The Contemporary Nature of Remembering

1
The Demise of theMULTI-STORE MODEL Structural
Approaches to Memory are OUT
2
One Memory or Two?
Forgetting in the Short-Term may be the result of
DECAY Forgetting in the Long-Term is the result
of INTERFERENCE
3
Properties of theShort-Term Store

• Capacity 7 or 2 Bits of Information
• Duration Up to 30 seconds
• Code Auditory or Acoustic
• Forgetting Decay

4
Code in STS is Auditory/Acoustic?
Brooks (1968) People asked to memorize a
sentence A bird in the hand is worth two in
the bush.
5
Brooks (1968)
Keeping the sentence in mind, people asked to
indicate Yes or No whether each word was a
Noun Two Methods of Response Group 1 Verbal
(say Y or N) Group 2 Visual (Point at Ys or
Ns on Paper)
6
Brooks (1968)
Results Visual Response Group performed FASTER
than Verbal Response Group Makes Sense Auditory
Code for the sentence in STS interfered with
Verbal Responding
7
Brooks (1968)
People asked to keep in mind a block letter F. F
8
Brooks (1968)
People asked to 1). Imagine starting at the
top corner and traveling along the outside 2).
For each corner indicate whether it is an outside
or inside corner.
9
Brooks (1968)
Two Methods of Response Group 1 Verbal (say
Y or N) Group 2 Visual (Point at Ys or Ns on
Paper)
10
Brooks (1968)
Results VERBAL Response Group performed FASTER
than VISUAL Response Group What? Auditory Code
in STS should cause interference with Verbal
Responding
11
Brooks (1968)
Results VERBAL Response Group performed FASTER
than VISUAL Response Group Block letter F must
be held in a visual representation causing
interference w/ visual responding
12
Properties of theShort-Term Store

• Capacity 7 or 2 Bits of Information
• Duration Up to 30 seconds
• Code Auditory or Acoustic
• Forgetting Decay

13
What about Millers Magic Number?
Digit Span Task People can hold 7 /-2 Bits of
Information in STS But what is a bit of
information, really?
14
Chunking
People can use meaning to chunk information into
larger groupings
FBICIADVDNHLUSAKFCWWF versus
HNEWTXFDVKPLPRQJBDRGS
15
7 /- 2 of What?
One never knows It depends on the way you
think about the information in consciousness ENCO
DING VARIABILITY AGAIN!
16
Properties of theShort-Term Store

• Capacity 7 or 2 Bits of Information
• Duration Up to 30 seconds
• Code Auditory or Acoustic
• Forgetting Decay

17
30 Second Duration?
Who Cares? Its interference that causes
forgetting anyway. Just like in the long term.
18
Properties of theShort-Term Store

• Capacity 7 or 2 Bits of Information
• Duration Up to 30 seconds
• Code Auditory or Acoustic
• Forgetting Decay

19
Information Transfer from STS to LTS?
Rundus and Atkinson (1970) REHEARSAL moves
information from STS to LTS But wait
20
Information Transfer from STS to LTS?
Rundus (1977) On a series of trials 1). Gave
people 2 digits to remember 2). Distracted them
by repeating one word over and over for 4, 8, or
12 seconds 3). Asked to recall the 2 Digits
21
Information Transfer from STS to LTS?
Rundus (1977) At the end Surprise Recall
Test!! Report all of the words that were
treated as distractors before.
22
Rundus (1977)
If Rehearsal transfers info from STS to
LTS? Words repeated more should be remembered
better.
23
Rundus (1977)
RESULT Number of times rehearsing words HAD NO
EFFECT on probability of recall
CONCLUSION Mere REHEARSAL is ineffective for
promoting later remembering
24
But what about H.M.?
Severe Anterograde Amnesia No ability to remember
events (except very recent ones) after his
surgery No link allowing transfer from STS to
LTS?
25
Milner (1962)
Had H.M. trace shapes presented on a computer
monitor EASY? Not allowed to look directly at
his drawing Had to monitor his progress with a
mirror
26
Milner (1962)
With practice, H. M. became a mirror-tracing
expert BUT he denied any knowledge of
having done mirror-tracing before Conclusion H.M
.s experiences are creating long-term
representations
27
What about the Sensory Store?

• Partial-Report Advantage only occurred when the
  cue to report was based on physical differences
• NOT when it was based on differences in meaning
• Only PHYSICAL information
• (not meaning) is held in Sensory Store
• RIGHT?

28
Merikle (1980)
No Partial-Report Advantage if items that differ
in MEANING? BUT What if the Whole-Report Group
has some advantage that reduces the
Partial-Report Advantage?
29
Merikle (1980)
Whole-Report Group Always knows what they need to
report EVERYTHING UNFAIR ADVANTAGE!
30
Merikle (1980)
Partial-Report Group Doesnt know what to report
until AFTER the letters are gone Lets make
uncertainty equal for Whole-Report and
Partial-Report
31
Merikle (1980)
F
2
7
4
D
J
W
9
6
3
T
Y
32
Merikle (1980)
Flashed LettersNumbers then HIGH TONE - Report
Only Letters MEDIUM TONE - Report Only
Numbers LOW TONE Report Everything Whole-Report
determined after the letters are flashed (just
like Partial-Report)
33
Merikle (1980)
Results Partial-Report Advantage for reporting
only numbers or only letters BUT a smaller one
than if physical differences (e.g., colour) are
the basis for partial-report
34
Merikle (1980)
Conclusion Seems like MEANING is
processed gradually across time Rather than
magically being accessed by transfer from one
store to another
35
The Point
Memory for a flash (e.g., of letters) is not
QUALITATIVELY different from memory for events
that last longer (e.g., for a Brown/PetersonPeter
son CVC) The Difference is QUANTITATIVE (Its a
matter of degree)
36
What about Attention?
Multi-Store Modelists thought of ATTENTION as a
BOTTLENECK or FILTER for processing (i.e., it
allows one message into STS, but not others)
37
What about Attention?
Kahneman (1974) Attention is not a filter its
a pool of resources
38
Kahnemans Resource Allocation Model of Attention

• Attention can be divided among different sources
  of information.
• Attentional resources are limited and available
  resources vary across time (e.g., due to
  arousal).
• Resources get allocated to different sources of
  information depending on disposition and current
  intentions.
• Degree that people process a message depends on
  how the amount of available resources.