9am

1. 9am

2. present LTM STM Lenny in Memento: has STM, can’t form new LTM Jimmy G. : has STM, has LTM only for longtime past, can’t form new LTM present LTM STM

3. LTM: what is it? -not just storage -LTM & Working Memory help create our present -wealth of background information retrieval

4. Short-Term = Long-Term Memory?  Demonstration: Serial position curve. Stimuli (Murdoch, 1962)  Barricade Children  Diet Racket  Antenna Folio  Meter Game  Journey Phoenix  Crossbow Doorbell  Muffler Sandwich  Mouse Colt  Menu Airplane

5. Primacy effect: -has time to rehearse and store in LTM -first word attended 100% (no other presented before) Recency effect: -last words still in STM

6.  Hypothesis 1: Primacy due to more rehearsal. – Test: slower pace => more rehearsal possible. – Result: Increased primacy effect

7. Glanzer and Cunitz (1966):  Hypothesis 2: Recency due to STM. – Test: intermediate task (30 seconds counting backwards) prior to recall  delete STM. – Result: Reduced recency effect, can’t rehearse, 30sec enough to lose STM

8. Neurophysiological evidence for difference between STM and LTM: Double Dissociation suggests independent mechanisms HM: hippocampus removed to avoid epileptic seizures KF: digit span = 2; recency effect reduced

9. Semantic Coding of LTM (Sachs, 1967): read passage and then multiple choice of what sentence was present in passage The Galileo Story There is an interesting story about the telescope. In Holland, a man named Lippershey was an eyeglass maker. One day his children were playing with some lenses. They discovered that things seemed very close if two lenses were about a foot apart. Lippershey began experiments and his "spyglass" attracted much attention. He sent a letter about it to Galileo, the great Italian scientist. Galileo at once realized the importance of the discovery, and set out to build an instrument of his own. He used an old organ pipe with one lens curved out and the other curved in. On the first clear night he pointed the glass towards the sky. He was amazed to find the empty dark spaces filled with brightly gleaming stars! Night after night Galileo climbed to a high tower, sweeping the sky with his telescope. One night he saw Jupiter, and to his great surprise discovered with it three bright stars, two to the east and one to the west. On the next night, however, all were to the west. A few nights later there were four little stars.

10. Which sentence did you read? 1. He sent a letter about it to Galileo, the great Italian scientist. 2. Galileo, the great Italian scientist, sent him a letter about it. 3. A letter about it was sent to Galileo, the great Italian scientist. 4. He sent Galileo, the great Italian scientist, a letter about it.  Changes: 1. None: identical. 2. Semantic: A difference in meaning. 3. Voice: Changed from active to passive 4. Formal: syntactic change, but same meaning. Which sentence did you read? 1. He sent a letter about it to Galileo, the great Italian scientist. 2. Galileo, the great Italian scientist, sent him a letter about it. 3. A letter about it was sent to Galileo, the great Italian scientist. 4. He sent Galileo, the great Italian scientist, a letter about it.  Changes: 1. None: identical. 2. Semantic: A difference in meaning. 3. Voice: Changed from active to passive 4. Formal: syntactic change, but same meaning. Some participants remember the gist of meaning rather than exact sentence -eyewitness testimony

11. 10am

13. Declarative -conscious recollection of events or facts -episodic: personal events -‘time travel’ -self-knowing (Tulving) -semantic: facts and knowledge -’no time travel’ -knowing (Tulving) Double Dissociation -demonstrates difference between episodic and semantic -suggests independent mechanisms KC (hippocampus injury) has memory “skeleton”, no details (richness lost) Italian woman (encephalitis): trouble recognizing familiar people, meaning of words on a shopping list; can tell lively stories about events

14. Are they different? -brain imaging studies indicate overlapping but different patterns of activation -the jury is still out Connections -Episodic gateway to semantic: “morphing” episodic into semantic (only facts remain about a personal event e.g. graduation) -Episodic used to infer semantic information: better recall for names that I have personal experience with (“I’m a fan of actor X”) Westmacott & Moscovitch (2003) -Semantic knowledge can influence the formation of episodic memories (e.g. remember more personal details about the game based on knowledge about football)

15. primed words completed more than new words Implicit -not consciously aware when using it -nonknowing (Tulving) -repetition priming: response to item increases in speed or accuracy because has been encountered before -procedural: how to do things Repetition Priming (Tulving, 1962) -words presented - priming stimulus -fragment word to complete Keyboard c _ l o _ Color Truck Table Computer

16. Know it’s a memory task! Is repetition priming conscious? Recognition & Recall -recognition test: pick stimulus previously presented -delay of 1 hour or 7 days

17. Is implicit memory conscious? Warrington & Weiskrantz (1968): Korsakoff’s syndrome patients (lack of B1 vitamin, damage to frontal and temporal lobe)

18. Motor skills… Procedural Memory -no memory of where or when learned -perform procedures without being ‘consciously’ aware of how we do them But also cognitive skills such as reading…

19. Implicit Learning -mere exposure can affect behavior Perfect & Askew (1994): -higher ratings for ads previously seen -conscious recognition is not better propaganda effect : -rate statements previously seen or heard as true even when told false at the time -eyewitness testimony...

20. 11am

21. How is information stored in LTM? CODING: form of stimulus for memory (visual, auditory, semantic) ENCODING: the process of storing memories LTM encoding retrieval How to encode? REHEARSAL MaintenanceElaborative -repeat to keep in STM -rehearse meaning -no transfer to LTM -transfer to LTM -shallow memorization -connect to existing knowledge -memory for phone #

22. LEVELS-OF-PROCESSING THEORY (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) -memory depends on HOW information is encoded LIST#2: how useful on deserted island umbrella exercise forgiveness rock hamburger … LIST#1: count vowels chair mathematics elephant lamp car … BETTER MEMORIZATION Conclusion: memory depends on DEPTH OF PROCESSING

23. LEVELS-OF-PROCESSING THEORY Craik & Tulving (1975) experiment: TASK:PROCESSING: Does bird have capital letters? SHALLOW Does train rhyme with pain? DEEPER Does car fit? “He saw a ____ on the street.” DEEPEST

24. TRANSFER-APPROPRIATE PROCESSING (Morris et al., 1977) -circumstances of encoding and retrieval should match DEPTH-OF-PROCESSING ? Did joy rhyme with a word from the list?

25. What affects encoding: DEPTH OF PROCESSING TRANSFER-APPROPRIATE PROCESSING ...what else? Forming connections with other information Bower & Winzenz (1970) using imagery to remember pairs of words

26. Self Reference effect -memory better if relate word to self -self as a retrieval cue -deeper processing

27. generation effect: generating material on your own  enhances learning and retention Slameka & Graf (1978): 28% more if generated king-cr____ horse-sa____ lamp-sh___ • Organization: Jenkins & Russell (1952) • spontaneously organize information • similar items group together • (and recalled together) • Bower et. al. (1969) • 73:21 if organized in meaningful trees • [if all words are under right category]

28. Study guide… Organize your knowledge!

29. How is memory stored in the brain? HEBB (1948): physiological changes at the synapse LTP: long-term potentiation

30. Because these structural changes at the neural level take time to build up, memory for distant past is more stable memory for recent events more fragile than for remote events H.M. had both types of amnesia

31. memory for recent events more fragile than for remote events Why? CONSOLIDATION has to occur (which takes time) Synaptic (rapid) Systems gradual reorganization of circuits

32. standard model of consolidation during consolidation (recent memories) : retrieval depends on hippocampus after consolidation (remote memories): only cortical areas hippocampus Mechanism of consolidation: REACTIVATION (replay neural activity)  Mostly true for semantic memories (hippocampus not active)

33. but... hippocampus also active during remote episodicmemory retrieval as well This result would call for the revision of the standard model of consolidation, because standard model of consolidation claims that hippocampus active only in the beginning.

34. Emotions emotional and arousing words and pictures are remembered better emotion enhances process of consolidation more activity in the amygdala

35. 1pm

36. LTM encoding retrieval Retrieval process of transferring information from LTM into WM most failures of memory are failures of retrieval the memory is there, you just can’t access it Retrieval Cues like ‘keys’ that help to retrieve the memory associations between the cue and the memory help in retrieving it

37. Cued Recall (Tulving & Pearlstone, 1966) Recall the words 40% Recall the words. The categories were birds, furniture… 75%

38. Cued Recall (Mantyla, 1986) create associations with 600 nouns: say 3 features about “banana” peel, bunch, yellow

39. Encoding Specificity = transfer-appropriate processing Context is also key! Grant (1998)

40. State Dependent Learning Internal state is also key! Eich & Metcalfe (1989)

41. How to Study elaborate and generate: elaborative rehearsal, not only maintenance “I read the book and notes twice.”ask questions organize: outlines, ‘trees’, framework associate: imagery, cues take breaks: consolidation, sleep match learning and testing conditions: encoding specificity, state dependent learning

42. 2pm

43. Memory occurs in real environments, not labs • Memory as a creative mental process • Errors • Fill in incomplete information Everyday memory: “what I’m going to do later” • Remember what and when to do in future Event-based tasks (cues can trigger memories) better memories using distinctive versus familiar cues Time-based tasks: take pill every morning harder due to lack of cues alarm clock converts it into event-based cue

44. Self (A) Other (L) Remembering Personal Experiences Autobiographical memory = Episodic Field perspective (what you saw) vs Observer perspective (what outsider observer saw) Recent memories are experienced from a field perspective Distant memories are experienced from an observer perspective (more abstract) Cabeza et al. (2004): Difference between personal and nonpersonal Parietal cortex Hippocampus

45. The Reminiscence Bump Schrauf & Rubin (1998): Enhanced memory for (episodic and semantic) facts of adolescence & young adulthood. • Two explanations: • 1. Life-narrative hypothesis: • Personal identity is determined in those years. • 2. Cognitive hypothesis: • Encoding is better in periods of rapid change, followed by relative stability. • Question: How to argue for #2? • Find people who experienced rapid changes at different life periods. • Hypothesis: Reminiscence bump should shift…

46. Schrauf & Rubin (1998): US immigrants in 20s vs. 30s => shifted (& attenuated) reminiscence bump

47. Flashbulb Memories What did you do on Sep 09 2001? What did you do on Sep 11 2001? What did you do on Dec 11 2001? Phenomenon: Shocking and emotionally charged events tend to be remembered very vividly (and more detailed than other events). Question: Do these phenomena highlight a special memory mechanism?

48. FbM: A Special Mechanism Brown & Kulik (1977): FbM are created by a special ‘now print’ mechanism. Conditions for invocation: – emotionally charged circumstances – high consequentiality of events - no change or loss of details (like a photograph) FbM: No Special Mechanism Neisser (2000): FbM reflect ordinary memory processes. Conditions of invocation: – Frequent narrative rehearsal: saw it on TV million times – Decay and inaccuracies: FbM are often distorted, just like other memories

49. FbM: Evidence against a Special Mechanism Experimental method: Repeated recall (does memory change over time?) Neisser & Harsch (1992): Challenger in 1986 vs. 1989 – Increased distortions were affected by common knowledge. – Specifically: Increase in TV-memories from 21% to 45%. Schmolck et al. (2000): O.J. Simpson in 1995 vs. 1998 – Increased inaccuracies => Decay mechanisms. – “it seems unlikely that so-called flashbulb memories differ from ordinary episodic memories in any fundamental way. (p. 44)

50. 3pm