Problem 5 - Representation Of Knowledge Flashcards
Imagery
- mental representation of objects not currently seen/sensed by the sense organs.
- sensory modalities: hearing, smell, taste, seeing.
- skills differ with every individuals
- helps in memory, fading pain etc.
Dual-code theory: images and symbols (Paivio)
- pictorial and verbal codes to represent information
- organizes knowledge that can be acted on, stored, or retrieved.
- analog codes: mental images
- symbolic codes: mental representations for words
Propositional theory (anderson and bower)
- information is stored in an abstract format of imagery representing abstract meaning of knowledge.
- proposition: relationship between elements ]([subject element], [ object element ])
Propositional theory: epiphenomena
Secondary and derivative phenomena:
- side effect: you experience = you code = you retrieve it = you see the code again = secondary imagery again (same modality as you experienced it).
Dual code theory VS propositional code theory
Dual code theory:
- encoded symbolically or analogically
- stored and retrieved in the same modality
- no transformation between WM and LTM
Propositional code theory:
- encoded as propositions
- stored and retrieved as imagery
- transformation happens between WM and LTM
Image scaling
- mental images are functionally equivalent to our representations and use of perceptions.
- resolution is limited (smaller details is harder than large details)
- supports dual code view
Image scanning
- images can be scanned the same we scan physical perceptions.
- the further away the object, the longer it takes to scan
- supports dual code theory
Imagery debate (stephen kosslyn)
Do our mental images resemble perception (analogue codes) or langauge (propositional codes)
- analogue approach: mental imagery close to perception
- propositional approach: mental imagery close to language.
- evidence: rotation provides strong support for analogue coding.
Summary of characteristics found for examining objects
- supports dual code theory
- rotating images takes longer for large rotations (analogue, linear relationship)
- the bigger the distance, the harder the manipulation (analogue, linear relationship)
- shape and similarity (analogue, linear relationship)
- keeping mental image in mind and examining physical stimulus creates interference and hinders speed and ability.
Bizarreness effect: research
- bizarre images enhances memory
- hypothesis: bizarre items require more effort and elaboration and therefore receive more attention at encoding and are easier to retrieve.
- assessed visual imagery by disrupting visual imagery processes during encoding, which should reduce the bizarreness effect.
Bizarreness effect: methods experiment 1
- to test whether distracting imagery would reduce the bizarreness effect.
- dynamic visual noise (DVN) used
- Conditions: read, spoken, heard and presented with the DVN
- Measurements: vividness rating and recall
Bizarreness effect: methods experiment 2
- presented sentences only visually
- same experiment
Bizarreness effect: results experiment 1
- better recall for bizarre sentences even when distracted or interfered.
- DVN condition scored lower on vividness
- More vividness correlated with more recall
- Bizarreness effect found
- Dissociation for experimental condition
Bizarreness effect: results experiment 2
- bizarreness effect found: recall was higher, vividness was lower for bizarre sentences
Bizarreness effect: conclusion
- no evidence that a secondary tassk reduces the bizarreness effect.
- no evidence that vividness influences the recall rates.
- against the visual imagery hypothesis => visual imagery, if at all, plays a small role for the bizarreness effect.
