Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
GoingBatty (talk | contribs) m General fixes & manual cleanup |
||
| (48 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Psychological model of memory}}
The '''levels
This theory contradicts the multi-store [[Atkinson-Shiffrin memory model]] which represents memory strength as being continuously variable,
In a study from 1975 (Craik and [[Endel Tulving|Tulving]]) participants were given a list of 60 words. Each word was presented along with three questions. The participant had to answer one of them. Those three questions were in one of three categories. One category of questions was about how the word was presented visually ("Is the word shown in ''italics''?"). The second category of questions was about the phonemic qualities of the word ("Does the word begin with the sound 'bee'?"). The third category of questions was presented so that the reader was forced to think about the word within a certain context. ("Can you meet one in the street [a friend]"?) The result of this study showed that the words which contained deep processing (the latter) were remembered better.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Craik,
==Modifiers==
Line 9 ⟶ 10:
===Familiarity===
A stimulus will have a higher [[Recollection|recall]] value if it is highly compatible with preexisting semantic structures (Craik, 1972). According to [[semantic network]] theories, this is because such a stimulus will have many connections to other encoded memories, which are activated based on closeness in semantic network structure.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.3758/BF03210735 |journal=Psychonomic Bulletin & Review |last=Rhodes |first=MG |author2=Anastasi JS |title=The effects of a levels-of-processing manipulation on false recall |year=2000
===Specificity of processing===
Specificity of processing describes the increased recall value of a stimulus when presented in the method with which it was
===Self-reference effect===
Levels of processing have been an integral part of learning about memory. The self-reference effect describes the greater recall capacity for a particular stimulus if it is related semantically to the subject. This can be thought of as a corollary of the familiarity modifier, because stimuli specifically related to an event in a person's life will have widespread activation in that person's semantic network.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 121| issue = 3| pages = 371–394| last = Symons| first = CS|author2=Thompson BT | title = The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis | pmid = 9136641 | journal = Psychological Bulletin | year = 1997
| url = http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=chip_docs
| doi = 10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371 | format = pdf | url-access = subscription}}</ref> For example, the recall value of a personality trait adjective is higher when subjects are asked whether the trait adjective applies to them than when asked whether trait adjective has a meaning similar to another trait.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 14| issue = 5| pages = 785–794| last = Kelley| first = WM |author2=Macrae CN |author3=Wyland CL |author4=Caglar S |author5=Inati S |author6= Heatherton TF | title = Finding the Self? An Event-Related fMRI Study | pmid = 12167262 | journal = Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience| year = 2002| doi = 10.1162/08989290260138672| citeseerx = 10.1.1.522.2494| s2cid = 2917200}}</ref>
===Implicit memory and levels-of-processing===
Implicit memory tests, in contrast with explicit memory tests, measure the recall value of a particular stimulus based on later performance on stimulus-related tasks. During these tasks, the subject does not explicitly recall the stimulus, but the previous stimulus still affects performance.<ref>{{Cite journal | volume = 45 | pages = 1043–1056 | last = Roediger | first = HL | title = Implicit memory: Retention without remembering | journal = American Psychologist | year = 1990 | doi = 10.1037/0003-066X.45.9.1043 | pmid = 2221571 | issue = 9 }}</ref> For example, in a word-completion implicit memory task, if a subject reads a list containing the word "dog", the subject provides this word more readily when asked for three-letter words beginning in "d". The levels-of-processing effect is only found for explicit memory tests. One study found that word completion tasks were unaffected by levels of semantic encodings achieved using three words with various levels of meaning in common.<ref>{{Cite journal | issn = 0002-9556 | volume = 102 | issue = 2 | pages = 151–181 | last = Schacter | first = DL |author2=McGlynn SM | title = Implicit memory: Effects of elaboration depend on unitization | journal = The American Journal of Psychology | year = 1989 | doi = 10.2307/1422950 |
"Memory over the short term and the long term has been thought to differ in many ways in terms of capacity, the underlying neural substrates, and the types of processes that support performance."<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Rose | first1 = N. S. | last2 = Craik | first2 = F. M. | year = 2012 | title = A processing approach to the working memory/long-term memory distinction: Evidence from the levels-of-processing span task | url = https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/300| journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,
====Long-term memory====
We especially remember information if we relate it to ourselves.
Damage to the hippocampus produces an inability to form or retrieve new long-term memories, but the ability to maintain and reproduce a small subset of information over the short term is typically preserved.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Baddeley | first1 = A. | last2 = Warrington | first2 = E. | year = 1970 | title = Amnesia and the distinction between long- and short-term memory
==Sensory modes ==
Line 32 ⟶ 33:
===Vision===
[[Visual perception|Visual input]] creates the strongest recall value of all senses, and also allows the widest spectrum of levels-of-processing modifiers. It is also one of the most widely studied. Within visual studies, pictures have been shown to have a greater recall value than words – the [[picture superiority effect]]. However, semantic associations have the reverse effect in picture memories appear to be reversed to those in other memories. When logical details are stressed, rather than physical details, an image's recall value becomes lower.<ref>{{Cite journal | issn = 0278-7393 | volume = 11 | issue = 2 | pages = 284–98 | last = Intraub | first = H |author2=Nicklos S | title = Levels of processing and picture memory: the physical superiority effect| pmid = 3157769 | journal = Journal of
===Hearing===
Auditory stimuli follow conventional levels-of-processing rules, although are somewhat weaker in general [[Recollection|recall]] value when compared with vision. Some studies suggest that auditory weakness is only present for [[explicit memory]] (direct recall), rather than [[implicit memory]].<ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.3758/BF03210786 |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=130–133 |last=Habib |first=R |author2=Nyberg L |title=Incidental retrieval processes influence explicit test performance with data-limited cues |journal=Psychonomic Bulletin & Review |year=1997 |
| pmid = 9679776 | doi-access = free | hdl = 21.11116/0000-0001-A1F6-3 | hdl-access = free }}</ref>
===Touch===
[[Touch|Tactile]] memory representations are similar in nature to visual representations, although there is not enough data to reliably compare the strength of the two kinds of stimuli. One study suggests that there is a difference in mental processing level due to innate differences between visual and tactile stimuli representations.<ref>{{Cite journal
|doi=10.3758/BF03214345
|volume=4
|issue=4
|pages=535–540
|
|first1=Kavitha
|author2=Greene AJ
Line 51 ⟶ 52:
|journal=Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
|year=1997
|doi-access=free
▲}}{{dead link|date=May 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> In this study, subjects were presented with an object in both visual and tactile form (a subject is shown a sphere but cannot touch it, and later is given a similar sphere to only hold and not view). Subjects had more trouble identifying size difference in visual fields than using tactile feedback. A suggestion for the lower level of size processing in visual fields is that it results from the high variance in viewed object size due to perspective and distance.
===Smell===
Line 60:
==Neural evidence ==
Several brain imaging studies using [[positron emission tomography]] and [[functional magnetic resonance imaging]] techniques have shown that higher levels of processing [[correlate]] with more brain activity and activity in different parts of the brain than lower levels. For example, in a lexical analysis task, subjects showed activity in the [[prefrontal cortex|left inferior prefrontal cortex]] only when identifying whether the word represented a living or nonliving object, and not when identifying whether or not the word contained an "a".<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1073/pnas.91.6.2008| volume = 91| issue = 6| pages = 2008–2011| last = Kapur
| first = S|author2=FIM Craik |author3=E Tulving |author4=AA Wilson |author5=S Houle |author6=GM Brown | title = Neuroanatomical Correlates of Encoding in Episodic Memory: Levels of Processing Effect | journal = [[Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences]] | year = 1994 | pmid = 8134340| pmc = 43298 | doi-access = free| bibcode = 1994PNAS...91.2008K}}</ref> Similarly, an auditory analysis task showed increased activation in the left inferior prefrontal cortex when subjects performed increasingly [[semantic]] word manipulations.<ref name = Fletcher/> Synaptic aspects of word recognition have been correlated with the [[Operculum (brain)|left frontal operculum]] and the cortex lining the junction of the inferior frontal and inferior precentral sulcus.<ref>{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1093/cercor/10.7.698 | volume = 10 | issue = 7
| pages = 698–705 | last = Friederici | first = AD |author2=Opitz B |author3=Yves von Cramon D | title = Segregating semantic and syntactic aspects of processing in the human brain: an fMRI
==Mental disorders==
Line 68:
===Age-related memory degradation===
{{main|Memory and aging}}
Memory encoding strength derived from higher levels-of-processing appears to be conserved despite other losses in memory function with age. Several studies show that, in older individuals, the ability to process semantically in contrast with non-semantically is improved by this disparity. Neural imaging studies show decreased [[Prefrontal cortex|left-prefrontal cortex]] activity when words and images are presented to older subjects than with younger subjects, but roughly equal activity when assessing semantic connections.<ref>{{Cite journal | volume = 10 | issue = 2 | pages = 224–231 | last = Grady | first = CL |author2=Craik FIM | title = Changes in memory processing with age | journal = Current Opinion in Neurobiology |year = 2000 | doi = 10.1016/S0959-4388(00)00073-8 | pmid = 10753795 | s2cid = 9567476 }}</ref>
===Panic disorders===
Panic disorders appear to modify levels-of-processing by increasing ability to [[Recollection|recall]] words with threatening meanings over positive and neutral words. In one study, both implicit (free recall) and explicit (memory of emotional aspects) memorization of word lists were enhanced by threatening meanings in such patients.<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1007/BF01173032| volume = 15| issue = 5| pages = 371–386| last = Cloitre | first = M |author2=Liebowitz MR | title = Memory bias in panic disorder: An investigation of the cognitive avoidance hypothesis | journal = Cognitive Therapy and Research| year = 1991 | s2cid = 24229675}}</ref>
===Alzheimer's disease===
Modern studies show an increased effect of levels-of-processing in Alzheimer patients. Specifically, there is a significantly higher recall value for semantically encoded stimuli over physically encoded stimuli. In one such experiment, subjects maintained a higher recall value in words chosen by meaning over words selected by numerical order.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 6| issue = 8| pages = 583–588| last = Scott| first = L. C.|author2=G. K. Wright |author3=G. S. Rai |author4=A. N. Exton-Smith |author5=J. M. Gardiner | title = Further evidence of preserved memory function in Alzheimer's disease| journal = International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry| year = 1991| doi = 10.1002/gps.930060806| s2cid = 144360572}}</ref>
===Autism===
In autistic patients, levels-of-processing effects are reversed in that semantically presented stimuli have a lower recall value than physically presented stimuli. In one study, [[phonological]] and [[orthography|orthographic]] processing created higher recall value in word list-recall tests.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 40| issue = 7| pages = 964–969| last = Toichi| first = M |author2=Kamio Y | title = Long-term memory and levels-of-processing in autism| journal = Neuropsychologia | year = 2002 | doi = 10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00163-4| pmid = 11900748 | s2cid = 37972435}}</ref> Other studies have explicitly found non-semantically processed stimuli to be more accurately processed by autistic patients than in non-autistic patients.<ref>{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1093/brain/awh561| volume = 128| issue = 10| pages = 2430–2441| last = Bertone| first = A |author2=Mottron L |author3=Jelenic P |author4=Faubert J | title = Enhanced and diminished visuo-spatial information processing in autism depends on stimulus complexity| journal = Brain | date = 2005-10-01| url = http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/128/10/2430| format = abstract| pmid = 15958508| doi-access = | url-access = subscription}}</ref> No clear conclusions have been drawn as to the cause of this oddity.
==References==
Line 84:
{{memory}}
[[Category:Memory
[[Category:Memory biases]]
| |||