memory--retrieval. for later... try to remember these words
TRANSCRIPT
• Measures of memory
• Relative difficulty of different measures of memory
• Role of cues in memory retrieval
• Retrieval and prior knowledge
MeasuresFree recall: Minimal information from experimenter: experimenter simply says “Remember” and the contextis usually implied, occasionally described.Cued Recall: Experimenter also gives part of the information, or some related information.Recognition: The to-be-remembered information is presented, along with other stuff (distractors) and the subject must distinguish new from old.
Savings in relearning: Subject learns some material to a criterion, and the # of trials required is noted. Later subject relearns the material to the same criterion; if fewer trials are required, that is savings.
Difficulty
An important principle is this:Whether or not it appears that someone rememberssome material depends on the way that you measuretheir memory.
That is, it can appear that someone has forgotten somematerial, but if you give them a different test, it is clear that they remember it.
Shepard & Recognition memory
Subjects see 512 words, then take a 2-choice recognition test--get 88%
Subjects see 612 brief sentences (e.g., “The truck swerved to avoid the limping deer”), then take 2-choice recognition test--get 88%
Final experiment = colored pictures cut from magazines.
Caveat
Although it’s true that recognition memory is usually very good, you have to bear in mind that the difficulty of a recognition task depends on the distractors.
SensitivityAlthough we can’t talk about the absolute sensitivity of free recall, cued recall, and recognition, we can talk about the relative sensitivity (usually). IN GENERAL
Free recall< cued recall< recognition.
Tulving & Pearlstone, 1966: Condition 1: Free recall, then cued recallCondition 2: Cued recall, then cued recallCued recall 50% more remembered than free.
Hart, 1965, 1967: When free recall fails, subjects recognize answer 50% of the time
Nelson, 1978 When recognition fails, subjects relearn the material faster than new material
Recognition more sensitive than free recall
Cued recall more sensitive than free recall
Savings more sensitive than recognition
Why the difference in sensitivity?
It feels like memory success is some combination of memory strength and the sensitivity of the test.
Tests are sensitive to the extent that they give you good cues.
Free recall: context (time and place)Cued recall: context + partial informationRecognition: context + all information
Does # of cues (sensitivity) explain everything?
No, what’s actually important is whether the cues make you think of material the same way at encoding and retrieval.
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
Pro
port
ion
Corr
ect
Recognition Rhyming
Type of Test
Deep Encoding
Shallow Encoding
Rhyming
Meaning
Transfer Appropriate Processing
The importance of cues
We can extend transfer appropriate processing: cues are important not just if they are about sound (rhyming) vs. about meaning: they are important if they make you think about different things about material, even if all the cues concern meaning
Barclay et al.
This effect works even if you don’t change the word, but just emphasize different properties of the word!
E.g., “The moving men struggled to get the PIANO up the stairs.
Cue: something that makes music (avg. 1.6 words/10)Cue: something heavy (avg. 4.6 words/10).
We can take this effect one step further:if a recall cue is better at making you thinkas you did at encoding than a recognition cue,you should be better at cued recall than recognition.
Recognition failure of recallable words
Participants see word pairs:
glue: CHAIRground: COLD
They are told they need only remember the wordsin capital letters, but the other words might help.
Recognition failure of recallable words
They get two tests:
Recognition test:
CHAIR NURSE SHELL
Cued recall test:glue: ground:
Recognition failure of recallable words
Key finding: there are some words for which people fail to recognize the word, but then are able to recall it.
The point: recognition failure of recallable words effect is consistent with the idea that different measures of retrieval lead to better or worse recall because they provide different cues, and the cues are more or less likely to make you think about material the way that you thought about it at encoding.
Why do people remember “sleep?”
• They might think about “sleep” at encoding
• They know the list is composed of words related to sleep, so at retrieval, “sleep” seems like a plausible list member.
Retrieval & prior knowledge
We can generalize from this “sleep” example to say that memory is almost always a combination of the actual event plus relevant prior knowledge.
What type of prior knowledge?
Schemas
A memory representation of a type of event, characteristics generally true of the event, not of a specific event.
Schemas• What’s in your schema of a doctor’s visit?
Things that conflict with the schema are attended to and remembered. Things that are not part of the schema but are irrelevant are not.
Schemas
• Would it stand out if the nurse didn’t say “The doctor will be with you shortly” after leaving you in the exam room? Would you perhaps remember that she did say that week later?
At encoding: schemas make atypical things stand out, and they are memorable.At retrieval: schemas make it seem likely that typical things happened, even if they didn’t.
Most memory researchers believe that all memory is a reconstruction. You combine what happened with what you believe probably happened and that’s your memory.
Retrieval success varies with cues. Cues vary in the extent to which they make you likely to think about material the way you did at encoding.