The scientific study of the mind
Subject matter, Emotion, Reasoning, Problem solving, Decision making, Memory - remembering, Recognition, Understanding language, Categorization, Perception, Attention, Conciousness
No easily defined boundries, Cognitive neuropsychology, Cognitive neuroscience, Lingustics, Artificial Intelligence
Methods, Experimentation, Cognitive neuroscience, Models
3.1 Origins of cognitive psychology, Philosophy, Decartes, Mind/Body problem, Locke, Wundt, Conciousness, Introspection, Objective measures, Ebbinghaus, Memory, Perception, Experimental method, Independent variables, Dependent variables, Willam James (Funtionalist), Conciousness and behaviour
3.2 Behaviourism and cognitive psychology, John B. Watson, 'behaviourism... holds that the subject of human psychology is the behaviour of the human being', Applied psychology, Scientific and objective: Must be observable, Edward Thorndike, Skinner, Hans Eysenk, Principles of learning, Stimulus-Response (SR) chains, Does not offer an account of higher mental processes
3.3 The problems with behaviourism, Language production, Lashley, Chomsky, Children learn language too easily to be relying upon SR chains, Adults - 2nd language, Ungrammatical examples does not hinder learning of correct grammar., Intelligence does not influence language aquisition., Tolman, Rats in a maze learn location of food not just the route., Cognitive map
3.4 Cognition and the brain, Classical neuropsychology, Possible functions of different brain functions, Cognitive neuropsychology, Possible cognitive components of cognition, Henry Molaison (HM), Memory dissociation, Experimentation vs Cognitive Neuropsychology (CN), Similarities, Assumes cognitive systems are similar so can generalise findings, Assumes cognition can be fractionated, Uses artificial tests such as memorising a word list, Differences, Experiments use large samples, CN often uses single-subject design., Exp. often collect specific quantitative data. CN gathers rich data, both quantitative and qualitative., Participants give informed consent to exp. In CN brain damage presents potental ethical issue., Exp are tightly controlled. In CN subject selection and participant history may bias results.
3.5 Computers and the mind, Alan Turing, Turing test (The imitation game), John McCarthy, Artificial Intelligence (AI), David Marr, Vision, Functional levels of a cognitive sytem, Computational, Algorithmic, Implementational
Can we scientifically study unobservably mental processes and representations?, Science often invokes unobservable entities such as fields (gravity) and energies.
Models, Predictive power, Evaluation through testing, Computer modelling, Makes complexity managable, Simulates effects and varifies behaviour, Tests internal consistencey of the model, When is a model good?, Extent to which the model fits human behaviour, Validated by psychological theory, Parsimony - Ockham's Razor
4.1 Cognitive neuroscience and the mind, Contributions of imaging, Identifies functional areas of the brain, Problems of imaging, May not advance understanding of cognition
Areas covered in Tim's notes that are not directly included in this current chapter
• The purpose of Attention is to bind features. Discuss. • In what circumstances may we be unable to give an accurate account of briefly displayed visual information? Discuss the theoretical implications of such findings. • We become aware of only a small proportion of the information registered by the senses. Why is this? • Do attentional processes operate serially or in parallel?
Attention is the process that gives rise to concious awareness
1. Auditory attention, 1.1 Seperating sounds, Sound shadowing Intesity cues, Wave position, Wavelength, 1.2 Attending to sounds, Spotlight of attention, Broadbent (1954), Dichotic listening, Echoic, Parallel, Serially, 2.1 Research study Application of research, Pilots enabled to use of dichotic listening to seperate messages from interference., Naish (1990), Stereo imaging improves reaction times to warning messages, 1.3 Eavesdropping on the unattended message, Cocktail party effect, Treismen (1960), Attenuation, Filter, Shadowing, Priming, Lexical decision task, Corteen and Wood (1972), Galvantic Skin Response (GSR), Deutsch and Deutsch (1963), Suggested that all messages receive the same processing, Norman (1968), Unattend messages activate semantic memories
2. Visual attention, 2.1 Knowing about unseen information, Sperling (1950), Partial report superiority effect, Iconic memory, Info captured in parallel then serial processing, Unselected material is forgotten, Backward masking, Stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), Evett and Humphreys (1981), Cheesman and Merikle (1984), Pecher et al. (2002), 2.2 Towards a theory of parallel processing, Coltheart (1980), Semantic activation, Eposodic activation, 2.3 Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP), Turvey (1973), Integration (peripheral masking), Interruption (central masking), Broadbent and Broadbent (1987), Vogel (1998), Cotext mismatch, Refractory period, Attentional Blink (AB), Raymond et al. (1992), Giesbrecht and Di Lollo (1998), 2.4 Masking and attention, Merikle and Joordens (1997), Perception without awareness (eg. Masking studies), Perception without attention (eg. Dichotic listening)
3. Integrating information in clearly seen displays, 3.1 Serial and parallel search, Treismen, Single dimension stimuli can be processed in parallel, Multi-dimensional stimuli are processed in serial, Feature integration theory, Integration requires attention, Parietal damage hinders integration, Influential but does not explain all exp obs., 3.2 Non-target effects, Duncan and Humphreys (1989), 3.3 The 'flanker' effect, Shaffer and LaBerge (1979), Stroop (1935), 2.2 Research study Stroop effect, Dudley et al. (2002), Emotional Stroop task, Broadbent & Gathercole (1990), Priming effect, Gellatly et al. (1999), Sudden visual stimuli captures attention, All stimuli must be present to demonstrate parallel processing effects
4. Attention and distraction, 4.1 The effects of irrelevant speech, Jones (1999), Impacts serial recall, Buchner et al. (1996), Meaning has no additional impact, Jones et al. (1990), Foreign language or reversed English is no less disruptive, White noise shows minimal impact, Jones and Macken (1995), The importance of difference, Rhyming words less disruptive than non-rhyming words, Jones (1999), One stream of three syllables, Stereo seperation, Three streams of one syllables, 4.2 Attending across modalities, Ventriloquism efect, Driver (1966), Dichotic listening: audio seperation mediated by stimulus position within the visual field., Spence (2002), Visual attention mediated by stimulus position within the auditory field, Practical impact - Mobile phones
5. The neurology of attention, fMRI shows audio and visual areas connected, 5.1 Effects of brain damage, Sensory neglect (hemispatial neglect), Example of visual neglect http://www.fizyka.umk.pl/~duch/ref/00/00-how-brain/neglect.jpg, Driver and Halligan (1991), Rotating silhouettes of chess pieces, Neglect can be object related, Bisiach and Luzzatti (1978), Neglect occuring in mental reconstruction of visual memories, Balint's syndrome, Both parietal lobes damaged, Difficulty shifting attention, Humphreys (2001), Suggests feature binding occurs at different procedural stages and different locations in the brain., 5.2 Event-related potentials, Woldorff et al. (1993), ERP's evoked by sound, Signals from an unattended ear are attenuated (not eliminated).
6. Concluding thoughts, Allport (1987), Directs action, Enables focusing upon one stimulus at a time., Automaticity, Removing/reducing attention for action, Novice vs expert drivers, 2.3 Research study Hypnosis, time and attention, Naish (2003), Crawford et al. (1998), Toleration of pain, Szechtman et al. (1998), Hallucinations, Naish (2001, 2002), Temporal perception, Gray (1995), Theory of conciousness, 'Snapshots' of the environment creates concious awareness
Why visual attention and awareness are different Lamme (2002)
Chapter notes by Tim Holyoake, http://www.tenpencepiece.net/
Chapter authors, Dr Graham Pike, Dr Graham Edgar
Will not be directly examined
TMA 01 Option 1 Evaluate the evidence that visual perception involves bottom-up and top-down processing., Cut off 8th March 2011, 2000 word limit
1. Introduction, Perception is the process of constructing a description of the surrounding world, 1.1 Perceiving and sensing, Atherton (2002), Sensation, The detection of energy in the environment via the senses, Perception, The process of extracting meaning from sensory information, 1.2 The eye, Lens, Retina, Cones, Detects colour and detail, Rods, Enables vision in low light, 1.3 Approaches to perception, Milner and Goodale (1998), Action, Recognition, Flow of information, Top-down processing, Bottom-up processing
2. Gestalt approach to perception, The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, Perceptual organisation, Aksentijevic et al., (2001), Closure, Good continuation, Proximity, Similarity, Two organisational priciples may conflict eg. similarity and proximity., Sometimes possible to switch between competing perceptions., Koffka (1935), Law of Prananz, Criticized for using simplified stimuli
3. Gibson's theory of perception, Gibson (1966), Direct perception, Cognition NOT required, Action not internal representation is the goal of perception, Cannot be fully explored using lab exp., Indirect perception, Criticised for not explaining how 'information is picked up', 3.1 An ecological approach, Air theories, Artificial, Pictorial stimuli, Isolated, No background information, Two dimensional, Planes, Visualisation, Ground theory, Real, True life experiences, Integrated, Enviromental cues, Three dimensional, Surfaces and textures, Seeing, 3.2 The optic array and invariant information, Ambient optic array, Invariants, Sedgwick (1973), Horizon ratio relation, Texture gradients, Density, Perspective, Compression, Lack of texture causes ambiguity, Necker cube, 3.3 Flow in the ambient optic array, Varient information, Motion, Objects, Observer, Motion parallax, Occlusion, Flow patterns, Pole, 3.4 Affordances and resonance, Affordance, Use, Enables action, No requirement for cognition, Criticism - What are the underlying processes?, Resonance, No requirement for memory, Criticisim - How do we learn from mistakes?
4. Marr's theory of perception, David Marr (1982), Bottom-up theory, Modular approach, Information processing perspective, Focused upon computational theory and algorithmic analysis, Little to say regarding neural implementation, Object recognition is the goal of perception, The grey level description, Module, Depolarization, The primal sketch, Raw primal sketch, Marr and Hildreth (1980), Gaussian blurring, Primitives, Edge-segments, Bars, Terminations, Blobs, Full primal sketch, Grouping, Clustering, Curvilinear aggregation, Place tokens, The 2 1/2D sketch, Information from modules is aggregated, Stereopsis, Viewer-centered, 3D object-centered description, Evaluating Marr's approach, Supports, Computer simulation provides some support for the formation of the raw primal sketch from intesity mapping, Depth cues ARE processed by different modules in th 2 1/2D sketch, Young et al (1993), Challenges, Formation of full primal sketch NOT limited to 2D groupings, Enns and Rensick (1990), Some grouping strategies use 3D, Does NOT seperate action and object recognition, Wade and Bruce (2001), Seperate visual pathways in the brain for 'what and 'where'
5. Constructivist approaches to perception, What you see depends upon what you know, Top-down, Stored knowledge guides perception, Sensory information is incomplete, It is necessary to construct a perception of the world, Irvin Rock (1977, 1983, 1997), Richard Gregory (1980), Perceptual hypotheses, Impoverised figures, Street (1931), Sensory info does not change Knowledge affects perception., Incorrect perceptions, Mask of Hor, Back, Front, 'Most likely' hypotheses, Penrose and Penrose (1958), Penrose triangle, Open questions, How are hypotheses generated?, What stops hypotheses generation?, How is a hypotheses judged to be correct?, How can we know something is wrong and still perceive it incorrectly?
6. Physiology of the human visual system, Shapley (1995), 6.1 From the eye to brain, Ventral stream, 'What' system, Pattern discrimination, Object recognition, Dorsal stream, 'Where' system, Position of objects, Movement of objects, 6.2 The dorsal and ventral streams, Schneider (1967, 1969), Ungerleider and Mishkin (1982), 'What is it?' - Pattern discriminations, 'Where is it?' - Orientation in space, Rao et al. (1997), Streams appear to converge in the prefrontal cortex, Courtney et al. (1996), Evidence that the dorsal-ventral distiction is maintained, Milner and Goodale (1995), Distiction between ventral and dorsal stream NOT straightforward, Patient DF, Ventral stream not processing sensory input, Could NOT perceive size, Perception did guide action (dorsal stream intact), Bridgeman (1992), Neisser (1994), Norman (2001, 2002), Dual process approach, Ventral system - Recognition Dorsal system - Visually guided behaviour, Goodale and Milner (1992), The dorsal system receives information faster than the ventral system, Bullier and Nowak (1995), Ventral system better at processing fine detail, Baizer et al (1991), Dorsal system better at processing motion, Logothesis (1994), Ventral system is knowledged based, using stored representations for recognition Dorsal system only has short term storage, Bridgeman et al. (1997), Creem and Proffitt (1998), We are more conscious of ventral stream functioning, Ho (1998), 6.3 The relationship between visual pathways and theories of perception, Ventral, Marr and the constructivists, Perception for recognition, Dorsal, Gibson, Perception for action, Ecological approach - No need for memory, 6.4 A dual-process approach?, Synergistic and interconnected, Is learning transferred, or acquired in parallel?, Binsted and Carlton (2002), Skill aquisition, Fitts (1964), Driving, Ventral stream - Learning, Dorsal stream - Automaticity, 6.5 Combining bottom-up and top-down processing, Is there evidence that perception contains BOTH bottom-up and top-down processing?, Enns and Di Lollo (1997), Dissimilar stimuli producing masking effect, Enns and Di Lollo (2000), Re-entrant processing, Felleman and Van Essen (1991), Re-entrant pathways, Hupe et l. (1998), Re-entrant pathways could be used to check perceptual hypothesis
What’s new in visual masking? Enns J.T. & DiLollo, V. (2000)
Chapter notes by Tim Holyoake, http://www.tenpencepiece.net/
Chapter authors, Dr Graham Pike, Dr Nicola Brace
Will not be directly examined
TMA 01 Option 2 Evaluate that face recognition involves processes that are different from those used in other types of recognition., Cut off 8th March 2011, 2000 word limit
1. Introduction, Simple model of visual recognition, Constuct descriptions based on retinal images, Store descriptions, Compare what is seen to what is stored, Enable recognition that is independent of viewing angle, 1.1 Recognition in the wider context of cognition, Humphreys and Bruce (1989), Early visual processing, eg - full primal sketch, Marr (1982), Viewpoint-dependent object descriptions, Similar to 2 1/2 D sketch, Perceptual classification (Perception), Recognition, Semantic classification (Categorization), Naming
2. Different types of recognition, 2.1 Object and face recognition, Humphreys and Bruce (1989), Naming, Between-category, Object recognition, Within-category, Face recognition, Unique issues, Internal features of a face can move, Move can express emotion and social cues, Faces can change over time., Different types, Familiar/unfamilar faces, Pike et al. (2000), E-fit, Pike et al. (2001), Id parade, Kemp et al. (2001), Video Id parade, Face/Emotion, Young et al. (1993), Specific process for recognizing emotions., Seperate from recognizing identity, 2.2 Active processing - recognizing objects by touch, Gibson (1986), Perception is an active process of interacting with the environment., Touch, Haptic information, Info from touch receptors, Feedback, Kinesthesis, Proprioception, Lederman and Klatzky (1987), Exploratory procedures, Lederman and Klatzky (1990), Particular procedures elicit specic info, Lederman et al., (1993), Visual recognition quicker and more accurate in processing info about shape, particularly complex 3D shape, 2.3 Recognizing two-dimensional objects, Template matching, Problems dealing with stimulus variation., Feature recognition theories, Pandemonium system, Demons, Selfridge (1959), Morse code, Neisser (1967), Alphanumeric, Does not capture relationships between features, Structural descriptions, Can be applied to 3D objects, 2.4 Object-centred vs viewer-centered descriptions, Marr (1982), Viewer-centered description, 2 1/2 D sketch, 3D object-centered description, Independent of viewpoint
3. Recognizing three-dimensional objects, Marr and Nishihara (1978), Canonical coordinate frame, 3.1 Marr and Nishihara's theory, Define a central axis, Generalized cones, This restriction seen as a potential weakness in the theory, Using 2 1/2 D sketch work out the objects shape., Marr (1977), Occluding contours, Contour generator, Marr (1982), Each point on the contour generator corresponds to a different point on the object., Any two points that are close together on the contour in an image are also close together on the contour generator of the object., All the points on the contour generator lie in a single plane (i.e. are planar)., Locate axis/axes, Marr and Nishihara (1978), Component axes, Concavity, Convexity, Primitives, Cataogue of 3D models, 3.2 Evaluating Marr and Nishihara's theory, Evidence that axis location is central to generation of 3D descriptions, Lawson and Humphreys (1996), Demonstrated that the central axis is important in recognition, Warrington and Taylor (1978), Brain damage preventing recognition from unusal viewpoints., Humphreys and Riddoch (1984), Axis more important than key features, Biederman's theory, Biederman (1987a), Geons, 3D description from 2D image using key features, 'Non-accidental' properties, Curvilinearity, Parallelism, Cotermination, Symmetry, Collinearity, Misinterpretation, Bicycle wheel, Supporting evidence, Importance of concavity, Is an object-centred description necessary?, Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993), Repetition priming, Object centered descriptions ARE generated, Geons are used, Challenges, Bulthoff and Elderman (1992), Complex objects NOT recognized from unusual viewpoints, Tarr (1995), Recognition is not exclusively dependent upon object-centered descriptions, Viewpoint-dependent descriptions used for some tasks, Within-category descrimination
4. Face recognition, Tanaka (2001), Likened to expert recognition, 4.1 Recognizing familiar and unfamiliar faces, Bahrick et al (1975), High levels of recognition of school friends over 35 yr period., Bahrick (1984), Teachers recognition of students less effective over time., Yin (1969), High levels of immeadiate recognition, Bruce (1982), Viewpoint and expression impacts recognition, Makes distinction between 'recognizing a specific picture of a face' and everyday 'face recognition', 4.1 Recognizing unfamiliar faces in matching tasks, Kemp et al (1997), Failure to match shoppers to credit cards, Matching unfamiliar faces is difficult, Bruce et al (1999), Poor matching of similar images, Burton et al 2001), Machine recognition more effective, Kilgour and Lederman (2002), Touch as good as vison.
5. Modelling in face recognition, Young et al. (1985), Diary study, Mistakes in reconizing people, Face must be recognized before semantic info and name can be retreived., Semantic info can be retrieved without name, Name never recalled without semantic info, Model of person recognition, Hay and Young (1982), Young et al. (1985), Bruce and Young (1986), Functional model of face recognition, Face recognition units (FRUs), Person identity nodes (PINs), Name generation, Cognitive system, Supporting laboratory evidence, Hay et al. (1991), Semantic information is retrieved before a person’s name., Johnston and Bruce (1990), Judging familiarity occurs before semantic classiﬁcation and that a person’s name is accessed last., 5.1 A connectionist model of face recognition, IAC model, Burton et al. (1990), Burton and Bruce (1993), Word Recognition Units (WRUs), Face Recognition Units (FRUs), Name Recognition Units (NRUs), Personal Identity Nodes (PINs), Semantic Information Units (SIUs), Lexical output, Excitation and activation accounts for priming effects, Accounts for laboratory findings and everyday errors
6. Neuropsychological evidence, Prosopagnosia, Exceptionally rare, All familiar faces affected, Recogition of personal identity NOT affected, Other cues, such as voice, enable recognition, Ability to recognize expressions can be unaffected, Young et al. (1993), Familiar face recognition, Unfamiliar face matching, Analysis of emotional facial expressions, Facial expression analysis and face identiﬁcation seem to be independent., The ability to recognize familiar faces and to match unfamiliar faces may be selectively and independently impaired, Bauer (1984), Skin conductance response (SCR), LF unable to overtly recognize familiar people but showed an emotional/affective response, Covert recognition, Emotional response, Dorsal visual-limbic pathway, Overt recognition, Ventral visual-limbic pathway, 4.2 Capgras delusion, Ellis and Young (1990), Capgras delusion may be a ‘mirror image’ of the impairments underlying prosopagnosia., Damaged dorsal route, Recognize familiar faces but fail to show an autonomic emotional response, Hirstein and Ramachandran (1997), Can covert recognition be turned into overt recognition?, Sergent and Poncet (1990), Provoked overt recognition can occur, Diamond et al. (1994), Morrison et al. (2001), IAC sucessfully modeled provoked over recognition
7. Are faces 'special'?, Prosopagnosia, fMRI scans suggest brain areas specialised for face recognition, Johnson and Morton (1991), Babies have attentional bias towards faces leading to expertise, Inversion effect, Face specific, Yin (1969), Johnston et al. (1992), General expertise, Diamond and Carey (1986), First order relational properties, Not enough for face recognition, Second order relational properties, Within-class differences, Expertise results in greater sensitivity, Inversion effect is acquired as a result of expertise and is not a ‘face-speciﬁc’ effect., Searcy and Bartlett (1996), Grotesque faces, |nversion disrupts our processing of spatial relationships between the features, Configural processing
Can generic expertise explain special processing for faces? McKone (2007), McKone suggests that the evidence favours face specificity over expertise
Chapter notes by Tim Holyoake, http://www.tenpencepiece.net/
Chapter Author, Graham J Hitch
1. Introduction, 1.1 Human memory as a multifaceted system, Evidence suggests memory is not a single system, Oldest thoretical distinction - STM/LTM, Baddeley (1986), Working memory, Cordinates mental operations, Tracks transient information, (Hitch, 1978), Mental arithmetic errors, 1.2 Distinction between short-term and long-term memory, Observations suggest two separate storage systems., Short Term Memory (STM), Immediate (STM) recall of phonemically similar words is poor., Baddeley (1966a), Acoustic/speech based, ‘Span of immediate memory’ is limited to just a few items, Miller (1956), Normal range of 7 plus or minus 2 items, Long Term Memory (LTM), Delayed (LTM) recall of semantically similar words is poorer., Baddeley (1966b), Codes meaning, Material forgotton more rapidly from STM tham LTM, Brown (1958), 'Modal' model, Murdock (1967), STM is a limited-capacity store of short duration, Control processes, such as subvocal rehearsal, can maintain information in STM, Information in STM is gradually transferred to LTM, <html><img src="../Images/Ch 5 Working Memory/Atkinson and Shiffrin (1971).jpg"><center>Atkinson and Shiffrin (1971) </center>, 5.1 Understanding ‘garden-path’ sentences, Alternative theories of how ambiguous sentances are processed., Multiple interpretations held in working memory, Just and Carpenter (1992), Evidence: individuals with low working memory capacity are less able to maintain multiple interpretations, Comprehension draws on more specialized resources than working memory, Caplan and Waters (1999), Shallice and Warrington (1970), Patient KF, Auditory digit span only two items, LTM, long term learning, inteligence and language all unaffected., Calls into question STM supporting these functions, Suggests STM is physically seperate from LTM, 1.3 Working memory as more than STM, 5.2 Studying the effect of an irrelevant memory load on verbal reasoning, Baddeley and Hitch (1974), Dual-task paradigm, Irrelevant STM task interferes with many cognitive tasks, Working memory combines temporary information storage with ongoing mental operations, Cognition continues when STM reaches capacity, Working memory is a bigger concept than STM, Daneman and Carpenter (1980), Reading span, Items have to be remembered at the same time as processing sentences, 5.3 Procedure for determining reading span, Working memory combines temporary storage with information processing, Reading span better predicts reading comprehansion than STM span, Critic: Conclusion based on correlation, Critic: Reading span, listening span and language comprehension all involve language processing, Turner and Engle (1989), Operation span task, Operation span also a better predictor of reading comprehension than STM., Engle et al. (1999b), Working memory span is more closely related to general intelligence than is STM
2. The structure of working memory, 2.1 A multicomponent model, Baddeley and Hitch (1974), Working memory can be partitioned, Articulatory rehearsal loop, Central executive, Tasks investigated were all primarily verbal, Observation suggests there are separate resources for dealing with verbal and visuo-spatial information, <html><img src="../Images/Ch 5 Working Memory/Baddeley's tripartite model.jpg"><center> Baddeley (1983, 1986) </center>, Visuo-spatial span and auditory digit span can be impaired independently, De Renzi and Nichelli (1975), Neurological evidence, Baddeley and Lieberman (1980), Visual mnemonics are disrupted by a spatial task, Tracking a moving loudspeaker whilst blindfolded, Visual mnemonics are NOT disrupted by visual task, Detecting changes in brightness, Suggested mental imagery is spatial rather than visual, However does not generalize to all forms of imagery, Hitch et al.(1995), Better performance when drawings were visually congruent, Concluded images preserve information about visual appearances, Logie (1995), Literature review, Suggested separate spatial and visual systems, Spatial system can rehearse contents of the visual store, Smyth and Waller (1998), Multiple forms of visual representation, Complex imagery for skilled movement., Alternative accounts to the Baddeley & Hitch (1974) / Baddeley (1986) model, Working memory as LTM activation, Ericsson and Kintsch (1995), Cowan (1988), Domain expertise improves working memory skills, Chess players, Stll assumes a separate executive system, Specialised buffer stores vs LTM, 2.2 Phonological working memory, Baddeley et al. (1975), STM span for verbal stimuli NOT a ﬁxed number of items or chunks, 5.4 The word-length effect, Relationship between no. words recalled and time taken to speak them, Recall words spoken in two seconds, Individual differences, Faster speakers recall more words, Dual-task exp, Serial recall, Primary task, Irrelevant word repetition, Secondary task, Articulatory suppression, Baddeley et al. (1984), Modified account of the articulatory loop., <html><img src="../Images/Ch 5 Working Memory/Phonological loop.png"><center>Phonological loop</center>, A decaying phonological store, Locus of the phonemic similarity effect, Spoken stimuli access the phonological loop automaically, Visual input has to be verbally recoded, Optional control process of subvocal rehearsal, Subvocalization, Locus of the word-length effect, 2.2.1 Developmental and cross-linguistic differences, As children’s ages increase, level of recall increases in proportion to the rise in speech rate., Hulme et al. (1984), Possible explanation for the developmental growth in memory span, Cross-linguistic differences in digit span, Naveh-Benjamin and Ayres (1986), Correlatied to articulation rates of digits in diff. languages, Developmental progression from visual to phonological coding, Related to learning to read, Hitch et al. (1988), Younger children ﬁnd it harder to recall pictures that are visually similar, Older children ﬁnd it harder to recall names of pictures that are phonemically similar, Younger children are more reliant on visuo-spatial working memory, Hitch et al. (1989), Words presented verbally or visually, Children 7yrs+ show poorer recall of items with longer names when presented both verbally and visually., Younger children have poorer recall only for longer words that are spoken, 2.2.2 The irrelevant speech effect, Disrupts STM for visually presented verbal stimuli, Salame´ and Baddeley (1982), Ignoring irrelevant speech more interfering than ignoring irrelevant noise, Challenge, Macken and Jones (1995), Non-speech causes interference, Same factors as speech, Steady state - less interference, Changing state - more interference, Broader, non-verbal explanation required, Unattended speech enters the phonological store whereas non-speech sounds do not, Blocking verbally recoding removes the disruptive effect, 2.2.3 Neural basis, Vallar and Baddeley (1984), Patient PV, Auditory digit span of only two items, Speech ﬂuent and rate of articulation normal, Recall unaffected by word length, Poorer recall for phonemically similar words, Concluded phonological store damaged, Visuo-spatial memory used for visual stimuli, 5.5 Neural correlates of the phonological loop, Paulesu et al. (1993), Seperate brain areas for storage and rehersal, Store localaised to the left parital cortex, Area of damage for PV, Rehersal - Broca's area, 2.2.4 Theoretical issues, Limitations of the phonological loop model, Effects of irrelevant speech, There is little or no effect of word duration when the phonological complexity of items is carefully controlled, Lovatt et al. (2000), Word-length effect apparent without rehersal, 4yrs olds do not have rehersal ability but display word-length effect, Hulme et al. (1984), Output delays without rehersal cause word-length effects, Cowan et al. (1992), Brown and Hulme (1995), 2.3 Executive processes, 2.3.1 Central workspace, Trade off between storage and processing, Towse et al. (1998), Tested this using reading span, operating span and counting span., No change in speed of processing found, Alternative hypothesis - task switching, Switch attention between processing and storage, Reading span limited by rate of forgetting during reading., Similar to arithmatic errors, Task switching effects reading, operation and counting span., Towse et al. (2000), Effects found in adults as well as children, Barrouillet and Camos (2001), Also found length of time processing effects memory, But also found span is lower when operations are more complex, Hitch etal.(2001), Processing operations slows as storage load increases, de Beni et al. (1998), People with low spans recall more items form previous trails (intrusion errors), Conway and Engle (1994), Link beween working memory capacity and inhibitory processes, Is the executive a unified system or fractionated?, 2.3.2 Attention, Norman and Shallice (1986), Slips of action, Lhermitte (1983), Patients with frontal lesions, Utilization behaviour, Difficulty inhibiting stereotypical behaviour, Sees a bottle of water and a glass, compelled to fill the glass and drink, Reason (1984), Diary studies of slips, Individuals report distracted attention may cause slips, Two level model of the control of cognition and action, Learned schemea for routine thought or action, Automatic response to trigger stimulus, eg. Hearing our name directs our attention, Schemata arrange in parallel and in competition with each other, Supervisory Attention System (SAS), Limited capacity, Inhibits triggered schema, Explains utilization behaviour as a deficit in SAS resources, Distraction could render SAS unable to inhibit triggered behaviour, Baddeley (1986), Move away from the model of the executive as workspace combining processing and storage, Adopted SAS (pure attention) model of executive control, 5.6 Random generation, Taxes a limited capacity system, Difficulty is avoiding stereotypical sequences, Pits learned habits against inhibitory control, Randomness declines with either increased speed or increased difficulty of a secondary task, 2.3.3 Fractionation, Baddeley (1996), Exectutive could be divided into seperate attention systems, Focusing, Ignoring irrelevant info, Dividing, Switching, Accesing LTM, Empirical evidence, Alzheimer patients have difficulty combining concurrent tasks, 'Normal ageing' leads to difficulty in focusing, Miyake et al. (2000), Studied individual differences, Shifting attention, Monitoring and updating information, Inhibiting responses, Concluded executive function appears to fractionate, Different model to Baddeley, 2.3.4 Coherence and the binding problem, Jones (1993), Criticises Baddeley and Hitch's (1974) and Baddeley's (1986) model of Working Memory for creating and not addressing a binding problem, Binding problem, Jones et al. (1995), Different types of irrelevant stimuli Interfer with working memory., Suggests a common representation within a unitary memory system, Episodic record, Baddeley (2000), Acknowledges the binding problem, Retains the executive as an attentional system, Adds..., Episodic buffer
3. Vocabulary acquisition, 3.1 Neuropsychological evidence, Baddeley et al. (1988), Patient PV, Phonological store had reduced capacity, Difficulty learning novel word forms, No learning occurs when trying to learn word pairs that include foreign (Russian) words, Learning is normal for pairings in native language, Relationship between short-term phonological memory and long-term phonological learning, Patient KF, Normal LTM but impared STM, Demonstrates distinction between STM and LTM, Cowan (1988), Suggested working memory corresponds to an activated region of LTM, 3.2 Individual differences, If learning vocab depends on the capacity to hold a phonological sequence over a short interval, then the two abilities should be correlated, Baddeley et al. (1998), Children's auditory digit span correlates with vocab test performance., Non-word repetition is more highly correlated with vocabulary scores than is digit span, Gathercole et al. (1997), Individual differences in phonological loop capacity predict vocab learning task performance., Service (1992), Finnish children’s ability to repeat English-sounding non-words before starting to learn English predicted their English vocabulary some two years later, Papagno and Vallar (1995), Polyglots ﬂuent in at least 3 languages had superior auditory digit span and non-word repetition, 3.3 Experimental studies, Papagno and Vallar (1992), Adults learning sets of either word–non-word pairs or word– word pairs, Increasing the phonemic similarity of non-words in a set, or the number of syllables in non-words, impaired learning., Manipulations in the word–word learning task had no effect, Papagno etal.(1991), Articulatory suppression impeded the learning of word–non-word pairs but had no effect on learning word– word pairs., Evidence suggests that for adults the phonological loop is necessary for learning non-words
4. Modelling the phonological loop, Two-component model insufficient, Learning?, Long-term phonologcal memory?, How is the order of items remembered?, Mathematical and computational models of the phonological loop, Brown et al. (2000), Burgess and Hitch (1992, 1999), Page and Norris (1998), Test of adequacy, Basic - Reproduces human behaviour, More powerful - Predicts human behaviour, 4.1 Serial order, Associative models, Chaining hypothesis, Jones (1993), Wickelgren (1965), Problems, How to explain repeated items, Errors tend to occur on repeated item, rather than after each occurrence, Jahnke (1969), Phonemically (dis)similar items, Errors occur on similar sounding items, Baddeley (1968), Henson et al. (1996), Chaining predicts errors on dissimilar items following similar cues, Mathematical models, Lewandowsky and Murdock (1989), Positional hypothesis, Conrad (1965), Ordered array of slots in verbal STM, Cannot account for typical errors, Transposition errors, Decrease with distance from correct position, Healy (1974), Mathematical model, Estes (1972), Order coded by associations between each item and a timing signal that varies with its position, Burgess and Hitch (1999), Brown et al. (2000), Two stage process, 1) Positional info to select candidate, 2) Retrieve phonemic content, Phonemic similarity imapcts this stage, Can acount for...., Non-associative models, Primacy model, Page and Norris (1998), Two stages, 1) Successive items encoded with less activation, Primacy gradient, 2) Retrieve phonemic content, Temporal grouping effect, Ryan (1969), Multiple levels of positional coding, Problem for Primacy model, Hitch et al. (1996), Demonstrated how their compiutational model captures hierarchical position coding
Chapter notes by Tim Holyoake, http://www.tenpencepiece.net/
Baddeley, A. (2000) ‘The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?’, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol.11, pp.417–23.
Baddeley, A. (2003) ‘Working memory and language: an overview’, Journal of Communication Disorders, vol.36, pp.189–208.
1 Introduction, Episodic Memory, Encoding, Storage and Retrieval
2 Encoding, 2.1 Levels of processing, ‘Multi-store’or‘Modal’ memory model., Atkinson and Shiffrin’s (1968), Depth of Processing, Craik and Lockhart (1972), Type I Processing, Type II Processing, 2.2 Relational and item-specific processing, Relational processing (Elaboration), Item-specific processing (Integration), 2.2.1 Encoding processing and Mandler’s (1980) dual-process model of recognition, Dual-process model of recognition, Mandler (1980)
3 Memory stores and systems, 3.1 Multiple memory systems, Episodic Memory, Semantic Memory, Collins and Quillian (1969), 3.2 Declarative and procedural memory, Declarative knowledge, Procedural knowledge
4 Retrival, 4.1 Encoding specificity and transfer appropriate processing, Encoding specificity, Tulving and Osler (1968), Transfer appropriate processing (TAP), Morris et al. (1977)
5 Implicit memory, 5.1 Perceptual and conceptual implicit memory, Conceptual implicit tests, 5.2 Accounts of implicit memory, 5.2.1 TAP account, 5.2.2 Memory systems accounts, Explicit memory tasks, Implicit memory task, Perceptual implicit memory tasks, 5.3 Implicit memory and amnesia
6 Jacoby's process-dissociation framework
7 Remember and know judgements, 7.1 Do remember and know judgements reflect different response criteria?
1 What are autobiographical memories?
2 Autobiograpical memory across the lifespan, Working Self, Conway and Pleydell-Pearce (2000), Lifespan retrieval curve, 2.1 Childhood amnesia, 2.2 The reminiscence bump, Self-defining experiences, Conway (1996), 2.3 Recency
3 Autobiogrphical knowledge, episodic memory, the working self and memory construction, 3.1 Autobiographical knowledge, 3.1.1 General events, 3.1.2 Lifetime periods, Goal attainment, Life story, Schema, Partonomic knowledge structures, 3.2 Episodic and semantic memory, 3.2.1 Recollective experience, 3.3 The working self, Retrieval mode, 3.3.1 Goals and the working self, Self-defining memories, Singer and Salovey (1993), 3.4 Constructing autobiographical memories, Generative retrieval, Direct retrieval
4 Autobiographical memory in distress, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), 4.1 Traumatic event, 4.2 Response at the time of trauma, 4.3 Subsequent psychological symptoms, 4.3.1 Re-experiencing symptoms including intrusive memories, 4.3.2 Avoidance symptoms, 4.3.3 Amnesia as avoidance, 4.3.4 Hyperarousal symptoms, 4.4 Impact of symptoms, 4.5 The nature of intrusive trauma memories
5 What are autobiographical memories for?
1 Introduction, Mental lexicon
2 Word recognition, 2.1 Spoken word recognition, 2.1.1 Segmenting the speech stream, Phonemes, Coarticulated, Segmentation, Pre-lexical, Lexical, Metrical foot, Wordspotting, Cutler and Norris (1988), Phonological representation, Implicit learning, 2.1.2 Parallel activation, Word-initial cohort, Uniqueness point, Cross-modal priming, 2.1.3 Lexical competition, Activation level, TRACE model, McClelland and Elman (1986), Phonetic feature, Bottom-up support, 2.2 Visual word recognition, 2.2.1 Models of visual word recognition, IAC (interactive activation and competition) model, McClelland and Rumelhart (1981), Lexical effects, 2.2.2 Mappings between spelling and sound, Orthography, Phonology, Assembled phonology, Addressed phonology, Pseudohomophones, Low-frequency words, DRC model, Coltheart et al, Neighbouring words, Homophones, 2.2.3 Eye movements in reading, Saccades, Fixations, Function words, Content words, Optimal viewing position (OVP), Foveal, Parafoveal
3 The mental lexicon, Semantic content, Semantic organization, 3.1 Morphology, Morphemes, Inflectional change, Inflectional morphology, Derivational morphology, Full-listing approach, Decompositional approach, Taft and Forster's (1975), 3.2 Accessing word meanings, Spreading activation models, Spreading activation models, Collins and Loftus (1975), Featural theory, Associated words, Association strength, 3.2.2 Semantic ambiguity, Syntactic ambiguity, Autonomous view of semantic ambiguity, Interactive view of semantic ambiguity
4 Sentence comprehension, 4.1 Syntax, Phrase structure, Thematic role assignment, 4.2 Models of parsing, Garden path model, Frazier (1979), Constraint-based model, MacDonald et al. (1994), 4.3 Is parsing autonomous?, 4.4 Constraints on parsing
1. Introduction, 1.1 What is a 'problem'?, 1.2 Protocol analysis in problem-solving research
Will not be directly examined
TMA06 Option 2 What are the difficulties encountered by psychologists in studying conciousness? To what extent have theory and research in cognitive psychology helped overcome these difficulties?, Cut off 27th September 2011, 2000 word limit
Will not be directly examined
TMA06 Option 1 To what extent has cognitive theory and research enhanced our understanding of the difficulties involved in obtaining accurate eyewitness evidence., Cut off 27th September 2011, 2000 word limit
Increasing reliance on neural based methods, Non experimantal, Neuroimaging, EEG, MEG, PET, fMRI, Limitations, Temporal and spatial resolution, Validity, How can we be sure what is observed corresponds to cognition?, Reliabilty, Cognitive neuropsychology, Infers cognitive processes from patterns of impairment, Assumptions, eg. Subtractivity, Techniques, Standardised tests, Experiments, Neuroimaging
Experimental, Ethics, Ethical codes, British Psychological Society (BPS), American Psychological Association (APA), Deontological approaches, Consequentialist approaches, Quantitavive methods, Statistical analysis, Assumptions, Limitations, Computer exercises, Spreadsheet, SPSS
Ethical approaches: deontology and consequentialism
Ethical issues, Competence, Informed consent, Withdrawal, Deception, Confidentiality and privacy, Risks, Recruitment and payment, Debriefing, Feedback and conveying specialist information, Colleagues and students, The safety of the researcher, Personal conduct, Internet-mediated research
Special cases, Work with patients, Brain imaging, Emotion research, Researching with children
TMA04 Option 2 Using examples discuss what can be learned about normal cognitive function by using haemodynamic imaging techniques such as fMRI and PET on healthy volunteers., Cut of 19th July, 2000 word limit
EEG and MEG: measuring the timing of electrical activity in the brain, Collecting data, Computing ERPs and ERFs, Estimating neuronal sources: the inverse problem, Statistical analysis of EEG/MEG data, The auditory oddball paradigm
Techniques based on metabolism and blood supply, Experimental design, PET: positron emission tomography, SPECT: single photon emission computerized tomography, fMRI: functional magnetic resonance imaging, Image processing and analysis, Data analysis
Transcranial magneic stimulation (TMS)
Choosing a technique
TMA04 Option 1 Cognitive neurospychologists often study single individuals rather than groups of people. Discuss, using examples of case studies, the advantages and disadvantages of this method of investigation., Cut of 19th July, 2000 word limit
Why study damaged brains?
Goals, Lesion localization, Assessment of deficit, Model building, Localization of function
Techniques, Standardised testing, Experimental neuropsychology
Dissociations and double dissociations
Issues, The Martian among us, Comparing brains, Subtractivity, Plasticity, Single-case versus group studies, Developmental versus acquired neuropsychological disorders
Cognitive neuropsychological rehabilitation
Two fundamentals, Why do we do statistics?, Estimating the mean: reducing error
Analysis of variance, The conceptual basis for analysis of variance, What is analysis of vaiance?, Analysis of variance with more than two conditions
Multiple factor analysis of variance, Interactions, Degrees of freedom
The assumptions underlying analysis of variance and most parametric statistics, Repeated measures
Making decisions under uncertainty, Drawing conclusions from statistical tests, Muliple comparison techniques, Type II errors, effect size and power
Analysing data for the case where the independent variables are continuous, Simple linear regression, Multiple linear regression, Analysis of covariance