Texto original encontra-se em http://psych.utoronto.ca/courses/372h/hummem.html
Human Memory
Short Term Memory: A History
- It is often described as a
moment in time – but how long is that?
- The capacity of an ‘immediate’
memory preoccupied a number of philosophers of the 19th
century
- Original proposal by William
James (1890) under the name of ‘primary memory’
- Compared to STM, the term
primary memory places less emphasis on time (i.e. duration of
memory storage), and more emphasis on the roles of attention,
conscious processing and memory capacity.
- The first systematic
experimental work to be done on STM was by Joseph Jacobs (1887)
- He devised a technique called
‘Digit Span’ which has played an important role in memory
research
- Most people can manage 6 or 7
digits, but there is a large range (4-10+)
- This can be improved by speaking
them aloud or by chunking
- Intensive interest in STM
developed in the late 1950’s
- This came about as a result of
studies by Brown in the England and the Petersons in the US
- They showed that even sequences
in such a short memory span could show clear forgetting, IF, the
individual was prevented from thinking about it or rehearsing it.
- Now known as the Brown Peterson
Test
- The Peterson result caused
enormous interest for at least 2 reasons:
- It offered a neat and
economical technique for studying short term forgetting
- The Petersons interpreted
their result in terms of trace decay
- Release from proactive
inhibition/interference
- developed by Delos Wickens
- demonstrated nicely by
Gardiner, Craik & Birtwisle (1972)
o
sequences
of flower names that were separated into clusters of wild and
cultivated flowers
o
after
a number of clusters of cultivated flowers it switched to wild flowers.
No subject noticed this and thus none showed release from PI
o
However,
one group was warned of the change and suddenly showed release from PI
o
A
third group received this info AFTER the presentation of the
critical sequence but BEFORE recall. In fact, they showed
release from PI
Are Short Term and
Long Term Memory Separate?
- The most compelling cognitive
and truly scientific evidence against a unitary view of memory is
seen in free recall and the recency effect!
- The following affects LTM but
not STM:
1. Rate of presentation
2. Familiarity of the words
3. Level of distraction
4. Age
- Equally compelling evidence
against a unitary view of memory comes from studies with brain
damaged populations, in particular, amnesia
- Patient H.M is the most noted
patient for demonstrating differences between LTM and STM (Scoville
& Milner, 1957)
Patient HM
- Anterograde amnesia causing him
to forget episodes of daily life as rapidly as they occur
- Became amnesic as a result of a
bilateral surgical excisions of the medial temporal region to
relieve him of severe epilepsy
- The removal was intended to
include the amygdala, the hippocampal gyrus and the anterior two
thirds of the hippocampus.
Summary of abilities
since surgery:
- Fewer seizures
- Good vocabulary
- Normal language skills
- IQ in the normal to
bright-normal range
- Retains older memories
BUT
- Lost memory for events a couple
years pre-surgery
- New learning is severely
impaired
BUT
- Normal digit span
- Normal short term memory
capacity unless distracted
- Information is lost if rehearsal
is prevented
Animal Research Supports Above
- Same distinction between LTM and
STM has been demonstrated in animal research
- Using a radial maze with eight
platforms extending from a center, rats were taught to visit the
eight arms in a sequence determined by the experimenter
- Rats were given a choice test
involving arms 1 vs. 2, 4 vs. 5, or 7 vs. 8 and were rewarded for
entering the arm that had been visited earlier in the sequence
- Bilateral lesions of the
hippocampus eliminated the primacy but not he recency effect
- The introduction of a delay
resulted in the loss of the recency effect as well
Where are we Now?
- 19th century talk of
‘immediate memory’
- William James (1890) proposal of
‘primary memory’
- Joseph Jacobs (1887)
experimental work on Digit Span
- Brown and Peterson experiments
in 1950’s
- Free Recall work around the same
time
- Patient HM starting in 1953
- Animal research in early 1960’s
THEN WE GET
- Atkinson and Shiffrin Model
(1968)
- Craik and Lockart (1972) Levels
of Processing
Atkinson and Shiffrin Model
- By now there is a strong belief
in separate STM and LTM systems
- As we know – A&S thought
there to be the three major components
- STM plays a crucial role because
without it info can’t get into LTM
- According to A&S, STM not
only stored info but it also was involved in control processes
o
Rehearsal
was a control process - they believed the longer info was maintained
in STM the more likely it was to go to LTM
Problems with the Modal
Model
- How do we explain people with
impaired STM but unimpaired LTM?
- Tulving has demonstrated simply
repeating words does not enhance subsequent learning, rather
active learning did.
These problems resulted
in the loss of interest in the general area of STM. At the same time,
Craik and Lockhart’s (1972) levels of processing was becoming a hit.
Levels of Processing
- Emphasized the importance of
focussing on the MODE of processing rather than hypothetical
memory structures.
- The more ‘deeply’ an item is
processed the better it will be remembered
- They still believe in a primary
memory – but it’s role is to process incoming information
- Longer storage results from deep
processing, not from transfer from one store to another
- This resulted in the distinction
between maintenance rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal
- Normal ‘block-tapping span’
but could not learn past his span
- Same thing shown in studies of
serial position curve for free recall
- Normals and amnesics given lists
of words to recall
- Normals show serial position
effects (primacy and recency)
- Amnesics showed absent or
reduced primacy but normal recency
|