{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Memory 3 Spr08 - Retrieval Is"Forgetting really just a...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Retrieval Is “Forgetting” really just a retrieval problem? I. Explicit Retrieval A. Recall 1. Free Recall : --spontaneous retrieval --subjective organization (Bousfield; 1953) 2. Cued Recall --provide some retrieval cue (e.g., first letter, category hints; first word of paired associates)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
B. Recognition 1. Absolute judgment -“Was this item in the original stimulus list?” 2. Forced choice recognition Shepard (1967) 540 words : ½ high frequency ( child, office ) ½ very low freq. ( ferule, wattled ) Recognition test : Hi F Target – Hi F Foil 82.1% Hi F Target – Low F Foil 86.7% Low F Target – Hi F Foil 93% Low F Target – Low F Foil 92% Word Frequency Effect 612 sentences : 89% recognition 612 color pictures : 2 hours: 99.7% 3 days: 92% 7 days: 87% 120 days: 57.7% Picture Superiority Effect
Background image of page 2
3. Continuous running recognition task --Implicit Associative Response II. Implicit Retrieval A. Relearning --Ebbinghaus: calculate “savings:” Number of trials to learn information originally, divided by number of trials to relearn (E.g., 22/11 = 50% savings) --Burtt (1941) & Oedipus Tyrranus Each 20-line passage read 90 Consecutive days to his son (beginning at 15 mos. to 33 mos.) Son later tested on trials to recite OLD vs. NEW 20-line passages Savings at age : 8.5 years: 27% fewer trials 14: 14% 18: 0%
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
B. Fragment (or Word Stem) Completion --“CANOE” appears on list; subject does not recall “canoe” --when then asked to complete the fragment CAN_____ with the first word that comes to mind, gives “CANOE” (& other words on list) more often than chance C. “Guilty Knowledge” Test --show different galvanic skin response (GSR) to familiar stimuli, even if claimed that person doesn’t remember the face/information
Background image of page 4
III. Encoding Specificity Phenomena A. Encoding Specificity 1. Fisher & Craik (1977) --Identical retrieval cues yield best recall Orienting sentence : “Does [capitalized word] rhyme with pail?” sleet HAIL Data for Rhyming Orienting Task only : Identical (rhymes with pail ) .24 Similar (rhymes with bail ) .18 Different (associated with sleet ) .16
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
B. Internal & External Retrieval Cues 1. Context effects : advantage to being in same room in which one learned the material Godden & Baddeley (1975) --36 unrelated words (2 & 3 syllable) --words listened to on tape, copy 15 digits, 4 minute delay Recall Environ. Learning Dry Wet Environ. Dry 13.5 8.6 Wet 8.4 11.4 --BUT, no differences in forced choice recognition
Background image of page 6
-- Context re-instatement : Smith, Glenberg, & Bjork (1978) found that simply reminding people to think of a room where they had learned material facilitated memory 2. State-dependent memory : advantage to being in the same physical/psychological state as when one learned the info.
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 8
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}