Home > Preview
The flashcards below were created by user
on FreezingBlue Flashcards.
What type of experiments primarily determined what different components there were in the Working Memory model? Give an example study.
- Dual-task experiments
- eg. Robbins et al (1996)
- Chess move selection and effect of several concurrent tasks
- Key pressing task (visuo-spatial sketchpad) and random number generation (central executive) affected quality of chess moves.
- However, word repetition task (involve phonological loop) had no effect.
- Chess move selection involves central executive and visuospatial sketchpad, but not phonological loop.
[Phonological loop] List the two key empirical findings that provide insights into the structure of the phonological loop.
- Phonological similarity effect
- Word length effect
Describe the phonological similarity effect and the study associated with it.
- Baddeley (1966)
- Serial recall of list of phonologically similar words (eg. Fee, He, Knee) significantly worse than from list of phonologically dissimilar words (Bay, Hoe etc)
- whereas semantic similarity had little effect on recall
- Suggests that speech-based representations are used in storing the words (+ recall requires discrimination between memory traces)
Describe the word length effect and study associated with it.
- Recall of list of long words worse than recall of short words.
- Cultural differences in mean digit span also illustrates this effect - Chinese digits are relatively quick to say, whereas in Welsh it is not. Digit span higher in China than in Wales (also could be correlated to maths performance?)
- Baddeley (1975)
- If word length effect due to phonological loop, disrupting subvocal rehearsal should reduce effect.
- Participants silently mouth irrelevant digits (articulatory suppression) during presentation and recall of words
- This eliminated word length effect - suggesting phonological storage capactiy determined by rate of rehearsal.
So, from these 2 empirical findings, what did Baddeley conclude about the structure of the phonological loop?
- Distinction between 2 components...
- phonological store: speech perception
- articulatory control process: speech production (giving access to phonological store for visual stimuli)
- So... explanation for the findings
- Phonoglocal similarity effect: confusion between similar representations in phonological store
- Word length effect: time taken to rehearse longer words via articulatory control process
[Visuospatial sketchpad] There have been less study on this one. Most have focused on what type of study? Give example.
- The effect on different tasks of concurrent visual visuospatial processing
- Baddeley et al (1975)
- encode material either by rote verbal learning or imagery-based strategy
- when task combines with pursuit rotor tracking (tracking a moving light) performance using imagery-based strategy was disrupted.
However, Baddeley's use of rotor tracking involves both visual perception and spatial localisation. Which are more important for disrupting imgaery-based learning? Study please.
- Baddeley & Lieberman (1980)
- Repeated Baddeley (1975) experiment, but contrasting specifcally visual (making brightness judgments) and specifically spatial (pointing at moving pendulum while blindefolded, guided by auditory tone) concurrent tasks
- Learning using imagery strategy disrupted most by spatial concurrent task
From Badderley and Lieberman's study, it was shown that a distinction needed to be made between visual and spatial information processing. Who proposed this and what did it entail?
- Logie (1995)
- Visuospatial working memory can be divided into 2 components...
- Visual cache: passively stores info about visual form and colour and decays and gets interfered by new info
- Inner scribe: process spatial info and allows active rehearsal of info in visual cache
- (However, lecturer thinks it is weak model - ASK!)
How is Logie's model of visuospatial sketchpad supported by neuropsychological evidence?
- Patient NL: preserved perceptual skills but could not describe details of scene from memory (Beschin et al)
- Patient LH: perfrom better on spatial processing tasks than visual imagery (Farah et al)
[Episodic buffer]. So, these teo systems allow temporary storage of modality-specific info, but various findings are difficult to explain with this distinct-systmes approach. Outline some of these findings.
- Baddeley (1984): articulatory suppression does reduce memory span for visually-presented material too (from 7-->5) but doesn't eliminate it like phonological loop model predicts
- Patients: with impaired ST phonological memory (with auditory span of 1 digit) can recall more digits with visual presentation (ASK WHY THIS IS RELEVANT!)
- Chincotta et al (1999): dual-task method used to study memory span for Arabic numerals (1,2,3) and digit words (one, two, three). Participants used both verbal and visual representations in performing task.
- These suggest verbal and visual info must be combined and stored somewhere in working memory.
What was a further issue/phenomena that couldn't be explained simply by 2 modality-specific stores
- Memory span for meaningful sentences can be as much as 15-16 words, much more than normal phonological loop capacity (Baddeley et al, 1987)
- Traditional explanation is that info from LTM is used to integrate words into meaningful 'chunks'
- BUT in densely amnesic patients (with grossly impaired LTM) can exhibit normal immediate sentence span (Baddeley & Wilson)
- Also densely amnesic patient able to continue playing bridge, keeping track of all cards that have been played (Baddeley 2000)
- Working memory model needed new temporary storage system allowing verbal and visual codes to be combined and linked into multi-modal representation.
Outline the evidence from neuroimaging for a distinct, multi-modal short-term store.
- Prabhakaran et al (2000)
- Working memory task requiring retention of integrated verbal and spatial info
- Result: activation in right frontal cortex greater for retention of integraded info - consistent with episodic buffer
- Posterior regions exhibited material-specific working memory effects - consistent with phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad
- Overall, episodic buffer useful addition, but lacks detailed account of how it integrates info from other components and from LTM is lacking.
[Central executive] Most important but least known about because of its complexity and somewhat vague specification. However, certain functions have been identified. What are they? (4)
- Smith & Jonides (1999)
- Identified major functions of central executive:
- 1. switching attention between tasks
- 2. planning sub-tasks to achieve a specified goal
- 3. selective attention to certain stimuli while ignoring others
- 4. updating and checking contents of other working memory stores
Describe a study which demonstrated the existence/mechanism of central executive.
- Baddeley (1996)
- Random generation
- Participants hold 1-8 digits in mind while trying to generate random sequence of key presses.
- Randomness decreases as digit memory load increases
- Suggesting greater demands on general-purpose, limited capacity central executive
What are other things Baddeley found about the central executive with the random generation paradigm?
- Concurrently reciting alphabet or counting didn't affect performance but alternating between letters and numbers decreased randomness
- suggesting that rapid switching of attention is another function of central executive
What is the impairment of the central executive called? What are the symptoms?
- Dysexecutive syndrome
- Rylander: disturbed attention, increased distractibility, difficulty grasping the whole of a complicated state of affairs, cannot master new types of task in new situations
What brain regions are associated with dysexecutive syndrome?
- D'Esposito: dorsolateral regions of frontal lobe show greater activity in dual-task than single-task conditions
- Duncan et al: lateral frontal cortex is neural basis of 'general intelligence' characterised as specific system involve in control of diverse forms of behaviour.
NOTE: Read summary slide on PP and ask lecturer questions! Bit hard to understand some of the bits - especially episodic buffer and central executive.
Good job. Keep going Ron.