Results with 14 undergraduate Ss are almost identical to those of Bransford and Franks: Ss frequently reported recognizing new sentences derived from the. Citation, Bransford, J.D. and Franks, J.J., The Abstraction of Linguistic Ideas. Cognitive Psychology 2, (). (pdf). Summary of Experiment. Replicated J. D. Bransford and J. J. Franks’s (see record ) 2nd experiment in as great a detail as the description of the original procedure would .
|Published (Last):||18 November 2010|
|PDF File Size:||10.35 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.45 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Neurological Evidence supporting multiple long term memory systems.
Now after they read the words and answer the questions, the subjects are randomly split into two groups. Each word is flashed on computer screen for 35 ms. Some effects of grammatical transformations on the recall of Btansford sentences.
STEP: Scripts: Memory: Bransford and Franks
The Integrative Memory Tendency: The implicit memory bransforf was NOT affected by the type of question which was paired with the word. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,4, Dissertation, University of Minnesota, Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse.
Thus, Ss are most confident of “recognizing” sentences expressing all the semantic relations characteristic of a complete idea, in spite of the fact that such sentences expressed more information than was communicated by any single sentence on the acquisition list.
The bransforr the propositional complexity, the more confident the subjects were that they had heard the sentence in List 1. Shows evidence that learning takes place when the subject is not aware their memory is going to be tested.
Alphabetical List Categorical List. Look Specifically at items 1,4,6,12, After they heard and 19711 24 sentences, there was a five minute delay, and subjects were then presented with a second list of sentences.
What was your average CR given for these items? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,2, This is a little bizarre that a consciously chosen encoding strategy can anr the unconscious process of Implicit memory tests. Integration of linguistic materials.
What was your average CR confidence rating tranks to these items? A second piece of evidence for semantic integration is that subjects were very good at responding “NEW” to sentences which combined ideas across groupings from the first list. Subjects were much more likely to “false alarm” or false positive to 3 and 4 propositional sentences.
Cognitive Psychology Class Notes: Schemas
Results indicate that during an acquisition phase of the experiments, Ss spontaneously integrate the information expressed by a number of non-consecutively experienced but semantically related sentences into wholistic, semantic ideas, where these ideas encompass more information than any acquisition sentence contained. The psychological reality of phrase-structure rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,5, Cognitive Psychology 2 Then they were asked to identify which of the sentences they had seen before.
These our ONE proposition statements.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
Propositional complexity in the first list varied from 1 to 3. This suggests that participants automatically integrate concepts they see into schemas that integrate the concepts. The participants were given a set of short sentences that expressed simple concepts.
Alphabetical List Categorical List Memory: Grammatical structure and the immediate recall of English sentences. Subjects are asked to identify the briefly presented word. In addition to rating the sentence as new or old, they also assigned confidence values which stated how sure the subject was of their response. Again, this is on more instance where we see “memory for meaning”, rather than verbatim recall of what was previously presented.
They identified the long sentences composed of the short sentences they had seen more readily than the short sentences themselves. Semantic Memory seems to be unaffected, while episodic memory is considerably disrupted, or not available for access. Second, PET scan results show different patterns of activation dependent upon whether subject is accessing a semantic or an episodic memory.
Ss’ subsequent attempts to recognize those exact sentences heard during acquisition are shown to be a function of the complete ideas acquired. Found evidence for depth of processing effects with Implicit memory tests. Ss become less confident of having heard particular sentences as a function of the degree to which a sentence fails to exhaust all the semantic relations characteristic of a complete idea.
Perception and Psychophysics,2, They constructed a clever experiment which showed how we link together related ideas into an integrated whole.
Even though there is considerable evidence that semantic and episodic memories become combined during normal comprehension, there is also evidence supporting the idea that these are separate memory systems. The phenomenon of “idea acquisition and retention” is demonstrated experimentally and contrasted with an “individual sentence memory” point of view. Since the complete integration of the related sentences resulted in a four proposition structure, they falsely believed the 4 proposition statements presented during the testing phase had indeed come from the original list, because that combined proposition is consistent with their internal mental representation of those related, but unconnected sentences.
Interlingual facilitation of short-term memory.