Presentation on theme: "The Learning – Retention Controversy"— Presentation transcript:
1The Learning – Retention Controversy MemoryStage AnalysisRetentionLearning RetrievalThe Learning – Retention ControversyResults from the fact that there is no independent test for learning (without also simultaneously studying memory) and vice versa.
2Electrical Activity of the Neuron Measures of RetentionRecall – to reproduce from memory materials that were earlier presented.Examples:Fill-in question on an examIdentify suspect by sketchElectrical Activity of the Neuron
3Electrical Activity of the Neuron Measures of RetentionRecallFree Recall – reproduce the remembered itemsin any orderSerial Recall – to be considered correct, items must be recalled in the order in which they were presentedElectrical Activity of the Neuron- Within the serial recall task we observe one of the most ubiquitous phenomena in all of psychology, “The Serial Position Effect”
4Electrical Activity of the Neuron Measures of RetentionRecallFree Recall – reproduce the remembered itemsin any orderSerial Recall – to be considered correct, items must be recalled in the order in which they were presentedElectrical Activity of the Neuron- Within the serial recall task we observe one of the most ubiquitous phenomena in all of psychology, “The Serial Position Effect”Let’s Score Our Results!
5Measures of Retention Recall “The Magical Number 7 ± 2” George A. MillerOur ability to recall unrelated pieces of information that have just been presented may be severely limited (e.g., a number series)Capacity can be extending by imposing organization on the materials we are trying to remember. E.G., “chunking”
6Measures of Retention Recall Recognition – identifying information that was previously presentede.g., a multiple choice test itema police line-up
7The Recognition Memory Paradigm Stage 1 – The TBR StageMaterials are presented with the explicit instructions that these are materials “to be remembered”Stage 2 - The Test StageTBR items are randomly intermixed with materials that were not part of the originally presented TBR materialsSubject’s task is to identify “Old” from “New”
8The Ralph Haber Experiment The stimulus materials were photographic slides taken with a 35mm film camera. Each slide was distinct but commonplace scene. A total of 20,000 slides were taken.10,000 slides chosen at random were presented each once for 20 seconds with the instructions “try to remember all of the scenes”.These 10,000 slides were then randomly interspersed with the remaining 10,000 slides that the subject had not previously seen.Test consisted of 20,000 slides. Subject pressed a button to indicate “saw it before” (Old) or “never saw it before” (New).DV – the percent correct recognitions during the test stage.
9The Ralph Haber Experiment Results George Miller findings – predict an extremely low percent correct score.Actual result was astounding – 97% accuracy.Suggests that we are dealing with a dramatically different memory process from that studied by Miller.
10The STM vs LTM Distinction Psychologists believe there are two distinct memory processes: STM (Short term memory) probably mediated in the hippocampus, and LTM (Long term memory) residing in the cerebral cortex.STM includes those things we know that we are actively aware of at the present moment. Information resides here 30 seconds to a few minutes.LTM includes all those experiences and knowledge elements that we have ever acquired. This information can last a lifetime.
13Measures of Retention Recall Recognition Relearning – learning curve for relearning is always steeper than curve for initial learningRelearningInitial Learning
14Measures of Retention Recall Recognition Relearning – learning curve for relearning is always steeper than curve for initial learning. Improved performance during relearning must be due to memory for the materials being retained.I - RI =Amount of time or number of trials required for initial learningAmount of time or number of trials required for relearningSavings =IR =E.G.= .5 = 50%Savings =20
15Nonsense Syllables (Hermann Ebbinghaus) Ebbinghaus wished to study the verbal learning process without the interference of what subjects previously knew about the materials to be learned.To do this he created new verbal materials that subjects had no prior experience with (meaningless). The Nonsense Syllable was the result.The Nonsense Syllable was a string of letters (usually three) that did not spell a word.BAFLODRIWWAJDOPSome Examples of CVC Trigrams
16Are Nonsense Syllables Meaningless? BNKDRPMLKPLMSPTBSFLGDRPWWRJDLPThe list on the right is more “meaningful” than the list on the left in that these items have a higher Association Value.How easily does the item remind us of something that has meaning for us?
17Factors Affecting Memory Conditions During LearningAttention (Greater Attention Greater Retention)Intentional Learning vs Incidental LearningAmount of Practice (More Practice Better Retention)Overlearning – practice beyond criterionNature of the Material To Be RememberedMeaningfulnessConcreteness - AbstractnessOrganizationChunking – Concise encoding of informationClustering – remembering according to categoryAssimilation – perceptions alter memory of objectMnemonics – memory systems or aids
18Factors Affecting Memory Conditions During LearningConditions During the Retention IntervalDisuse Theory – Memory is a trace which grows weaker over timeInterference Theory – The amount of time between learning and test for retention is not the important variable, it’s what happens during that interval that mattersJenkins & Dallenbach StudySubjects learned lists of materials and then were tested for retention 8 hours later. Subjects that slept during the retention interval (presumably experiencing less interference) remembered better than subjects who remained awake during retention
20Factors Affecting Memory Conditions During LearningConditions During the Retention IntervalConditions During RetrievalTip of the Tongue PhenomenonCued Recall Procedure (Tulving and Pearlstone)Penfield - Electrical Stimulation of the Temporal RegionPostevent Retrieval Cues (Loftus and Palmer)