The multi-store model of memory proposes that memory consists of three distinct stores: sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory. Information flows from sensory memory to short-term memory, and information rehearsed in short-term memory is passed onto long-term memory. Murdock's free recall experiment provided support for separate short-term and long-term memory stores by showing that words at the beginning and end of a list were remembered differently. Biological evidence from Squire et al also supported distinct short-term and long-term memory systems in the brain.
Implications of 20 Years of CHC Cognitive-Achievement Research: Back-to-the...Kevin McGrew
Much has been learned about CHC CHC COG-ACH relations during the past 20 years (McGrew & Wendling’s, 2010). This presentation, made at the First Richard Woodcock Institute on Cognitive Assessment (Sept 29, 2012), built on this extant research by first clarifying the definitions of abilities, cognitive abilities, achievement abilities, and aptitudes. Differences between domain-general and domain-specific CHC predictors of school achievement were defined. The promise of Kafuman’s “intelligent” intelligence testing approach was illustrated with two approaches to CHC-based selective referral-focused assessment (SRFA). Next, a number of new intelligent test design (ITD) principles were described and demonstrated via a series of exploratory data analyses that employed a variety of data analytic tools (multiple regression, SEM causal modeling, multidimensional scaling). The ITD principles and analyses resulted in the proposal to construct developmentally-sensitive CHC-consistent scholastic aptitude clusters, measures that can play an important role in contemporary third method (pattern of strength and weakness) approaches to SLD identification.
The need to move beyond simplistic conceptualizations of COG COG-ACH relations and SLD identification models was argued and demonstrated via the presentation and discussion of CHC COG-ACH causal SEM models. Another example was the proposal to identify and quantify cognitive-aptitude-achievement trait complexes (CAATCs). A revision in current PSW third-method SLD models was proposed that would integrate CAATCs. Finally, the need to incorporate the degree of cognitive complexity of tests and composite scores within CHC domains in the design and organization of intelligence test batteries (to improve the prediction of school achievement) was proposed. The various proposals presented in this paper represented a mixture of (a) a call to return to old ideas with new methods (Back-to-the-Future) or (b) the embracing of new ideas, concepts and methods that require psychologists to move beyond the confines of the dominant CHC taxonomy of human cognitive abilities (i.e., Beyond CHC).
Thinking, Creativity, Decision Making and OpportunityMurray Hunter
Thinking, creativity & decision making - slide showing how our cognitive system works, how we make decisions, and the concept and elements of creativity - with a focus on entreprenurial opportunity
Implications of 20 Years of CHC Cognitive-Achievement Research: Back-to-the...Kevin McGrew
Much has been learned about CHC CHC COG-ACH relations during the past 20 years (McGrew & Wendling’s, 2010). This presentation, made at the First Richard Woodcock Institute on Cognitive Assessment (Sept 29, 2012), built on this extant research by first clarifying the definitions of abilities, cognitive abilities, achievement abilities, and aptitudes. Differences between domain-general and domain-specific CHC predictors of school achievement were defined. The promise of Kafuman’s “intelligent” intelligence testing approach was illustrated with two approaches to CHC-based selective referral-focused assessment (SRFA). Next, a number of new intelligent test design (ITD) principles were described and demonstrated via a series of exploratory data analyses that employed a variety of data analytic tools (multiple regression, SEM causal modeling, multidimensional scaling). The ITD principles and analyses resulted in the proposal to construct developmentally-sensitive CHC-consistent scholastic aptitude clusters, measures that can play an important role in contemporary third method (pattern of strength and weakness) approaches to SLD identification.
The need to move beyond simplistic conceptualizations of COG COG-ACH relations and SLD identification models was argued and demonstrated via the presentation and discussion of CHC COG-ACH causal SEM models. Another example was the proposal to identify and quantify cognitive-aptitude-achievement trait complexes (CAATCs). A revision in current PSW third-method SLD models was proposed that would integrate CAATCs. Finally, the need to incorporate the degree of cognitive complexity of tests and composite scores within CHC domains in the design and organization of intelligence test batteries (to improve the prediction of school achievement) was proposed. The various proposals presented in this paper represented a mixture of (a) a call to return to old ideas with new methods (Back-to-the-Future) or (b) the embracing of new ideas, concepts and methods that require psychologists to move beyond the confines of the dominant CHC taxonomy of human cognitive abilities (i.e., Beyond CHC).
Thinking, Creativity, Decision Making and OpportunityMurray Hunter
Thinking, creativity & decision making - slide showing how our cognitive system works, how we make decisions, and the concept and elements of creativity - with a focus on entreprenurial opportunity
MEMORY
By JOYSRI ROY
M.SC APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY
SEMESTER 1
CALCUTTA UNIVERSITY
Definition
Our ability to encode, store, retain and subsequently recall information and past experiences in the human brain.It is the sum total of what we remember, and gives us the capability to learn and adapt from previous experiences as well as to build relationships.
In more Physiological and neurological term, memory is, at its simplest , a set of encoded neural connections in the brain.
MEMORY PROCESS
1)Encoding
2)Storage
3)Retrieval
NEURO-BIOLOGY OF ENCODING
Process of laying down a memory begin with attention, which is regulated by thalamus and fontal lobe, in which a memorable event causes neurons to fire more frequently making the experience more intense and increasing the likelihood that the event is encoded as a memory. Emotion increases attention in the amygdala. The perceived sensation are decoded in the various sensory areas of the cortex. Then combined in the hippocampus into one single experience. Hippocampus analyzing these inputs and ultimately deciding if they will be committed to long- term memory.
TYPES OF MEMORY
1)Sensory memory
2)Short term memory
3) Long term memory
MODELS OF MEMORY
1) ALLEN D. BADDELEY’S MODEL
2)ATKINSON AND SHIFFRIN’S MODEL (1968)
3)LEVELS OF PROCESSING ( CRAIK AND LOCKHART)
ZEIGARNIK EFFECT
Bluma Zeigarnik , a Russian Psychologist, compared memory for tasks that were successfully completed and those which were not. She interpreted the work and did not allow them to finish it. Interrupted tasks were remembered more frequently than those which were completed.
Dutta and Kanungo gave a new interpretations to this effect.
The intensity of emotiom arousal by the completed tasks or the interrupted task is the critical factor. Any aivity that gives to strong emotion, be it pleasant or unpleasant , is remembered better than ordinary everyday actions
METHODS OF STUDYING MEMORY
1)FREE RECALL
2)RECOGNITION
3)PRIMIMG
FORGETTING
1)TRACE DECAY THEORY
2)DISPLACEMENT FROM STM
3)LACK OF CONSOLIDATION
4)RETRIEVAL FAILURE
5)INTERFERENCE THEORY
6)AMNESIA
TYPES OF MNEMONIC DEVICES
lecture 20 from a college level introduction to psychology course taught Fall 2011 by Brian J. Piper, Ph.D. (psy391@gmail.com) at Willamette University, Loftus, eyewitness memory
1. Introduction to Memory
The process by which we retain
information about events that have
happened in the past.
2. Models of Memory
a representation of
how memory Developed by Cognitive Psychologists
works
2. Working
Memory Model
– Baddeley & Hitch
1. Multi-store
Model
– Atkinson & Shiffrin
3. Multi-store Model of Memory (MSM)
Maintenance
rehearsal
(Elaborative)
Rehearsal
Sensory Short Term Long Term
External
Stimuli
Memory Memory Memory
(SM) (STM) (LTM)
Attention
Retrieval
Information If STM capacity Information in
enters information Information
is small,
memory the LTM is
is attended information that is
from the retrieved
to then it is not rehearsed rehearsed is
environment when needed
passed is lost through passed onto
and is and can last a
onto the displacement the LTM
registered by lifetime
STM or decay
the SM
4. Multi-store Model of Memory (MSM)
Key words/phrases! Linear process
Atkinson & Shiffrin
3 distinct (1968)
memory stores
Retrieval
Attention
Constraints e.g.
Rehearsal capacity, duration
and encoding
SM, STM & LTM
5. Get to know your components:
You need to know the characteristics of each
memory store in terms of:
o Capacity
o Encoding
o Duration
6. MSM –
get to know your components
Sensory Memory
Iconic Store –
Touch
Visual input
Receives
Sight
information
from the Sound
Echoic Store –
environment Auditory input
Taste
Smell Haptic Store –
Tactile input
Milliseconds
7. Sensory Memory
Encoding
Capacity Duration
Very brief
Accepts duration
Very limited
information
capacity
through all 5
(Sperling ,1960)
senses Sperling ,1960 –
visual info for
Holds the
Sperling, 1960 – milliseconds
‘impressions’ of
lab exp = iconic
information and
Baddeley, 1988 – Crowder, 2003 –
then they’re
Iconic allows us Auditory info for
gone!
to piece an image 2-3 seconds
8. MSM –
get to know your components
Short Term Memory Receives
information
Small amount of info
from the SM
Information not for a short time
rehearsed is lost
due to decay or Rehearsed
displacement information is passed
into LTM
Decay – Displacement –
Limited duration Limited capacity
9. Short Term Memory
Capacity Encoding Duration
5-9 items Acoustic
0-18 seconds
Jacobs (1887) Baddeley used
used the digit acoustically
span technique similar and Peterson &
dissimilar words Peterson used
nonsense
trigrams
10. MSM –
get to know your components
Receives
Long Term Memory
information
Link between from the
STM
amount of
rehearsal and Via rehearsal
strength of
memory trace
(engram)
Infinite capacity
Can last a lifetime
11. Long Term Memory
Capacity
Encoding Duration
Unlimited
Semantic
Unlimited
Merkle (1988)
Baddeley used
looked at number
semantically
of synapses in Bahrick found
similar and
brain, between that LTM is a
dissimilar words
1000 to 1000000 stable memory
GB store – school
photos
12. MSM – A02
Positive Negative
- Murdock (1962) - KF
- Squire et al (1992)
- KF
13. MSM – A02 (Murdock)
Position Position on
on list list
1 floor 16 voice
2 flower 17 front
3 America 18 degree
4 carpet 19 light
5 laugh 20 chief
6 animal 21 radio
7 point 22 paper
8 race 23 ring
9 hair 24 desk
10 boat 25 tree
11 frame 26 vase
12 mirror 27 smile
13 skin 28 Spain
14 circle 29 clock
15 printer 30 green
15. MSM – A02
How do you think Murdock provides support for the
Multi-Store Model of memory?
Supports the idea of the LTM and
STM being separate stores
Words at the
beginning of the
Words at the end of the list were list had been
still in the STM rehearsed –
therefore were
Words in the middle of the list had in the LTM
been displaced
16. MSM – A02
STM =
Squire et al prefrontal
cortex
Biological evidence –
LTM =
why is this a good thing? hippocampus
This is a strength because it provides scientific
(biological) evidence of 2 components of memory,
identified by the MSM
17. MSM – A02
STM =
KF severely
impaired
Demonstrates that it is
possible to damage just LTM = intact
one store
This is a strength because it provides evidence for
STM and LTM being unitary stores, as suggested by
the MSM
18. MSM – A02
STM =
KF partially
damaged
Demonstrates that it is
possible to damage part
of one store
This is a weakness because it goes against the MSM
theory that STM is a unitary store, according to MSM
is part of the STM is damaged it all should be.