Three forms of consciousness in retrieving memories Autonoetic Consciousness Self-Knowing Remembering Presenter: Ting-Ru Chen Advisor: Chun-Yu Lin Date: 2010/3/24

Factors that increase autonoetic consciousness 1.Conceptual(or Elaborative) Influences 2.Distinctiveness Effects 3.Effects of Emotion 4.Recollective Experience and Memory for Source

1. Conceptual Influences on Remembering Dual-process theories of recognition: – Conceptual or elaborative processing  Recollective component of recognition – Perceptual process  Familiarity component Gradiner(1988): – Episodic Memory(EM)  Conceptual processing  Remember response(R) – Semantic Memory(SM) or Procedural Memory  Perceptual process  Know response(K)

Remember response increased by conceptual processing 1.Study words for their meaning(the level of processing : deep) 2.Picture superiority effect 3.Elaborative rehearsal(vs. rote rehearsal) 4.Full attention(vs. divided attention)

Remember response influenced by perceptual processing Change in body size & orientation of objects can influence R (little effect on K) – In study & test: the same  R increased different  R decreased

2. Distinctiveness effects on Remembering  Autonoetic consciousness( or R) reflects distinctiveness of the processing(encoding) (Rajaram) Ex1. Orthographic distinctiveness: Ponea vs. sailboat (unusual vs. common letter combination) Ex2. Facial distinctiveness of various features (vs. categorize face)

3. Effects of Emotion Flashbulb memories: ex. Events of 911 – Quite suspect to error / great confidence(more R) Effects of motion on R/K responses: – Pictures(positive/negative/neutral): Retention: negative > positive > neutral Negative pictures: more R Positive & neutral pictures: more K

4. Recollective Experience and Memory for Source_1 R/K paradigm: vividness is the characterized by using a single R response Assess the quality of their memories : – Reality monitoring & Source-monitoring – Source determined by comparing the characterizes of the memories to memories generally associated with that sort – Source can be discriminated flexibly among many dimensions (features of the target, cognitive processes, the plausibility of remembered details, related experiences)

4. Recollective Experience and Memory for Source_2 A series of tasks: perform/image/watch Ask about their source & compare their R/K response: perform  more R / image  more K /watch  R=K  R response: reflect detailed perceptual memories associated with personally experience  Rating the qualities of memories: Memory characteristics questionnaire (MCQ) False & correct R: less auditory perceptual detail

Noetic consciousness knowing 1.the influence of instructions on the interpretations of know judgments 2.knowing and retrieval from semantic memory 3.knowing as fluency and familiarity

Noetic consciousness Is associated with the experience of knowing and with the semantic memory system(Tulving,1985) Represents the lesser personal and the more generic sense in which we retrieve factual events and information Knowledge judgments for 2 types of cognitive experiences: knowledge & familiarity

Tulving’s three-component theory

Instructions for Remember & Know judgments 1.Ask the last movie you saw 2.Asks for your name Mental time travel/re-experience

Know ? or Remember? Judgment the pictures

The interpretations of Know Judgment in the semantic sense : knowing one’s own name Knowing the president Recognize a face as familiar Know judgments: what they are not (they are confident memories that lack detail), rather than what they are. Know Judgment The sense of knowledge The sense of familiarity

Semantic Memory Repository of organized information about concepts, words, people, events, and their interrelations in the world. Information from semantic memory is retrieved as facts and without memory for the details of the learning experience or the time and place where learning took place

Knowing & retrieval from semantic memory_1 Classroom education (Conway et al.,1997): – 2 types of course: lecture & research methods course Lecture course: more Remember judgments Methodology course: more Just Knowing Over time: shift R → k (sense of knowledge) – Episodic details were lost → schematized & conceptually organized information

Varied & Deep Encoding on Remember & Know states of awareness (Rajaram & Hamiliton,2005) Target words: ex. cousin, bread  Unrelated word pairs  Learned once or twice (varied context & space apart) ex. Penny-cousin fence-bread → guard-bread Recognition & remember/know judgments 1.More R responses to words repeated under diff contexts ( > once-presented target words) after 48 hrs of delay 2. More K responses after 48 hrs (vs. 30mon delay) Know judgments were responsive to both conceptual encoding and varied repetition even after considerable delay

Reading a story before being tested (E. Marsh et al.,2003) – Testing: general knowledge questions – Answer: the source of questions Immediate & Retrospective source judgments : many details from story → part of prior knowledge  Episodic information was converted to facts or semantic memory Knowing & retrieval from semantic memory_2

knowing as fluency and familiarity_1 Examine subject’s transcripts of reasons they gave K judgments → based on a feeling of familiarity (Gradiner et al.,1998) – The fluency or ease with which stimuli are processed (K judgments) – Process of distinctive attributes of stimuli (R judgments)

knowing as fluency and familiarity_2 More K response: 1.Masked repetition of the same word (↑ fluency) > masked presentation of an unrelated word (Rajaram,1993) 2.Presentation of semantically related words > unrelated words 3.Modality match (ex. Item presented visually in both cases, ↑ Perceptual fluency & selectively ↑ K judgments ) > modality mismatch