To what extent is one cognitive process reliable? (ERQ)
Method
- 30 student volunteers - Wait in office space - Unusual objects + "office schema" objects - Wait 35 seconds - Write down what they remember
Core issue
- Cognitive process -> memory (gain + store knowledge) - Important to mankind -> used everyday + almost everything we do based on memory - Aspects make it unreliable without our knowledge - Can affect important situations (eyewitness testimony, exams)
Define neuroplasticity
- Form / change synaptic connections - In response to learning / injury
Define schema theory
- Knowledge, beliefs, expectations (collection of) - Specific situations - Based on experiences
Explain how neural networks strengthen memory
- Localised function - Brain more efficient - Specialist structures -> communicate faster - Do things more precisely / less effort / faster
Evaluate schema theory
- No way to measure schema - Can't visually see it taking place in the brain - Very general - However, there is compelling evidence for it
Results
- Recalled "office schema objects" - Most uncommon objects not recalled (but some were eg: skull) - "Office schema" objects not present also recalled (eg: stapler)
Describe reconstructive memory
- Schema - fill in the gaps - between key parts of memories based on what likely happened - Store key elements - Reconstruct when recalled - Memories rarely precise & accurate
Describe neural networks
- Series of neurons - Connected through synapses - Work to perform specific function
Use of research
- Spatial memory = better - Posterior hpc = bigger - Spatial memory = localised in posterior hpc - There are neural networks there - Strengthened by taking the knowledge + working as taxi driver - Didn't occur with control/fail so neuroplasticity didn't take place there
Explain why the brain reconstructs memories
- Store less info - More efficient - less energy required - Schema probably right (because based on experience) - Most everyday info = not important - Unlikely to notice inaccuracies
Use of research
- The brain didn't store much info because it wasn't important - Schema -> reconstruct memory - 👍 reliable - good recall of relevant items -> fit the schema - 👎︎ reliable - they added things not there - 👎︎ reliable - items that don't fit "office schema" not recalled
Study
Brewer and Treyens
Evaluate study
High ecological validity - Ppts are just waiting, not aware the study had begun - Mimics what would happen in real life - Real life situations - people would reconstruct memory Low mundane realism - Recall of objects in a room not everyday task - Results understate reliability of memory - Ppts should have done activity they complete regularly (eg. grocery list) - They actively want to recall it -> recall would have been more accurate
link to next topic
Hwvr, other things may make memory more reliable...
What to talk about first
Reconstructive memory (as a limitation)
Evaluate study
Results are not correlational brains scanned before and after -> causal result More certain that it is a result of the job And not that taxi drivers drawn to the job because of large posterior hpc
Study
Woolet and Maguire
What to explain
how neural networks strengthen memory
What to describe
neural networks
what to define
neuroplasticity
Method
trainees before learning London routes Compared with controls measure ability to remember location of landmarks complex shapes MRI measure hpcl volume After process (3-4 years later) same tests & MRI Compare memory skills & hpcl volume w controls
Results
volume of posterior hpc increased significantly able to recall info about landmarks better recall of complex shapes declined failed/control - no change
