Learning and Memory Flashcards
(47 cards)
Multi-store Model of Memory
- Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968; memory consists of 3 levels —>
- sensory (iconic/visual -1/2 s; echoic/auditory -2s),
- short-term (when sensory info paid attention to - 20s…unless rehearsed…consists of memory span aka storage capacity/primary memory - 7 +/- 2 but expanded w/chunking…and working memory - process/manipulate info e.g., solve simple math probs),
- long term: encoded; capacity/duration unlimited; divided into recent/secondary memory (minutes to years…most affected w/increasing age) and remote/tertiary memory (years to decades).
Serial position effect
- explained by 3-store model
- word list immediate recall - will demo a primacy and recency effect due to long-term (as evident by primacy) and short-term (as evident by recency) memory…however, after delay, see only primacy effect (short-term no longer online)
Baddeley’s Model of Working Memory
- working memory (WM) aspect of short-term memory consists of:
- ->Central Executive: controls 3 subsystems by directing attention and coordinating other cognitive processes (e.g., mentally solve math problems).
- ->3 subsystems:
(1) Phonological Loop-temporary storage of verbal info.
(2) Visuo-spatial sketchpad-temporary storage of visual/spatial info.
(3) episodic buffer-integrates verbal, visual, spatial info and links WM to long-term.
Long-Term Memory
- can be recent or remote
- can also be:
- -> procedural/nondeclarative - learned skills/actions (e.g., bike riding, playing instrument).
- -> declarative - can be semantic (facts, concepts) and episodic (personal experienced events)
- Can also be retrospective (past) or prospective (future)
- Can be implicit (AKA procedural…recalled w/o conscious effort or through conditioned responses) or explicit (aka declarative).
Explanations for Forgetting
-Trace decay theory: memories create physical changes in brain that deteriorate over time w/o rehearsal/recall. Not well supported in research.
- Interference theory: Forgetting due to memory disruption
- -> proactive: prior learned info (e.g., prior list of words interferes with learning new list of words)
- ->retroactive: newly acquired info interferes w/recall of prior info (e.g., unable to recall old list of words bc memorized new list).
- most likely when info is similar (e.g., alternative ways to solve same math prob).
Techniques for Improving Memory
- Elaborative Rehearsal: Relate info to prior knowledge or generating personally meaningful examples (semantic encoding - helps retrieval from long-term).
- Mnemonics (memory aids):
- -> verbal: acronyms (e.g., OCEAN) and acrostics (e.g., PEMDAS).
- -> visual: keyword method (paired associate learning -duck w/pot) and method of loci (link image to word).
- Encoding Specificity: hypothesis says retrieval best when conditions @learning are same as conditions @recall (i.e., learning conditions serve as retrieval cues).
- ->context-dependent learning (environment the same)
- ->state-dependent learning (mental/physical state the same)
- Practice Testing: flashcards, tests. Results in “testing effect” - which generates effective mediators (cues) that facilitate future retrieval (mediator effectiveness hypothesis).
Cognitive Learning Theories
- focus on mental processes responsible for acquisition of info and skills
- Include Tolman’s Latent Learning, Kohler’s Insight Learning, and Bandura’s Social Cog. Theory
Tolman’s Latent Learning (1930)
- rats in mazes.
- Formation of cognitive maps attributed to latent learning (learning not observable w/o reinforcement)
Kohler’s Insight Learning (1925)
- Influenced by Gestalt Psych/chimp research (chimp gets banana).
- “a-ha” experience or insight learning…
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (1986)
- Based on observational learning
- Bobo the clown doll…see adult model act aggressively or not.
- More aggressive if saw aggression. Method didn’t matter (live, film, cartoon)
- more aggressive if gender match and boys overall more aggressive than girls but not if provided reward.
- observational learning depends on 4 meditational processes:
- -> attention
- ->retention
- ->production
- ->motivation (can be increased w/reinforcement..self, external, or vicarious aka through model).
*Modeling most effective w/gradual and guided participation/participant modeling. (good for phobias)
Classical Conditioning
- Pavlov’s dog US (meatpowerder) -> UR(salivation)…THEN CS (bell) -> CR (salivation)
- CR always weaker than UR but…
- CR impacted by no. US/CS pairings
- procedure used..delay conditioning (CS precedes/overlaps US; 1/2 sec optimal; best), trace conditioning (CS ended before US), simultaneous conditioning (both end same time), backward conditioning (US before CS…but sucks)
Classical Extinction
After CS repeatedly presented w/o US….CS no longer produces CR
Spontaneous Recovery (in classical conditioning)
CR returns after extinguished…per Pav means suppressed v. eliminated
Stimulus Generalization
- Stimuli similar to original CS elicit CR w/o pairing w/US.
- (Watson) Little Albert (9mo)…white rat/noise startle response.
- generalized to other fuzzy whites
Stimulus Discrimination
- Discriminate CS from similar stimuli.
- (pavlov - different tones for dog salivation)
Experimental neurosis (Classical Conditioning)
- consequence of stimulus discrimination training/unexpected consequences
- conflict between excitatory and inhibitory processes….
- Pavlov dogs getting aggro when being taught to discriminate
Latent Inhibition
-when stimulus pre-exposure reduced likelihood that it will later become CS (when paired with US)
Higher-order Conditioning
AKA 2nd or 3rd-order
- chaining different neutral stimuli to elicit CR (e.g., CS serves as US for other stimuli)
- Pavlov bell paired with blinking light
Compound Conditioning
2+ stimuli presented together and blocking/overshadowing occur.
Blocking: CC of 1st neutral stimulus blocks CC of 2nd neutral stimulus; 2nd neutral stimulus never becomes CS (happens bc 2nd neutral stimulus does not provide new info re: occurrence of US).
Overshadowing: 2 neutral stimuli repeatedly presented together before US. Will elicit CR together and stronger stimulus of the 2 will elicit CR alone. Failure of less salient stimulus bc overshadowed.
Exposure w/Response Prevention (Extinction)
Avoidance has reinforced anxiety response. Need opportunities to extinguish. Expose to feared stimulus (CS) while preventing usual avoidance response.
- can be in vivo, virtual reality, imagination.
- use flooding or graded exposure. Flooding best for agoraphobia otherwise graded is best.
- Sessions must end w/decrease in anxiety.
Cue Exposure Therapy (CET): Extinction
Type of ERP for substance use disorder. Expose to cues (CS) w/ substance but prevent use.
- works via extinction/habituation.
- cues= internal/external triggers e.g., cravings, interpersonal conflicts, sight of substance.
*effective alone but better w/coping strategies.
Implosive Therapy (Extinction)
Always conducted in imagination and w/psychodynamic elements.
Pt exaggerates image of feared object/event to elicit high anxiety and embellished by therapist (imagine conflicts underlying anxiety).
Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR): Extinction
OG for PTSD but now for lots of things.
Combo exposure to trauma-related imagery, neg cognitions related to feared event, rehearsal of adaptive cognitions, rapid lateral eye movements.
Says eye movements facilitate mental processing of trauma memories BUT evidence that eye movements don’t add to effectiveness. Benefits due to repeated exposure to feared events (but argued).
Systemic Desensitization: Counterconditioning AKA reciprocal inhibition
For phobic anxiety. THREE STEPS:
(1) relaxation strategies
(2) anxiety hierarchy
(3) imagine stimuli while doing relaxation. Graded. Move on when relaxation maintained.
Works by replacing undesirable anxiety response w/incompatible relaxation response.
Research w/dismantling strategy has found effectiveness is due to extinction and NOT reciprocal inhibition.