Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)1 1. Do we learn only with intention – or also without intention? We learn with and without intention. 2.Is learning influenced by what we already know? And if so, how? Questions about Memory

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)2 WWAK could influence new learning through: 1. Associations 2. Construction #2 will be the topic in Chapters 8, 9, 11. Today, we'll focus on #1 - Associations. What we already know (WWAK)

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)3 A. Associations - some history B. How do associations influence learning? 1. Levels of Processing theory Levels of Processing effect Maintenance vs. Elaborative Rehearsal 2. Criticisms of Levels of Processing Theory Baddeley – circularity Bransford – Transfer Appropriate Training 3. The role of newly-formed associations (Tulving) Outline

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)4 Basic idea: one thing makes you think of another. Aristotle's three grounds for association: Similarity – e.g. gold coins, golden retrievers Contrast – e.g., night and day Contiguity – graduate students and beer Associations

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)5 More recently: J.S. Mill & the British Empiricists All knowledge is association Behaviourism Response associated with reward Neural Networks. Pattern associators Associations

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)6 1. Levels of Processing theory – Craik & Lockhart (1972) In early 1970’s Cognitive Psychology was interested in process rather than structure C & L said, ability to recall a stimulus depends upon how you processed it. How do associations influence learning?

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)7 Kind of code generated depends on your purpose when you first process the information. E.g., are you looking for a red thing among green things? Then generate visual codes. Ability to retrieve that information later depends upon type of code generated. Craik & Lockhart (1972)

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)8 Orienting task - subjects read a list of words and answer one of three questions: Which words in list contain letter 'e'? Which words in list rhyme with CANE? Which words in list name animate objects? On surprise recall test, success varied with orienting task. Semantic > Rhyme > Spelling Craik & Lockhart (1972)

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)9 This is the basic Levels of Processing Effect Probability of recall varies with type of code generated when learning. See also studies described in text (pp ) Why does this effect happen? Levels of Processing – The Effect

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)10 Craik & Lockhart – 2 types of rehearsal: Maintenance Rehearsal uses articulatory loop simply saying words over and over Elaborative Rehearsal uses the meaning of the object or event requires establishing associations Levels of Processing – The theory

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)11 Compare sound [banana] vs. meaning "banana" - what associations can be made? Semantic associations are richer, more distinctive – therefore more memorable. Craik & Lockhart – this explains Levels of Processing effect: deeper processing permits richer associations. Maintenance vs. Elaborative Rehearsal

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)12 2.Problems with Levels of Processing Theory Baddeley – L.O.P Theory is circular Which levels produce best memory? Deepest Which levels are deepest? Those that produce best memory. No independent way of assessing depth. How do associations influence learning?

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)13 Problems with Levels of Processing Theory Baddeley – result does not generalize to other tasks. E.g., Glenberg, Smith, & Green (1972) – LoP effect not found for recognition task. Recognition – subject shown “old” and “new” stimuli, asked to say which is which.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)14 Problems with Levels of Processing Theory Bransford – Transfer Appropriate Training LoP – memory performance depends upon conditions under which encoding occurs. Bransford – memory performance also depends upon conditions under which retrieval occurs.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)15 Transfer Appropriate Training Morris, Bransford, & Franks (1977) used semantic & rhyme orienting tasks at retrieval, some subjects asked to recall words seen during orienting task. others asked to detect words that rhymed with words seen during orienting task.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)16 Morris, Bransford, & Franks (1977) GroupOrientationRetrieval task task 1SemanticRecall 2SemanticRhyme 3RhymeRecall 4RhymeRhyme

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)17 Transfer Appropriate Training Morris, Bransford, & Franks (1977) – findings: Recall task – semantic orienting led to better performance than rhyme orienting. Rhyme task – rhyme orienting led to better performance than semantic orienting did. Encode for the way you plan to use the information.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)18 The role of newly-formed associations Bransford’s idea was that retrieval success depends upon the match between what happens at retrieval and what happens at encoding. Tulving had come to the same conclusion (Tulving & Osler, 1968). At the time, it was a radical idea…

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)19 Why was this a radical idea? For some years after Cognitive Psychology replaced Behaviourism, some Behaviourist prejudices maintained their hold on the field. In particular, most researchers still believed that behaviour was governed by pre-existing learning. What happened before subjects got to the lab was more important than what happened in the lab.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)20 Tulving’s Encoding Specificity Theory Thomson & Tulving (1970) Subjects learned a list of words for later recall. Some subjects got words without a context. Subjects who got words in a context, got either strong or weak contexts.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)21 Thomson & Tulving (1970) Examples: Condition LearnRecall Cue No contextCOLD-- Strong context 1COLD-hothot Strong context 2COLD-hotblow Weak context 3COLD-blowhot Weak context 4COLD-blowblow

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)22 Thomson & Tulving (1970) Predictions: If long-term learning is most important, then hot should have been a better cue for COLD than blow, regardless of learning condition. If blow is a better cue (when it is presented at learning), that means that context matters.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)23 Thomson & Tulving (1970) Predictions: Strong context 1COLD-hothot Strong context 2COLD-hotblow Weak context 3COLD-blowhot Weak context 4COLD-blowblow If long-term learning is most important, then 3 > 4. If learning current context is important, then 4 > 3.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)24 Thomson & Tulving (1970) Finding: Probability of recall with blow as cue was higher than with hot as cue, when blow was presented at learning. (4 > 3). A cue is effective only if it re-establishes the learning context. This was a radical idea at the time.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)25 Review – Craik & Lockhart Type of code you generate when you process a stimulus varies with your purpose. Ability to retrieve a stimulus later varies with type of code you generated. Maintenance Rehearsal involves simply repeating the stimulus, without creating new connnections.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)26 Review – Craik & Lockhart Elaborative Rehearsal involves working out connections between the new stimulus and WWAK. Deeper processing permits more elaboration. Greater elaboration leads to better memory.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)27 Review – Criticisms of Craik & Lockhart Baddeley: LoP theory is circular. LoP effects do not generalize well to tasks other than recall. Bransford: Conditions at retrieval are important as well as conditions at encoding.

Lecture 6 – Long Term Memory (2)28 Review – Encoding Specificity Tulving: You encode aspects of context when you learn new information. Cues help in retrieval only if they re-establish the learning context.