国外人类记忆.pptVIP

* 0 = no info available for that feature * Simulations done in studies show that the feature model can predict these effects: Based on overwriting aspect of model - #4 due to more features to encode in longer words so more errors possible Recall that the suffix effect is a reduction of the recency effect when an auditory item follows the last item in the list. * Recall that the irrelevant speech effect is where irrelevant background speech reduces recall of studied items - similar irrelevant speech should interfere more with memory in this model * Parsimony is one of the canons of the scientific method. * * * Study: 2, 5, 3, 8 Test: 5 - Y or N * Primacy due to retrieval from LTM * More rehearsal = better chance of transfer to LTM * More rehearsal = better chance of transfer to LTM * We’ll talk about working memory and the processing models next time. * * * * * Episodic buffer = back-up storage - allows for recall when other systems are engaged with other tasks * * * * May be two parts to VS pad - one for visual info (e.g., color, etc,) and one for spatial info (e.g., orientation, location, etc.) * * Episodic buffer = back-up storage - allows for recall when other systems are engaged with other tasks * * Episodic buffer = back-up storage - allows for recall when other systems are engaged with other tasks * This model of the phonological loop is consistent with several memory effects: * Word list: rhinoceros (4), zinc (1), gorilla (3), tuberculosis (5), measles (2), calcium (3), uranium (4), carbon (2), hippopotamus (5), mumps (1) Count backward from 756 * Word list: rhinoceros (4), zinc (1), gorilla (3), tuberculosis (5), measles (2), calcium (3), uranium (4), carbon (2), hippopotamus (5), mumps (1) Count backward from 756 * We talked about this last time in terms of studies that compared letters that looked or sounded alike (Conrad) and words that had similar meanings or sounded alike (Baddeley). * Auditory task = repeating “the” Also lowers auditory recall