Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Working Memory > Lecture 3 > Flashcards

Lecture 3 Flashcards

1
Q

What did Daneman and Carptenter (1980) look into?

A

Measured individual differences in WM capacity by measuring “reading and listening span”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Explain Daneman and Carpenter (1980) experiment

A

A task when they read a sentence and remember the final word/s

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Findings of Daneman and Carpenter (1980)

A

recall varies from one person to another and the ability to recall seems to correlate with other abilities of comprehension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What did Daneman and Hannon (2007) Show? and how

A

Same test but this time with remember number at the end.

Remembering digits without context or random words correlates more poorly with language comprehension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What can be concluded when looking at daneman (1980) vs (2007)

A

Something about listening and reading span that correlates more with comprehension than just memory alone

one could argue that sentence span is a measure of general WM capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is working memory span and how is it measured?

A

The limited span of a person’s working memory

Measured by seeing how many words they can remember at the end of a list of sentences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What did Baddeley et al. (1985) think was a problem about the Daneman and Carpenter (1980) results? (2)

A

Small sample from Univesity population (about 20)

Something about listening span not covering all of WM - too simple a measure for complex WM
- doesn’t include the selection of strategies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Explain Baddeley et al (1985) experiment

A

Sentences and if they are true or not

Then count dots

Then recall final word of sentence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What the results of Baddeley et al (1985)

A

Listening sentence span correlated with language comprehension

Counting span correlated more poorly with language comprehension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What did baddeley et al (1985) conclude from their results

A

They argued that a listening comprehensions and memory test correlates with comprehension tests - not a measure of general WM capacity

Maybe not a general working memory capacity but something relating to language learning - a different version of comprehension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Explain the Turner and Engle (1989) experiment

A

Operation span

Tried to avoid a language based task - Separated memory task from processing task

Maths equation then a word, how many can they remember

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Results of Turner and Engle (1989)

A

They found it Operation span correlates with language comprehension and sentence span

Argue that WMS is not just for language comprehension

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What did Kane and Engle (2002) find?

A

WM span correlates with general intelligence and other executive functions

Standard digit span correlates poorly with these other mental abilities

Reinforcing the idea that it is part of working memory not just language ability

People who perform well on these tasks they do better on a wide range of tasks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Where in the brain is WM (controlled attention) linked?

A

Linked with the pre-frontal cortex

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Explain Barrouillet et al (2004) time based sharing model

A

The capacity of working memory is based on how quickly we can switch between working memory processing and storing

The more we spend on processing the more likely it will decay away due to less time refreshing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Explain how Barrouillet (2004) tested the TBRS theory

A

Presented letters for recall, with numbers to read aloud between letters. Numbers presented at fast or slow rates. Recall letters after presentation of all material

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What were the findings of Barrouillet (2004)

A

With a high cognitive load, less time between each number to rehearse memory number - Resulted in poorer performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Conclusions of Barrouillet (2004)

A

Supports TPRS - ability to remember is based on ability to switch between process and rehearsal - all based on time

  • Assumes loss of these items from memory is due to decay, switching back will limit decay
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Explanation of Barroillet results

A

He argues that slow pace allows more time for “swapping” attention between reading numbers and rehearsing letters. Fast pace prevents swapping of attention, and so the memory for letters decay

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Problem with TBRS results (Oberauer and Lewandowsky 2008)

A

Note confound with effects of interference between letters and numbers

Confound - more items in the second section, could be that there are more items and they are interfering, disrupting content of memory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was Conway looking into?

A

Whether WM capacity is a by product of attention

22
Q

Explain Conway et al (2001) experiment

A

Gave them a dichotic listening task, one set of info from one ear and one from the other ear (headphones)

  • Told to focus on one channel and ignore the other, in ignored channel name is said
  • Then asked question on what you heard
23
Q

Findings of Conway (2001)

A

High WM more likely to ignore their name is presented

24
Q

Explain the Colflesh and Conway (2007) experiment

A

Listen to message in one ear, ignore info from other ear but occasionally you will hear your name, listen to that
- No shadowing - not told to listen to just one ear

  • Shadowing - listen to just one source

The idea is that you are trying to ignore the attention but switching ever so often

25
Q

Findings of Colflesh and Conway (2007)

A
  • No shadowing - Difference is small

Shadowing - High working memory do better when instructed

26
Q

What does Colflesh and Conways (2007) results indicate?

A

Indicates flexibility in high capacity individuals

27
Q

Explain Conway et al (2010) experiment and why they underwent it

A

Looking at different groups of WM capacity (different ages 7 and 11

Testing their selective attention ability

In line with Conway (2007) if high WM are better than low WM should be worse

28
Q

Findings of Conway (2010)

A
  • Having a low WMC doesn’t seem to be related to being bad at focusing attention
  • Can control attention even with low WMC
29
Q

• What are the various hypotheses about working

memory capacity?

A

1) Working memory “capacity” is a by-product of attentional control
2) Working memory storage capacity itself varies between individuals
3) Working memory capacity reflects different styles of cognitive control
4) Efficiency of retrieval from secondary memory

30
Q

What is the cocktail party effect?

A

the phenomenon of the brain’s ability to focus one’s auditory attention (an effect of selective attention in the brain) on a particular stimulus while filtering out a range of other stimuli, as when a partygoer can focus on a single conversation in a noisy room.

31
Q

Why are high WM less likely to hear their names

A

The critical factor seems to be the ability to block information from the irrelevant message.

High-span subjects are more capable of this and were therefore less likely to hear their names, and they also were less susceptible to a consequential disruption
of relevant task performance.

32
Q

What is the anti-saccade task?

A

Saccaded eye movement controlled by the frontal cortex

Assesses brain ability to inhibit reflexive saccade

Asked to fix on a motionless target, a stimulus is then presented to one side of the target. Participant is asked to look at the other side of the target that the stimulus isn’t on.

Failure to do this implies cognitive dysfunction

33
Q

What did Morey et al (2012) investigate and how?

A

WMC and cognitive function ability

Cross modal stroop

  • see colour on screen, hear colour word
  • Goal: Name colour on screen and ignore sound
34
Q

What did Morey et al (2012) find?

A

Correlation between Cross-modal stroop and WMC was very limited

35
Q

What did Beilock and Decaro (2007) find

A

Pressure and anxiety had no effect on low WM, but affected high

36
Q

What is an explanation for why pressure only effects high WM performance

A

People with high WM work harder and control more, learning more

Low WM can’t be bothered, so pressure doesn’t affect it

37
Q

How did Duff and Logie (2001) measure WMS?

A

They measured word span and processing span

Remember last word of sentence and how many correctly answered

38
Q

What was the difference in Duff and Logie’s study compared with previous experiments on WMS

A

Previous studies measured memory and didn’t measure how well they did on the processing task

If they are drawing on the same mental ability, they should correlate highly

39
Q

How did Duff and Logie (2001) measure WMS?

A

They measured word span and processing span and together

Remember last word of sentence and how many correctly answered

40
Q

What did Duff and Logie (2001) find? and how might one interpret the results?

A

Little effect when combining tasks so implies processing and storing are separate systems

41
Q

What did Waters and Caplan (2003) investigate and how?

A

What is the most reliable measure of WM

groups between 20-80, measured twice across 6 weeks using 7 different measures of WM.

42
Q

What did Waters and Caplan (2003) find?

A

Processing time and memory score combine to give a better measure of WMC than memory score alone

Related?

43
Q

What did Daneman and Hannon (2007) evidence?

A

Verification time of whether or not the statement is true and memory score show very poor correlations

Processing and storage unerelated?

44
Q

What did Logie and Duff (2007) investigate?

A

working memory for the correlations between
memory and processing in working memory span
tasks

45
Q

Explain Logie and Duff (2007) experiment

A
  • Series of short sentences.
  • Respond true/false to each one, while maintaining accuracy
  • Time and accuracy recorded

At end of series – retrieve final words of sentences in correct order – select words from a word array

Span procedure – two trials at each level, from 2 to 6 sentences. Stopped if two in a row incorrect.

46
Q

3 predictions with Logie and Duff (2007)

A

1) Barrouillet and Camos: If Memory and Processing draw on a common resource with swapping between processing and
storage, then we would expect higher memory span
is correlated with longer response time (high +ve
correlation)

2) If general mental ability then high memory span is
associated with faster speed (-ve correlation)

3) If memory span and processing speed are unrelated, then expect a low correlation

47
Q

What were the results from the Logie and Duff
(2007) study, and how might those results be
interpreted by different working memory theories?

A

WMS and processing speed had little correlation!

Implies unrelated! Not strong evidence that they are relying on the same part of the cognitive system

Points to multiple resources fro processing and memory maintenance capacities

48
Q

What measures of working memory were included

in the BBC internet study?

A

Range of memory tests with several experiments
included across a life span

Focus here on working memory span

49
Q

What were the results of the BBC internet study?

A

Between 8-20 abilities are improving

Digit span improving more slowly than visual tasks

Beyond 20, digit span is strong for ages, visual pattern spans get real bad pretty fast

Visual STM is most sensitive and Verbal STM is least
sensitive. WM is intermediate

50
Q

Issue with the BBC study

A

cross sectional

51
Q

How might different theories interpret BBC results?

A

Multi: If it is all general attention why do they change at different rates across age

General: all to do with control of attention, focus of attention
- Storing a sequence of numbers requires less attention so ability decreases less with age

Eval: WM sentence span less effected by age which is supposed to push you to the limits so should drop the most…

Working Memory (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions