Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: working memory
- Creators: Benitez, Viridiana
Description
Recognition memory is examined by exposing a person to a stimulus and later prompting them with the same stimulus to examine their ability to accurately acknowledge that the stimulus was previously encountered (Kahana, 2012). In recognition memory, confidence ratings are taken during the testing phase to assess how confident the participant is that the old-new judgment that they just made is accurate (Busey et al., 2000). Confidence is a metacognitive assessment about the accuracy of perception of decision making based on the amount, speed, and clarity of thoughts that come to mind (Dunlosky and Metcalfe, 2008). The goal of the current study is to better understand how assessing recognition memory using a variety of test procedures influences memory accuracy using the signal detection theory and adding multiple confidence scales that vary in granularity. Based on the previous literature, it is hypothesized that; 1) tasks ordered sequentially will produce greater recognition accuracy (d') than the simultaneous (dual task) condition; 2) confidence scale of 3 points will produce a larger d' than the 7 point scale, and the 7 point scale will produce a larger d' than the 100 point scale; and 3) task mode (ordered vs. sequenced) will interact with confidence scale granularity to predict memory accuracy, such that sequential judgments lessen demands on working memory that come from maintaining an increasing number of decision criteria in comparison to the dual task. Results indicated all hypotheses were not upheld. The findings suggest that taxing working memory may not affect decisional accuracy on a recognition task incorporating confidence judgments.
ContributorsSullivan, Krysten Jennifer (Author) / Brewer, Gene (Thesis director) / Blais, Chris (Committee member) / Davis, Mary (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-12
Description
The label-feedback hypothesis (Lupyan, 2007, 2012) proposes that language modulates low- and high-level visual processing, such as priming visual object perception. Lupyan and Swingley (2012) found that repeating target names facilitates visual search, reducing response times and increasing accuracy. Hebert, Goldinger, and Walenchok (under review) used a modified design to replicate and extend this finding, and concluded that speaking modulates visual search via template integrity. The current series of experiments 1) replicated the work of Hebert et al. with audio stimuli played through headphones instead of self-directed speech, 2) examined the label feedback effect under conditions of varying object clarity, and 3) explored whether the relative prevalence of a target’s audio label might modulate the label feedback effect (as in the low prevalence effect; Wolfe, Horowitz, & Kenner, 2005). Paradigms utilized both traditional spatial visual search and repeated serial visual presentation (RSVP). Results substantiated those found in previous studies—hearing target names improved performance, even (and sometimes especially) when conditions were difficult or noisy, and the relative prevalence of a target’s audio label strongly impacted its perception. The mechanisms of the label feedback effect––namely, priming and target template integrity––are explored.
ContributorsHebert, Katherine P (Author) / Goldinger, Stephen D (Thesis advisor) / Rogalsky, Corianne (Committee member) / McClure, Samuel M. (Committee member) / Benitez, Viridiana (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Statistical word learning (SWL) has been proposed and tested as a powerful mechanism for word learning under referential ambiguity. Learners are adept at resolving word-referent ambiguity by calculating the co-occurrences between words and referents across ambiguous scenes. Despite the generalizability of such capacity, it is less clear which underlying factors may play a role in SWL, such as learners’ language experience and individual differences of working memory. The current study therefore asked two questions: 1) How do learners of different language experience (monolinguals and bilinguals) approach SWL of different mapping types–when each referent has one name (1:1 mapping) or two names (2:1 mapping)? and 2) How do working memory capacities (spatial and phonological) play a role in SWL by mapping type? In this pre-registered study (OSF: https://osf.io/mte8s/), 69 English monolinguals and 88 bilinguals completed two SWL tasks (1:1 and 2:1 mapping), a symmetry span task indexing spatial working memory, and a listening span task indexing phonological working memory. Results showed no differences between monolinguals and bilinguals in SWL of both mapping types. However, spatial and phonological working memory positively predicted SWL regardless of language experience, but only in 1:1 mapping. The findings show a dissociation of working memory’s role in SWL of different mapping types. The study proposes a novel insight into a theoretical debate underlying statistical learning mechanisms: learners may adopt more explicit processes (i.e. hypothesis-testing) during 1:1 mapping but implicit processes (i.e. associative learning) during 2:1 mapping. Future studies can locate memory-related brain areas during SWL to test out the proposal.
ContributorsLi, Ye (Author) / Benitez, Viridiana (Thesis advisor) / Goldinger, Stephen (Committee member) / Brewer, Gene (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022