1335327
| Question | Answer |
| Problems with modal models of memory? | eg Atkinson & Shiffrin ('68) >Assumption - to achieve L/T learning info has to pass thru STM >Assumption - just having info in STM guarantees it moving to LTM. Evidence shows retention not related to how long info held in STM but what you do with it - eg levels of processing (Craik and Lockhart '72) Neuropsychological: >LTM amnesic patients (eg HM) don't acquire new info yet have normal STM >STM amnesic patients (eg KF - Shallice & Warrington) poor digit span, normal LTM >Impaired STM should impair LTM & vice-versa Estimates of STM capacity vary w/ no explanation |
| Type of experimental method used by Baddeley & Hitch ('74)? | To try and mimic deficits seen in neuropsychological cases Dual task method - assume limited S/T store - more it's utilised, less resource available for other task >If 2 tasks use same component, they cant be performed successfully together >If 2 tasks use different components, it should be possible to perform them as well together as separately x2 tasks verbal vs x1 task verbal & x1 task visuo-spatial Ps did reasoning Qs whilst trying to hold up to 6 digit number in head Longer time to answer Q with longer digit |
| Initial 3 components of Baddeley & Hitch WM model? | Central Executive - controls: Articulatory Loop Visuo-spatial Sketchpad |
| Alternate WM model? | Cowan ('88) WM = activated component of LTM WM performance affected by what we know Agrees w/ B&H re central executive (ie SAS) |
| Example of 3 components working together (hint - windows) | How many windows does your house have? CE = strategy & running it VSS = image of house PL = counting windows |
| Phonemic similarity? | Harder to remember list of words (in order) when they sound the same Articulatory rehearsal loop - store 2-3 speech items Central exec. - process info & store while processing Processing & storage compete for limited resource NB - if more words to learn and longer to learn them - meaning more important Suggests PL interested in sound not meaning |
| Word length effect? | Assume sub-vocal rehearsal >Can remember more shorter words than longer ones >Those who speak faster can remember more words >Faster spoken languages remember more words - Naveh-Benjamin & Ayres ('86) Rehearsal period = 2 seconds |
| Articulatory suppression? | Part of dual-task method Having P repeat "blah" whilst trying to remember word list Stops rehearsal - Eliminates: Word length effect Phonemic similarity effect |
| Baddeley's personal experience of visuo-spatial sketchpad performance? | Driving whilst listening to football game (in the US) Gets engrossed, car starts weaving! Switched off radio & okay Tested in UK - effect of holding visual image is inconsistent w/ motor task |
| Developmental aspects of phonological loop? | Young children = poorer recall spoken stimuli w/ long names than same stimuli w/ pictures - Hitch Baddeley et al ('98) - Children's auditory span & vocabulary size correlated Gathercole et al ('97) - PL capacity good predictor of vocabulary problems BUT most studies correlational Linked to learning to read - Dyslexics poor digit span & performance on PL tests |
| Theoretical issues with phonological working memory? | Model doesn't explain irrelevant speech Lovatt et al - word length effect not related to spoken duration. Can be eliminated if complexity controlled for Hulme et al ('84) - Young children have word length effect but not yet learned rehearsal strategies Cowan et al ('92) - word length effect caused by output delays (w/o rehearsal) |
| Key WM dates | 1968 - Atkinson & Shiffrin: modal model 1974 - Baddeley & Hitch: tripartite model 1984 - Baddeley: renames articulatory loop to phonological loop (phonological store & continuous sub-vocalisation process) 1986 - Baddeley - adopts Normal & Shallice concept of Supervisory Attentional System (SAS) for central executive 1996 - Baddeley - abandons storage in executive, fractionates it into modules for attention 2000 - Baddeley - multi-modal Episodic Buffer added |
| Evidence for fractionation of Central Executive (1996) | Alzheimer's patients - concurrent tasks hard vs normal aging Miiyake et al ('00) 3 executive functions/processes partially overlapping Baddeley's 1) Inhibition function 2) Shifting function 3) Updating function Baddeley function - dual-task processing More research req'd |
| Coherence & binding problem? | WM model fractionated How does info from sub-systems combine? (Jones '93) Remembering words: 5-6 individual words; more if part of a sentence Where are they held together & how? Baddeley ('00) >Multi-modal episodic buffer >Combines info from sub-systems >Temporary storage - allow sub-systems to interact with LTM & perception >Output = episodes/chunks (3-4 chunk capacity) >Seat of conscious awareness |
| Evolutionary purpose of Phonological Loop? | Language acquisition Neuropsych evidence: Baddeley et al ('88) - Patient PV, poor digit span, normal intelligence & laguage Not able to learn Russian/Italian word pairs Suggest PL req'd for learning language Experiment: Papagno ('92) - Adults learn word/non-word pairs; increase phonemic similarity or # syllables in non-words impairs learning Word pairs = no effect Suggest PL req'd to learn novel words Individual differences: Service ('92) PL capacity correlates w/ vocab in 2nd language |
| Daneman & Carpenter ('84) | >Individual differences in WM & language >Measure storage combined w/ manipulation = WM span >Read sentences & remember last word of each >Complex: typical span = 3 Predicts: >comprehension >learning new computer language >attention focus >performance in std intelligence test |
| Logie ('95) - Visuo-spatial Sketchpad | 2 separate systems: Visual Cache - info re visual form & colour Inner Scribe - spatial & movement info Beschin ('97) - patient NL's performance consistent w/ someone w/ selective damage to visual cache |
| Visuo-spatial sketchpad tests? | Corsi Blocks test (Corsi '72) - P follows & copies sequence of blocks Measure of visuo-spatial WM span; similar to digit span for PL WM capacity |
| Evidence for the visuo-spatial sketchpad? | De Renzi & Nichelli ('75) - Corsi span & auditory digit span could be impaired independently in patients Baddeley & Lieberman ('80) - visual mnemonics disrupted by spatial task NOT by visual task Farah et al ('88) - Patient LH = spatial abilities better than visual Williams Syndrome - impairment of visuo-spatial processing but normal verbal processing (Bellugi et al '94) |
| WM model - current status | >One of most successful models in cognitive psychology. Widely cited each year >Lot know about phonological loop/store >Little known about visuo-spatial sketchpad & its role in movement & imagery >CE still focus of work >No attempt to explain automatic processing >Link with LTM - other than an interface? |
| WM & garden path sentences? | >Assumption - multiple interpretations of ambiguous sentences held in WM (Just and Carpenter, 1992) >Just and Carpenter: individuals with low WM capacity less able to maintain multiple interpretations than individuals with high WM capacity >Alternative theory - comprehension draws on more specialized resources than WM (e.g. Caplan and Waters, 1999). |
| Evidence suggesting the need for the Episodic Buffer? | >Tulving - Bridge playing amnesic >Prose recall - normal & amnesic Ps >Resistance in serial recall (of visually presented numbers) to articulatory suppression |
| Consciousness & the Episodic Buffer? | >LTM & Central Executive major areas >WM = useful empirical tool w/ limitations >Previous model - central exec key role in binding problem & integration BUT it doesn't have a store >Previous model - no means of storing complex images > big role for LTM >Suggests further store capable of getting info from slave stores & LTM & holding it in integrated form |
| Central Executive - central workspace? | >Towse et al ('98) >Test kids reading, operational & counting spans w/ parallel testing >Hypothesis - as test progresses more storage req'd = less resource for processing >Results - no decline in processing >Alternative hypothesis - rather than share attention between processing & storage, attention switched to/from processing & storage >Test - change time intervals for storing info >Results - Spans lower as time interval increased >Similar effects in adults when manipulate order of presentation (Towse '00) >BUT Hitch el at ('01) weak tendency for processing to slow as storage load increases SUGGESTS mixed model w/ attention switching & resource sharing WM & central executive not simple construct - linked to fractionation of central exec. |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.