necessary exceptions at lower nodes

EXP: Forster & Lavie

Studied role of processing capacity & perceptual load in determining distractions. Subjects respond as quickly as possible when they ID a target (X or N), press the appropriate key Easy when n = surrounded by same letters, difficult when surrounded by a bunch of different letters Hard task --> longer reaction times Easy task --> faster except when task-irrelevant stimulus is introduced. Then, slower response for easy task than for hard task

Fast forgetting

Stuff gets in fine, disappears v quickly Can't look at how slowly/rapidly they forget bc they forget immediately (can't record) Reg get .25 seconds, amnesic get 15 seconds to look at pic - make sure it's deep encoding - recall @ 5 mins = control - forgetting happens bn 2 groups in parallel, doesn't account for what's going on

Distractor

Stuff you don't need to remember

Target

Stuff you're supposed to remember

EXP: Schneider & Shiffrin

Subject = shown memory set with 4 characters (target stimuli), followed by rapid presentation of 20 "test frames" with distractors (1/2 trials, frames had target stimulus from memory set) >600 trials later, went from memorizing memory set --> automatically completing task (subjects didn't have to consciously think before responding) --- Practice made it possible for subjects to divide their attention to deal with all of target's test items simultaneously Demonstrated for certain situations, if task difficulty = increased and change targets/distractors for each trial, automatic processing doesn't happen, even with practice (i.e.: driving & texting)

EXP: Morris, Bransford, Franks

Subject has 32 sentences, 16 rhyme & 16 meaning --> 24 hours delay 16 subjects take test on all 32 words with rhyming cues 16 subjects take standard recognition test on all 32 words When tested, those who learned in meaning had better scores when tested on meaning. Those who learned in rhyme and given rhyme cue had better scores than those who learned in recognition. --- Can't say deep processing works across the board Shows that transfer-appropriate processing matters

Savings in relearning

Subject learns material to a criterion, number of trials required = noted Later subject relearns the material to the same criterion, if fewer trials = required, that's savings Relearning occurs much faster than it did the first time around

EXP: Donald McKay

Subject listened to an ambiguous sentence with multiple interpretations in attended ear. Biasing words = presented to unattended ear, later presented with pairs of sentences, indicate which sentence = closer to the one they heard --- Meaning of the biasing word affect subject's choice even though they were unaware of biasing words Proposed word must have been processed to the level of meaning even though it was unattended

Recall

Subjects = presented with stimuli, after a delay asked to report back as many of the stimuli as possible

EXP: Strayer & William Johnson

Subjects = sim, hit brakes as quickly as possible in response to a red light Talking on phone --> 2x errors of people not talking on cell phone --- Talking on phone uses cognitive resources that would otherwise be free

EXP: Neville Moray

Subjects = unaware of a word that has been repeated 35 times in the unattended ear (known as the cocktail party effect)

EXP: Rosch and protoypicality

Subjects heard the primer = name of a color 2 seconds later, saw a pair of colors side by side, indicated if 2 colors = same/diff Side by side: colors = same, good examples of category Colors = same but bad examples of category Colors = diff with 2 colors from diff categories Priming --> faster "same" judgements for prototypical (good) colors than non prototypical (poor) colors Happens bc they hear "green", imagine a highly prototypical green --- Showed prototypical members of category = more affected by priming than non prototypical members Subjects create images of prototypes in response to color names

EXP: Michael Posner

Subjects kept eyes stationary, always looking at t in display. See an arrow cue that indicates where to focus attention while keeping eyes on t (example of covert attention). Press key as rapidly as possible when target square = presented to side Presented valid cues (direct attention to left, signal is on left) and invalid cues (direct attention to left, signal is on right) --- Subjects reacted to square more rapidly when attention = focused on location where signal is about to appear. Therefore, information processing is more effective at place where attention is directed --> attention = zoom that improves processing when directed towards a particular location --- Used precueing procedure to answer if paying attention to a location --> inc ability to respond to stimuli presented there --- BASICALLY: Beam metaphor Attention = "spotlight" that enhances perceptual processing Independent of eye movements Metaphor = only partly correct

EXP: Li

Subjects looked at T on fixation screen, saw central stimulus (array of 5 letters where all were same or 1 = diff from other 4) Immediately followed by peripheral stimulus at corner of the screen Central task = indicate if all letters in central stimulus = same/peripheral task = what corner image was --- Possible to take in info about some objects but not others in scene, even when attention is focused elsewhere

Lexical decision task

Subjects read stimuli that are/aren't words They indicate if each entry is/isn't a word

EXP: Baddeley

Subjects remember 77% short words, 60% long words (demonstrating word length effect) --- Occurs bc takes longer to rehearse long words & to produce them during recall Also proposed that people who speak faster can remember more

EXP: Shepherd & Recognition memory

Subjects see 512 words, take 2-choice recognition test See 612 Sentences (brief), 2 choice recognition test Get 88% on both tests

Recognition failure of recallable words

Subjects see pair of words on at a time, memorize words in all caps Get 2 tests 1) Recognition test: circle words you recognize 2) cued recall test: see lowercase, just write down as many you remember Key finding: fail to recognize some words, get the cued word correct - bias people to think about odd aspect of a common word when paired with lowercase letters ---- Cue = better hint to though you had at encoding rather than uppercase letter alone

EXP: Jenkins

Subjects spontaneously organize info as they recall them

EXP: Slameka

Subjects study words by reading in group of related words or by filling in words related to the first group (generate group) Read group < generate group at reproducing word pairs --- Displays generation effect: Generating material vs passively receiving it --> enhanced learning & retention bc giving connections bn material to be remembered & other material in memory

Gollin figures

Taken pic of object, erased lines, guess what actual object is, give more complete figures over time Writing down which image you identify object by With inc trials, can ID with less complete versions

Same object advantage

The faster responding that occurs when enhancement spreads within an object

Digit span

The number of digits a person can remember

Thinking about meaning (depth)

Think about how it relates to things you already know Deep vs shallow Degrees of depth

Tachistoscopic ID

Time 1: see a list of common words, asked to do something with them Time 2: hour later, done 3 other tasks. Didn't make any ref to 1st task Flash word v quickly, adjust time so you're getting 50-60% of words correct When I should you world on list, should ID it better Memory component bc showing some benefit to a word

Episodic memories turn into semantic memories

Time and place keeps changing, info stays the same, can't remember time & place of when you learned it As number of sim events occur, strength of memory increases. As strength of memory increases, more likely that memory = semantic

Recognition

To be remembered info = presented, along with other stuff (distractors) & subject must distinguish new from old

EXP: Multitasking

Told you'll see letter/digit combo Do diff acts for each letter depending on quadrant, press button --- Shows you can't make multitask v well, even with simple rules. Multitasking = switching, can't keep multiple rules in mind

Scene schemas

Top-down processing = also influenced by scene schemas. Observers knowledge about what's contained in typical scenes influence how people direct attention --- People look longer at things that seem out of place. Attention = affected by knowledge of what's usually found in scene

Mirror tracing

Trace around a star as quickly as you can, get timed Mirror perpendicular to table, see hand in mirror (can't see actual hand though) and trace looking at mirror With repeated practice, get better & much faster. HM performed like a typical 30 year old on this task

Input units

Units activated by stimuli from environment or stimuli presented by the experimenter Send signals to hidden units, which send signals to output units --- Stimulus presented to the input units = repped by the pattern of activity that's distributed across the other units

EXP: Alvarez

Used change detected used by Luck and Vogel (colored squares & complex stimuli) Would have to say if 2 scenes with diff number of cubes = same or not Basically, subject's ability to make same/diff judgement = dependent on complexity of stimuli --- Greater amount of info in an image, the fewer items can be held in visual STM

EXP: Meyer

Used idea of lexical decision task Showed 2 words stacked above each other, subjects press yes if both = words, no if atleast one = nonword Key variable = ass bn pairs of real worlds (closely/loosely ass) Rxm time = faster when 2 words = ass --- May have occurred bc retrieving 1 word from memory triggered spread of activation to other nearby locations in network More activation spreads to words that = related, response to related words = faster than response to unrelated words

EXP: Edward Smith

Used sentence verification technique to see how rapidly people could answer q's about an object's category Subjects responded faster for objects high in prototypicality than objects low in prototypicality, they demonstrated typicality effect --- Shows connections bn prototypicality and behavior

EXP: Brooks

Visualizing F & its corners, pointing when it's an outside (inside corner or saying out or in) Pointing = more dif bc pointing & holding image = VS sketch pad tasks, becomes overloaded, while speaking uses phono loop which doesn't interfere with VS sketch pad --- Exp demonstrates how interference can affect the operation of the VS sketch pad

Top-down selection

Wanna pay attention to this (force yourself to pay attention to something bc it's important) --- Overt attention (moving your eyes) & visual search Unlike bottom up: 1) Have specific thing in mind you want to attend to (not usually attending to it) 2) Searching by color = relatively quick Single perceptual characteristic that help you ID stuff (finding blueberry in the snow, etc) --- Searching for meaning = difficult to do (red & white stripes in a pool of red & white - where's waldo)

Switching

Way of dealing with limited attention --- Can't practice and get better at it. It's about working memory Always carries a cost

What do these experiments focus on with regards to selective attention

What types of info = used for selection (physical characteristics of meaning, etc) No single answer to what's early & late (early selection = demonstrated under same conditions, later selection under others, depending on observer's task & types of stimuli presented) Idea that ability to selectively attend to a task can depend on distracting stimulus & on nature of task being studied

Basic level category = psychologically privileged

What we use when we usually think Use in language, faster to verify on object name at basic level than other levels Levels of categorization don't mesh well with rules

Role of prior knowledge in retrieval

What you think about at encoding = v important for future memory & retrieval MC: Need to know distractors & testers, while in essays just need to integrate info from other sources Whether you remember depends on match bn retrieval & how you thought about things at encoding. What you already know about topic = also important for encoding Memory is more than remembering. It's also about knowledge. Infer this most likely happened, fill in gaps bc memory = fallible

Focused attention stage

When "free floating" features = combined & we can perceive the object --- Observer's attention plays important role in combining features to create the perception of whole objects Focusing attention specifically eliminates illusory conjunction

Prototypicality

When asked to list as many objects in a category as possible, tend to list more prototypical members of the category first (robins come before penguin) Prototypical objects = more affected by priming Follows closely in time

Basal ganglia

When motor skill learning/procedure occurs Important for movement/control

EXP: Nelson

When recognition fails, subjects relearn the material faster than new material

EXP: Brown & Kulik

When something happened in culture (assassination, 9/11, etc.) they'd ask how it felt and for spec details. Decades later would ask the same question --- 8 years after event, people reported a lot of details and were v confident about answers In realty, recalled details that have nothing to do with event

Sensory store

When something's presented briefly, perception continues for a fraction of a second (can perceive movies with this)

Fan effect

When you don't know much about an area, only have one link to activate When you know a lot about princeton, have many ass facts with concept People with lots of knowledge = slower to verify there's a uni than someone with less knowledge --- Only seen in lab, bc IRL you have lots of connections linking concepts with princeton uni and town of princeton (this road leads you to uni, etc.) Activation starts to go to nodes, then flies around bn nodes bc nodes = connected to nodes --- Fan effect predicts experts = slower to produce knowledge than novices. Not true bc of all the interconnections bn the nodes In lab, can teach you facts so that nodes don't interact, not true in practice

How a prototype model works

When you see new exemplar, compare to the prototype. More sim to prototype --> more confident you are that it belongs to that category When you see prototype dot pattern, you're v confident bc perfectly matches prototype in memory --- Judge sim to other prototypes you have in memory, tweak what you have in memory a bit

Central executive

Where major work of WM occurs (control center) Pulls info from LTM, co-ordinates activity of phono loop & VS sketch pad by focusing of spec parts of a task & deciding how to divide attn bn diff tasks Helps you ignore messages from outside so you can focus your attn Attn controller: focuses attn, splits it bn tasks, switches it bn tasks ---- Tells other components what to do WM = sustained activation of reps Maintains info in WM stores/important as coordinator of other cog processes --> not well specified/developed

How many windows in your house example

Why do your eyes turn away? 1) Avoid distracting stimuli -Faces = socially important, hard not to attend to them 2) Habituate -Attention demanding now, after a while it won't bug you -More effective for stimuli that don't change much (harder to habituate to music than to refrigerator hum) -complexity != important as long as it's simple

Central characteristic of attention

Withdrawing from some things in order to deal effectively with others. Doesn't capture diversity of phenomena

Modal model: STM

holds 5-7 items for 15-20 seconds

Exemplar approach to categorization

involves many examples Takes into account the wide variation among items that belong to a particular category Involves determining if an object = similar to other objects using exemplars Explains Rosch's results about typicality Same idea as family resemblance ("better" objects have high family resemblance) Advantage: Uses real examples Takes into account individ cases --> doesn't discard info that might be useful later deals better with variable categories Good for small categories

Intentional memory tests

know test is coming

Rehearsal

repeating a stimulus over and over again (repeating telephone number to self)