1/167
Looks like no tags are added yet.
attention
a process that enables continued cognitive processing
ability to focus on specific stimuli or locations
attentional capture
rapid shifting of attn. usually caused by a stimulus such as a loud noise, bright light, or sudden movement
properties of attention
(1) limited: not all sensory stimuli simultaneously get continued processing
(2) selective: attn. must be selective exactly bc it is limited (can't attend to everything)
consequence of selectivity
sometimes you're attending to the wrong thing
how are stimuli attended to
stimuli → processing physical characteristics → processing semantics → awareness
early filter
everything is processed for physical characteristics (filter before semantics)
what you attend to is processed for meaning and to awareness
late filter
everything is processed for physical characteristics and semantics
selection doesn't occur until messages are processed enough to determine meaning
what you attend to goes into awareness
dichotic listening
2 different messages; asked to shadow what is heard in attended ear
don't remember words from unshadowed
don't notice if speech is played backward or if lang. changes
DO notice if a pure tone is played or there's a gap
shadowing
procedure of repeating what you are hearing (in dichotic listening task)
cocktail party phenomenon
ability to focus on 1 stimulus while they filtering out others nearby
monitoring background noise to see if anything demands attn. (testing the name works, but only 1/3 the time)
early filter says this would never work
treisman's dichotic listening experiment
mixed up sentences; switch to unattended ear when sentence switches then go back
evidence for late filter bc how could you switch between attended & unattended at the right time if you weren't picking up semantics
dichotic listening & GSR
(1) classical conditioning; shock associated with 3 city names (train until GSR response)
(2) dichotic listening: shadow irrelevant message from one ear - the other ear gets words, plus occasional city names
results: participants showed the GSR response most to the old city names (38%), then 23% new city names & 10% new nouns
conclusion: unattended material is evaluated for meaning (all stimuli are evaluated for their semantic content)
load theory
attn. resources are limited so w/ a low-load primary task, you have remaining cognition resources to spare (might be able to process at semantic level)
high-load (demanding): difficult, not as well practiced so use up processing capacity (no cog. resources remain)
stroop effect
demonstrates how a powerful task-irrelevant stimulus can capture attention → reading words is highly practiced & has become so automatic that it is difficult NOT to read them
bottom up selection & scanning
physically salient stimuli attract attn. (saliency map)
meaningful (cog. factors) attract attn. (schemas; look longer at out-of-place)
scanning based on task demands ("just in time" strategy)
strategies employed to avoid distraction
faces are socially important & it's hard NOT to attend to them (change your place or space)
habituate: continued exposure no longer demands attn. (effective for stimuli that don't change much aka static; complexity ok)
overt top down selection
moving eyes
visual search (harder when it's a configuration of visual clues; i.e. Waldo)
you have a specific thing in mind that you want to attend to
searching by color is relatively easy (much harder by meaning)
saccadic eye movement
rapid, jerky movement from one fixation to the next
covert top down selection
NOT moving eyes
attn. as a spotlight that enhances perceptual processing (metaphor only partly correct)
"attn. beam"
attentional cues experiment
cross on screen --> arrow in direction to direct attn --> delay --> go signal
when the cue is valid, RT fast
when the cue is invalid, RT slow
neural basis of the beam
neural evidence shows that damage to diff parts of the brain support 3 separate processes: disengage, move, engage
disengage damage
posterior parietal cortex
valid trials = okay on either side
invalid trials = really bad on the contralateral side; difficult to disengage attn.
move damage
superior colliculus
valid trials = very slow to show the advantage of cue (but do show it)
invalid trials = slow but not a special problem (at short delays, cue is not used)
don't show cost or benefit
engage damage
thalamus
valid trials = don't use cues much
invalid trials = don't use cue much (easily distracted by irrelevant stimuli) -you can't really see an advantage or disadvantage bc response times are always really slow bc attention is never engaged...it's always drifting.
beam metaphor conclusions
a couple of predictions of metaphor do NOT work
moving attn. greater distances don't take a longer time
moving attn. isn't slowed down by intervening stuff
beam implies attn. selects space
spatial vs. object-based selection
can attend to just 1 word, based on color, even though another word overlaps in space
implication: when you switch, you are switching not to a location in space, but to another object or object part
but different parts of the parietal lobe are maximally active during b/w object shifts & w/n object shifts
implication: possible that both mechanisms are present
automatic processing
little or no attn. cost
w/ or w/out intention
no affected by motivation
can happen w/out awareness
controlled processing
attn. cost
occurs only w/ the intention
affected by motivation
only w/ awareness
switching in complex tasks
initially huge interference in complex tasks but after continued practice sessions subjects developed automaticity
can you practice switching & get generally better at it?
younger people are better at multitasking but it doesn't follow age, follows WM capacity
it's not practice, it's working memory
cost of multitasking
high multitaskers have worse attn. control
switching NOT sharing
change blindness
failing to notice changes in the environment
attn. is necessary for perception
i.e. movie continuity
attention as the "binder" of experience
sometimes you know what you want to attend to, but you're not currently attending to it, so you need to redirect attn. to appropriate target
binding
the process by which features (color, form, motion, location) are combined to create our perception of a coherent object
broadbent's filter model of attention
input --> filter --> detector --> memory
the attended message is separated from the incoming signal early in the analysis (all other messages filtered out)
filter identifies the message being attended to based on physical characteristics & sends it to the detector to process it for higher-level characteristics (meaning) before sending it to STM
attenuator model
analyzes incoming messages in terms of physical characteristics, language & meaning
analysis of the message proceeds only as far as it is necessary to identify the intended message
"leaky filter" model where the attended massage emerges at full strength (unattended messages are present, but weaker)
inattention blindness
failing to see visible objects when our attention is directed elsewhere
feature integration theory (triesman)
objects are analyzed into their features & their attn. is necessary to combine these features to create the perception of an object
binding occurs by proposing 2 stages of processing
(1) preattentive stage: objects analyzed into separate features (independent)--> illusory conjunctions
(2) focused attn. stage: free-floating features are combined so we can perceive the object (eliminates illusory conjunctions)
illusory conjunctions
combinations of features from different stimuli
conjunction search
search for combination of two or more features in same stimulus
attention takes possession of the brain
covert attn. to an object or location enhances brain activity associated with the object or location
topographic "attn." map
automaticity is
consistent
sperling's partial-report method
sensory memory demonstration: letters presented --> blank screen --> tone indicates which row of letters to recall
showed people can see & Recall
measuring the capacity & duration of sensory store (sensory memory fades fast)
properties of iconic memory
large capacity (up to 20 characters)
physical properties; little semantic
rapid loss through decay or masking
modal model of memory
3-stage memory model that divides memory into sensory, STM & LTM
STM vs. working memory
STM: storage
WM: storage + thinking
short term memory
window on the present
holds 5-7 items for 15-20s
sensory
patient clive
viral encephalitis: damage to the hippocampus
problem: storage, can't get anything from STM to LTM
had extreme anterograde (can't encode new) BUT also lost some retrograde
components of phonological loop
phonological store: stores about 2s (limited) of auditory info (from the environment)
articulatory control/rehearsal process: info enters the store from this process of talking to yourself (prevents decaying)
properties of phonological loop
limited capacity
temporary, sound-based storage (~2s)
must be attended to periodically & rehearsed in order to be preserved
phonological similarity effect
impaired serial recall for items similar in sound (issue is pronunciation not # of items)
acoustic info is the storage code in the phonological loop
word-length effect
serial recall of sequences declines as the length of time it takes to say each word increases
memory for lists of words is better for short than long
3 ways to code
acoustically
visually
semantically (meaning)
visuospatial sketchpad
where you store visual or spatial info
similar to mental imagery
central executive
the attentional controller that selects & regulates the flow of info within working memory
helps maintain info WM stores & coordinates other cog. processes
decide how to divide attn.
WM capacity & focused attention
individuals with stronger working memory are better able to focus & ignore distractions
better self regulation & impulse control
memory
process involved in retaining, retrieving, and using info about stimuli, images, events, ideas and skills after original info is no longer present
persistence of vision
continued perception of a visual stimulus after it is no longer present (i.e. sparkler)
iconic memory
persistence of vision
duration of visual sensory memory is < 1s
echoic memory
persistence of sound
auditory sensory memory is 2-4s
proactive interference
info learned previously interferes with learning new info
retroactive interference
new learning interferes with remembering old learning
digit span
7 ± 2 items (capacity of STM)
more recent estimates 4 but can be expanded by chunking
chunking
small units can be combined into larger meaningful units
using prior knowledge to group items together (strong associations)
meaning matters for memory
working memory
limited capacity system for temporary storage & manipulation of info for complex tasks such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning
sustained activation of representations
behaviors that depend on WM can be disrupted by damage to the prefrontal cortex
articulatory suppression
repetition of irrelevant sound reduces memory because speaking interferes with rehearsal
overloads the phonological loop
mental rotation
reaction times longer for greater differences in orientation
rotate image of object in mind to solve the problem
event-related potential (ERP)
brain response that indicates how much space is used in WM as task is carried out
episodic buffer
component of working memory where WM info interacts with LTM info
makes interchange/connection so greater storage capacity is possible
encoding
process of getting info & transferring it into LTM
phase of experiment when info might go into LTM
factors that affect getting into LTM
imagery
emotion
repetition
thinking about meaning (depth)
effort/desire to learn
effect of emotion on memory
emotion at encoding boosts memory
BUT maybe it's not the emotionality of the object, but some other property (i.e. guns attract attn. bc they're most likely to be "active in a scene"
cahill experiment with emotion & memory
slideshow about a kid visiting his dad (surgeon) at work
some subjects said the dad was operating on victims of accident vs. drill operation on dolls (showing identical slides and prompting high or low emotional responses with just slight changes in the accompanying story.)
emotional response at encoding does lead to better memory
repetition
sheer repetition does NOT necessarily lead to memory for the stimulus
generally good for memory, but must be the right type of repetition
effort to learn
intention or effort is irrelevant
depth has a big effect
limitations of levels of processing
(1) definition of levels & circularity
(2) we can't ignore what's happening at retrieval
circularity
defining a procedure as deeper bc it results in better memory
then using that procedure to show that deeper processing results in better memory
doesn't prove anything
flashbulb memories
happen during very high-emotion
similar accuracy but higher confidence
accuracy & longevity thought to maybe indicate special memory process
transfer-appropriate processing
when the type of process is the same in encoding & retrieval, memory will be successful
cue matches what you thought about during encoding
dangerously circular idea
shows that deeper processing at encoding does NOT always result in better retrieval
anterograde amnesia
old memories mostly intact
can't encode new memories
retrograde amnesia
old memories lost
new memories encoded normally
temporal gradient (retrograde amnesia)
not all past memories are equally affected
recent memories very affected, distant not so much
test for public events or famous faces
consolidation
initially, mems are fragile --> must be consolidated after they're encoded
the process by which memories become more stable, even if they are not practiced
takes years for a memory to be fully consolidated
mems don't sit passively after they are encoded --> mems are consolidated for years after (even those not thought about)
evidence of consolidation in anterograde amnesia
if you have anterograde, you always have some degree of retrograde
parts of the brain that encode new mems are the same that consolidate them
free recall
minimal info from experimenter --> "remember"
context usually implied, occasionally described
cued recall
experimenter gives part of info (retrieval cues) to aid in recalling the previously experienced stimuli
recognition
to-be-remembered info is presented along with distractors & must distinguish new from old
savings in relearning
learn some material to a criterion & # of trials required is noted
later, relearn material to the same criterion (if fewer trials are required, that is savings)
difficulty of memory retrieval
free recall is hardest --> cued recall --> recognition --> savings
sensitivity of memory retrieval
savings --> recognition --> cued recall --> free recall
a better way to think about cues
different cues are more/less likely to make you think about material the way that you thought about it at encoding
combination of memory
actual events
relevant prior knowledge
schemas
memory representation of a type of event
characteristics generally true of event not a specific event
things that conflict more attended to remembered
script / event schemas
things that conflict with schema are attended to & remembered
at encoding: schemas make atypical things stand out & memorable
at retrieval: schemas make it seem likely that typical things happened, even if they didn't
retrieval
process of transferring info from LTM to working memory
before material that has been encoded can be used, it must be retrieved
maintenance rehearsal
rehearsal that involves repetition without any consideration of meaning or making connections to other info
elaborative rehearsal
better way to establish LTM bc you are making meaningful connections
levels of processing theory
memory (retrieval) depends on how info is encoded into the mind
depends on the depth of processing (shallow vs. deep)
deep processing
close attention to meaning
relating it to something else
shallow processing
little attention to meaning (repetition, physical features of words)
not as effective