Lecture 11 – Psyco 350, A1 Winter, 2011
description
Transcript of Lecture 11 – Psyco 350, A1 Winter, 2011
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 1
Lecture 11 – Psyco 350, A1Winter, 2011
N. R. Brown
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 2
Outline
• Implicit Memory– Introduction
– Dissociating Implicit & Explicit Memory
– Transfer Appropriate Processing
– Implicit Learning
• Dual Process Models– Recognition & Remember/Know
– Process Dissociation Procedure• Direct Tests
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 3
Evidence for Implicit Memory on Indirect Tests
• Indirect tests typically use improved performance as the measure of implicit memory
• Priming = the improvement in performance on a subsequent occasion due to processing on a previous occasion
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 4
Priming Effects
Exp condition = a prior exposure to stimControl = “no” prior exposure to stim
Priming:• fragment, stem, anagram:
dv – % complete: exp > control• Perceptional Identification:
dv -- % correct: exp > control• Lexical Decision:
dv – RT: exp < control
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 5
Dissociating Implicit & Explicit Memory
Dissociation: One variable affects one task differently than it affects another
_______________________________________
Tulving, Schacter, & Stark (1982)
Design:
Delay X Test Type .
1 hr fragment completion (indirect)
1 week recognition (direct)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 6
Tulving, Schacter, & Stark (1982)
Phase 1 Intentional Study (96 words)
1 hr delay
Phase 2 Recognition48 words
Frag Completion
48 words1 week delay
Phase 3 Frag Completion
48 words Recognition
48 words
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 7
Tulving, Schacter, & Stark (1982)
Results:• Reco w/ dealy• frag unaffected by delay
Delay causes a dissociation between reco & frag tests.
Implication:
Test tap different “forms” of memory.
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 8
(Double) Dissociating Implicit & Explicit Memory
Jacoby (1983)
Aims: Using same materials demonstrate:
• explicit memory w/ depth of processing
• implicit memory w/ perceptual similarity
Materials selected so that:• as depth of processing , perceptual similarity
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 9
Jacoby (1983)
Design: Encoding Task X Test .
(Antonym) Generation recognition
Read (antonym in context) perceptual ID (40 ms)
Read (target alone)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 10
Jacoby(1983): Two perspective on Encoding Tasks
Predictions:• Recognition: deeper processing should produce
better performance.• Percp ID: priming should become stronger as study
and test materials become more similar.
Task example LOP perc similarity
Generate hot deep low
Read in context hot – COLD mid mid
Read no context COLD shallow high
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 11
Jacoby (1983): Results• w/out prior exposure
(control): perc ID = 60%• In all conditions:
– Perc ID > 60% – priming
_________________________
• Reco with Depth of Processing
• Perc ID perc similarity (Perc ID LoP)Evidence for 2 types of
memory
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 12
Jacoby (1983): Results• w/out prior exposure
(control): perc ID = 60%• In all conditions:
– Perc ID > 60% – priming
_________________________
• Reco with Depth of Processing
• Perc ID perc similarity (Perc ID LoP)Evidence for 2 types of
memory
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 13
Transfer Appropriate Process: Theory
Assumes:
• Performance depends of match between processing at study and processing at test.
Analogous to encoding specificity.
• Two-types of Processes– Data-driven (perceptual) – processing of
physical features.
– Conceptually-driven (semantic) – processing for meaning
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 14
Transfer Appropriate Processing: Two Types of Indirect Test
Data-driven
(Perceptual):• fragment completion• stem completion• anagram completion• lexical decision• perceptual
identification
Conceptually-driven
(Semantic):• word association
doctor ??• category-instance
generation“name a mammal”
• general knowledge“The capital of the US is
…?”
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 15
Transfer Appropriate Process: Theory
Processing-type & memory task typically confounded:
• Direct tests require/benefit from conceptual processing
• Indirect tests require/benefit from data-driven processing.
However, it is possible to unconfound test-type from process-type (e.g.):
• Fragment-cued, recall test – data-driven, direct• general knowledge test – conceptual, indirect
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 16
Transfer Appropriate Processing: Blaxton (1989)
• Goal to demonstrate;– data-driven processing can affect direct tests
– data-driven processing do not necessarily affect indirect tests
• Design:
TEST TYPE
Study Mode X Explicitness X Level .
visual direct data-driven
auditory indirect conceptually-driven
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 17
Blaxton (1989): Four Types of Memory Test
Data-driven Conceptually-driven
Direct Graphic-cuedRecall
Free Recall
Indirect FragmentCompletion
GeneralKnowledge
Target word: bashful• graphic-cued recall: looks like “bushful”• free recall• frag completion: b_sh_u_• General knowledge: “Name one of the 7 dwarfs”
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 18
Blaxton (1989): Competing Predictions
Data-driven Conceptually-driven
Direct no modality effect no modality effect
Indirect visual > auditory visual > auditory
Standard view: modality match should affect only indirect tests for both implicit tests: visual > auditory for both explicit test: visual = auditory
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 19
Competing Predictions
Data-driven Conceptually-driven
Direct visual > auditory no modality effect
Indirect visual > auditory no modality effect
TAP View: modality match should affect data-driven tasks only. priming depends on match between study/test processing match & not on test instructions: for both data-driven tests: visual > auditory for both conceptually-driven tests: visual = auditory
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 20
Blaxton (1989): Results
Priming Effect (v > a) for data-driven tasks only:
• indirect: frag completion• direct: graphemic-cued
recall
Not all indirect tests display priming effect.
• Gen Know (indirect, conceptual): v = A
graphemic-cued recall
fragment completion
free recall
General knowledge
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 21
Transfer Appropriate Processing: Conclusions
• It is the match between processing at study and processing at test that produces priming effects.
• Priming can affect performance on both indirect tests and direct tests.
• Implication: at least for direct tests, performance reflects both implicit and explicit memory
• Question: Is it also the true that indirect tests reflect both implicit and explicit memory?
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 22
Implicit Learning
Learning w/out intention or awareness• Covariation (required for use of availability/familiarity
in judgment)• Frequency-of-occurrence• Sequence Learning
– Fixed sequences
– Rule-based sequences
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 23
Fixed Sequence Learning: Nissen & Bullemer (1987)
Task: Press button under 1 of 4 lights
Sequence Type:
• Repeating– same pattern reports every across every 10 trials
• Random – lights presented at random (no sequence).
Details:
800 10-trial sequences (!)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 24
On each trial a light goes on
Just press corresponding button
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 25
Nissen and Bullemer (1987): Results:
•Repeated: RT rapidly over blocks
• Random: RT little changed over block
•Repeat-condition Ps unable to report sequence
Conclusion: Sequence learning/use was unconscious/implicit
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 26
Rule governed
Another N & B (1987)Exp.
Subjects are sensitive to the presence of the sequence even when they deny knowing that there was a sequence
Violates rules
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 27
Rule-based Sequence Learning (Reber)
Artificial Grammars – General Approach
Use Artificial Grammar to define/generate “grammatical sequences”
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 28
Example of an Artificial Grammar
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 29
Aim: Can people learn “grammatical” rules w/out intention:
Two Groups:• Grammatical– (implicitly) learn sets of grammar-generated letter sequences• Random – learn sets of randomly generated letter sequences
Test: Grammatically judgment:
50% grammatical
50% ungrammatical
Reber (1967)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 30
Results:• Phase-1Learning: grammatical faster than random• Phase-2 Grammatical-judgment task:
– Grammatical group: 79%– Random group: chance
• Grammatical group could not state the rules explicitly
Conclusion:• Grammatical group (implicit) learned the rules/grammar during Task 1•Rules: facilitated string learning; enabled classification
Reber (1967)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 31
Approaches to Implicit Learning
• Rules (Reber)
• Instance Based (Brooks)– Encode examples/instances
– assess similarity between target and stored instances
• Fragment-based (Perruchet)– Learn string fragments (bigrams, trigrams)
– reject strings lacking learned fragments
Problem – knowledge might be explicit.
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 32
Dual-Process Accounts
General View – two sources of info analytic, explicit, controlled nonanalytic, implicit, automaticAssumption – “no process pure tasks”
Interpretation problem for Indirect Tests:• contaminationIssue generalizes to:• direct tests• judgments tasks
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 33
Recognition: Background
Recognition Task (Radvansky, pp. 55-56)
Process of list of items: STIM 1 …. STIMn
Test:“Was STIMx on prior list?”
STIMx on list “OLD”
STIMx not on list “NEW”
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 34
Dual-Process Account of Recognition: Mandler (1980)
Reco judgments based on 2 types of information:• Recollection:
– Judgment based on successful retrieval of information about the study episode
• Familiarity:– Judgment based on assessed familiarity
(fluency).• Evidence:
– Remember/Know Judgments– Process Dissociations
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 35
Remember/Know
Two memory processes
2 phenomenal experiences
• remember = successful recollect of details of prior episode
• know = high levels familiarity, in the absence of recollection
• remember R
• know A
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 36
Remember/Know: General Method
@ study: manipulate some factor likely to manipulate recollection
@ test: recognition
“yes” “no”
r/k
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 37
Remember/Know: An Example – Rajaram (1993)
Exp 1. Levels of Processing• R: semantic > rhyme; K: deep = shallow
Exp 2. Pictures vs words• R: picture > words; K: picture = word
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 38
Remember/Know (Radvansky, pp 307-308)
General Findings:
factors recollection, “remember”
LOP, repetition, short (vs long) delay
Problems:
• poor terminology
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 39
Remember/Know Instructions: Rajaram
(1993)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 40
Remember/Know
General Findings:factors recollection, “remember”LOP, repetition, short (vs long) delay
Problems:• poor terminology• judgmental criteria• r/k as confidence judgment Converging Evidence:
Process dissociation studies
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 41
Process Dissociation; Jacoby (1991)
• Two Independent Process:
recollective (R)
automatic (A)
• Strategy: set processes in opposition
manipulate factor(s) affecting recollection
2 tests:
recollection yes (Inclusion)
recollection no (Exclusion)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 42
Process Dissociation
2 tests:• recollection yes (Inclusion)• recollection no (Exclusion)
Goal: Compute values for R & A• Data:
Inclusion = R + A(1-R)
Exclusion = A(1-R)• Parameter Estimates
R = Inclusion – Exclusion
A = Exclusion / (1-R)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 43
Process Dissociation
Evidence for the role of Dual-Processes in two classes of memory test
1. A Direct Test (recognition)
2. An Indirect Task (fragment completion)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 44
Process Dissociation: Direct Test
• Read a list of words – List 1• Hear a list of words – List 2• Two recognition tests:
– Both tests include List 1, List 2 and novel words.
– Inclusion test: Respond “old” if word was on either list.
– Exclusion test: Respond “old” only if word was on List 2.
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 45
Inclusion test
• Inclusion test: Respond “old” if word was on either list.– Intentional (recollective) process will have a
certain probability of concluding “old” for List 1 words – R
– Automatic process will also have a certain probability of concluding “old” for List 1 words – A
– If either process concludes “old”, the subject will respond “old”
P(old) = R + A (1-R)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 46
Inclusion Condition
List1Word
“OLDR”Recollected
NOT Recollected
High Familiarity “OLDA”
“New”Low
Familiarity
P(OLD) = P(OLDR) + P(OLDA)
R%
1-R%
1-A%
A%
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 47
Exclusion test
• Exclusion test: Respond “old” only if word was on List 2.– Subject will only respond “old” to List 1 words if
two things happen:• The automatic process responds “old” due to a
feeling of familiarity – A• The intentional process fails to recognise the
word (if it had, it would recall it was from List 1) – (1-R)
P(old ) = A(1-R)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 48
Exclusion Condition
List1Word
“NEW”Recollected
NOT Recollected
High Familiarity “OLDA”
“New”Low
Familiarity
P(OLD) = P(OLDA)
R%
1-R%
1-A%
A%
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 49
Dissociating the processesData:• Inclusion: P(old) = R + (1- R)• Exclusion: P(old) = A(1-R)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 50
Inclusion Condition
List1Word
“OLDR”Recollected
NOT Recollected
High Familiarity “OLDA”
“New”Low
Familiarity
P(OLD) = P(OLDR) + P(OLDA)
R%
1-R%
A%
1-A%
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 51
Exclusion Condition
List1Word
“NEW”Recollected
NOT Recollected
High Familiarity “OLDA”
“New”Low
Familiarity
P(OLD) = P(OLDA)
R%
1-R%
1-A%
A%
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 52
Dissociating the processesData:• Inclusion: P(old) = R + (1- R)• Exclusion: P(old) = A(1-R)
Parameter Estimates• Inclusion – Exclusion = R• A = Exclusion / (1-R)
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 53
Jacoby (1991)
Materials:• List 1: READ words• List 2: HEAR wordsTests:• Inclusion
– List 1 “OLD”– List 2 “OLD”
• Exclusion– List 1 “NEW”– List 2 “OLD”
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 54
Jacoby (1991; Exp 3)Two recognition tests (% “OLD” for READ words):
• Inclusion test P(old) = 0.48• Exclusion test P(old) = 0.37*
– R = Inclusion – Exclusion = 0.11– A = Exclusion / (1-R) = 0.37 / 0.89 = 0.42
*in exclusion condition, “OLD” are errors
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 55
Jacoby (1991; Exp 3)Two recognition tests (% “OLD” for READ words):
• Inclusion test P(old) = 0.48• Exclusion test P(old) = 0.37*
– R = Inclusion – Exclusion = 0.11– A = Exclusion / (1-R) = 0.37 / 0.89 = 0.42
*in exclusion condition, “OLD” are errors
Psyco 350 Lec #11– Slide 56
Jacoby (1991; Exps 2 & 3)Implication: When recollection is knocked out, P(OLD) in exclusion condition should equal A
Exclusion test w/ digit monitoring task (monitor for 3 odd digits in a row).
Expectation: Recollection eliminated by divided attention (digit task) – R = 0
Prediction: Exclusion = A(1-R) = 0.42 (1-0) = 0.42
Results: Exclusion w/ divided attention: Prob(Old) = 0.43