Levels of processing model: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Sp12342 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Citation bot (talk | contribs)
m Alter: url, title. Removed parameters. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.| Activated by User:Marianne Zimmerman
Line 9:
 
===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 |url=http://lamar.colostate.edu/~mrhodes/RA00.pdf |format=pdf |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=158–62 |pmid=10780030 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080906162014/http://lamar.colostate.edu/~mrhodes/RA00.pdf |archivedate=2008-09-06 |df= }}</ref> This activation increases cognitive analysis, increasing the strength of the memory representation. The familiarity modifier has been tested in [[implicit memory]] experiments, where subjects report false memories when presented with related stimuli.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Toth |first=JP |year=1996 |title=Conceptual automaticity in recognition memory: Levels-of-processing effects on familiarity |journal=Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology |url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3690/is_199603/ai_n8735087 |volume=50 |issue=1 |pmid=8653094 |pages=123–38 |doi=10.1037/1196-1961.50.1.123 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080124111249/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3690/is_199603/ai_n8735087 |archivedate=2008-01-24 |df= }}</ref>
 
===Specificity of processing===
Specificity of processing describes the increased recall value of a stimulus when presented in the method with which it was inputted. For example, auditory stimuli (spoken words and sounds) have the highest recall value when spoken, and visual stimuli have the highest recall value when a subject is presented with images.<ref name = Vaidya2002>{{Cite journal| volume = 40| pages = 2136–2143| last = Vaidya| first = CJ |author2=Zhao M |author3=Desmond JE |author4=Gabrieli JDE | title = Evidence for cortical encoding specificity in episodic memory: memory-induced re-activation of picture processing areas | journal = Neuropsychologia | year = 2002 | url = http://web.mit.edu/gabrieli-lab/Publications/2002/Vaidya.Neuropsy.2002.pdf | doi = 10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00053-2 | format = pdf | pmid = 12208009| issue = 12 }}</ref> In writing tasks, words are recalled most effectively with semantic cues (asking for words with a particular meaning) if they are encoded semantically (self-generated by the subject as being related to a particular meaning). Words are recalled most effectively with data-driven cues (word completion) if they are read, rather than generated by a subject.<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 15| issue = 4| pages = 657–668| last = Blaxton| first = TA| title = Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework| journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition | year = 1989| url = http://www.colby.edu/psychology/ps341fa06/papers/Blaxton,%201989.pdf | format = pdf | doi = 10.1037/0278-7393.15.4.657 }}</ref>
 
===Self-reference effect===
Line 22:
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 | jstor = 1422950 }}</ref> Another found that typical level-of-processing effects are reversed in word completion tasks; subjects recalled pictures pairs more completely if they were shown a word representing a picture rather than asked to rate a picture for pleasantness (semantic encoding).<ref>{{Cite journal | volume = 18 | issue = 6 | pages = 1251–1269 | last = Roediger | first = HL |author2=Stadler ML |author3=Weldon MS |author4=Riegler GL | title = Direct comparison of two implicit memory tests: word fragment and word stem completion | journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition | year = 1992 | doi = 10.1037/0278-7393.18.6.1251 | pmid = 1447550 }}</ref> Typical level-of-processing theory would predict that picture encodings would create deeper processing than lexical encoding.
 
"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, and Cognition | volume = 38 | issue = 4| pages = 1019–1029 | doi = 10.1037/a0026976 | pmid = 22268911 }}</ref>
 
====Long-term memory====
Line 61:
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 }}</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 investigation of different word types | journal = Cereb. Cortex | year = 2000 | url = http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/10/7/698 | format = pdf | pmid = 10906316}}</ref> The self-reference effect also has neural correlates with a region of the medial [[prefrontal cortex]], which was activated in an experiment where subjects analyzed the relevance of data to themselves.<ref>{{Cite journal | 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 |year = 2002 | doi = 10.1162/08989290260138672 | pages = 785–794 | volume = 14 | issue = 5 | journal = Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience | pmid = 12167262 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.522.2494 }}</ref> Specificity of processing is explained on a neurological basis by studies that show brain activity in the same ___location when a visual memory is encoded and retrieved, and lexical memory in a different ___location.<ref name = Vaidya2002/> Visual memory areas were mostly located within the bilateral [[Extrastriate cortex|extrastriate visual cortex]].
 
==Mental disorders==