1. Questions about Memory
Do we learn only with intention – or also without intention?
We learn with and without intention.
Is learning influenced by what we already know? And if so, how?
6:24 AM

2. The two-edged sword
What we already know can help us perceive what is out there in the world (encoding) and help us recall it (retrieval).
It can also cause us to see what we expect (not what’s there) or to construct a memory of “what usually happens” (not what actually happened).
6:24 AM

3. What we already know (WWAK)
1. Knowledge effects at encoding
Levels of Processing theory
Criticisms of LoP
2. Knowledge effects at retrieval
Transfer Appropriate Training
Encoding Specificity
6:24 AM

4. Knowledge effects at encoding
Levels of Processing theory – Craik & Lockhart (1972)
In 1950s & 60s, CP was most interested in questions about structure (e.g., SM – STM – LTM).
In early 1970’s, CP became more interested in process
Craik & Lockhart said, ability to recall a stimulus depends upon how you processed it.
6:24 AM

5. Craik & Lockhart’s (1972) tenets:
1. Ease of information retrieval depends upon type of code generated at learning.
2. 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.
6:24 AM

6. Craik & Lockhart’s (1972) evidence
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 varies with orienting task: Semantic > Rhyme > Spelling
6:24 AM

7. Levels of Processing – the basic effect
Dependence of recall on orienting task 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?
6:24 AM

8. Levels of Processing – the explanation
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
6:24 AM

9. Levels of Processing – the explanation
Compare sound [banana] vs. meaning "banana" - what associations can be made?
Semantic associations are richer, more distinctive – therefore more memorable.
LoP effect reflects richer associations to stimuli processed for meaning.
6:24 AM

10. Criticisms of LoP 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.’
6:24 AM

11. Criticisms of LoP Theory
Baddeley – result does not generalize to other tasks.
E.g., Glenberg, Smith, & Green (1972) – LoP effect not found for recognition task.
Recognition task: subject shown “old” and “new” stimuli, asked to say which is which.
Recognition task generally easier than recall task.
6:24 AM

12. Knowledge effects at retrieval
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.
6:24 AM

13. 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.
6:24 AM

14. Transfer Appropriate Training
Morris et al. (1977)
Group Task at
Orientation Retrieval
1 Semantic Recall
2 Semantic Rhyme
3 Rhyme Recall
4 Rhyme Rhyme
6:24 AM

15. Transfer Appropriate Training
Morris et al. (1977) - Results
Recall Rhyme Judgment
SO > RO RO > SO
Encode for the way you plan to use the information.
SO: Semantic orienting RO: Rhyme orienting
6:24 AM

16. Knowledge effects at retrieval
Bransford’s idea was that retrieval success depends upon the match between what happens at retrieval and what happens at encoding.
At the time, it was a radical idea, because most researchers still believed (as behaviourists argued) that behaviour was governed by pre-existing learning…
6:24 AM

17. Knowledge effects at retrieval
If behaviour was controlled by pre-existing learning, it shouldn’t matter whether retrieval conditions matched learning conditions.
Match/mismatch could not alter the facts about pre-existing learning.
Bransford’s results questioned this idea. So did Tulving’s (Tulving & Osler, 1968).
6:24 AM

18. 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.
6:24 AM

19. Encoding Specificity Theory
In Thompson & Tulving’s (1970) study, subjects were given pairs of cues & targets in the learning phase. Then, in the test phase, they were given the cue and asked to recall the target.
Learn Recall cue Response
COLD – hot hot COLD
6:24 AM

20. Encoding Specificity Theory
Thompson & Tulving (1970)
Condition Learn Recall cue
Strong 1 COLD – hot hot
Strong 2 COLD – hot blow
6:24 AM

21. Encoding Specificity Theory
Thompson & Tulving (1970)
Condition Learn Recall cue
Weak 1 COLD – blow hot
Weak 2 COLD – blow blow
6:24 AM

22. Encoding Specificity Theory
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.
6:24 AM

23. Encoding Specificity Theory
Thompson & Tulving’s results:
Probability of recall with blow as cue was higher than with hot as cue, when blow was presented at learning.
A cue is more effective if it re-establishes the learning context. This was a radical idea at the time.
6:24 AM

24. 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.
6:24 AM

25. Review – Craik & Lockhart
Deeper processing gives access to meaning, which permits more elaboration.
Elaborative Rehearsal involves working out connections between the new stimulus and what we already know.
Greater elaboration usually leads to better memory.
6:24 AM

26. Review – Criticisms of LoP Theory
Baddeley:
LoP theory is circular.
LoP effects do not generalize well to tasks other than recall.
6:24 AM

27. Review – Morris, Bransford, & Franks
Transfer Appropriate Training:
Conditions at retrieval are important as well as conditions at encoding.
Encode for the way you plan to use the information
6:24 AM

28. Review – Thompson & Tulving
Encoding Specificity theory:
You encode aspects of context when you learn new information.
Cues help most in retrieval if they re-establish the learning context.
6:24 AM