Upload
vernon-curtis-fletcher
View
232
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Situation Models and Embodied Language Processes
Franz Schmalhofer
University of Osnabrück / Germany
1) Memory and Situation Models
2) Computational Modeling of Inference Processes
3) What Memory and Language are for
4) Neural Correlates
5) Integration of Behavioral Experiments and Neural Correlates (ERP; fMRI) by Formal Models
Northwest of Germany
Schloß (University Building Osnabrück)
Cognitive Science in Osnabrück
Bachelor Degree:
Cognitive Psychology,
Computational Linguistics
Computer Science and
Artificial Intelligence
Neurobiology
Neuroinformatics
Mathematics
Philosophy of Mind
Masters Degree:
PhD Program:
Townhall of Osnabrück (early 17-th century negotiations for a European peace)
Central Europe: 1618 - 1648
Arbitrary and Perceptual Symbols
Steckenpferd
Hobby Horse
Franz Schmalhofer
EDUCATION
• 1978 Diplom Psychology
Universität Regensburg
• 1982 PhDUniversity of Colorado
• 1996 HabilitationUniversität Heidelberg
EMPLOYMENT
• Universität Heidelberg und Freiburg, 1982-1987
• McGill University/Montreal, 1987/88
• University of Colorado/USA, visiting, 1989
• German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI) Kaiserslautern, 1989-2000
• Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück; (Cognitive Psychology), since 2000
Introduction
• Please introduce yourself: Name, University, City, Country
• What you have studied so far
• What do you expect from this course
Situation models and Embodied Language Processes
1. Memory and Situation models 2. Computational Modeling of
Inference Processes3. What memory and language are
for4. Neural correlates of language
processes5. Integration of behavioral
experiments, computational models, neural correlates (ERP; fMRI)
• Analyze data from memory experiments
• Do a C-I model
• Embodied language processes; extend C-I model (marker passing);
• Discuss ERP and fMRI
• Levels approach, material structuring, analysis of dependent measures
Lectures Small group meetings
Memory and Situation Models
1. Osnabrück, Maps, Cognitive Science
2. Ebbinghaus and serial position effects
3. Serial position curves , Aktinson & Shiffrin as cognitive architecture
4. False memory, Loftus, Bransford & Franks
5. Referenced situation important, not so much the stimuli
Analyze false memory;
• Enter data; one participant per line
• Merge data
• Calculate means and standard deviations
Herrmann Ebbinghaus (1850 - 1909)
• Born in Barmen (near Bonn)
• studied in Bonn, Halle, Berlin,
• went abroad and tutored in France and England
• 1880 „Privatdozent“ at the University of Berlin
• 1885 „Über das Gedächtnis“
• then professor at Breslau and Halle
• What made Ebbinghaus famous?
Nonsense Syllables and Learning to Criterion
• Ebbinghaus used only himself as subject
• but strictly followed his experimental prescriptions
• commit CVC-trigrams (nonsense syllables) such as „gid, var, mon“ to memory
• in comparison to such syllables, memorizing a poem was approximately nine times faster
Number ofsyllables ina series
Number ofrepetitionsrequired forerrorlessreproduction
Probableerror
7 1
12 16.6 +
- 1.116 30.0 +
- 0.424 44.0 +
- 1.736 55.0 +
- 2.8
A natural science with statistical laws
Ebbinghaus, (1885/1913):• „When in repeated cases I memorised series of
syllables of a certain length to the point of their first possible reproduction, the times (or number of repetitions) necessary differed greatly from each other, but the mean values derived from them had the character of genuine constants of natural science (p. 52)
• logarithmic function of forgettingRubin & Wenzel (1996) One hundred years of forgetting.
Psychological Bulletin.• Ebbinghaus‘ results confirmed by many data sets
Human memory
• Human intelligence as adaptive behavior– for computational reasons,
memory is a necessary condition for being adaptive
• Memory system– Is it possible to identify
subsystems of memory?
– How do they interact?
• Memory contents– what information is stored?
– How is the information organized?
– How is the information retrieved
• Performance factors– Under what circumstances do
we remember less? more?
Memory in common experience
A phone numberremembered just
for dialing
A phone numberthat we have
forgotten
A well-learned phone number we
are currently thinking about
Well-learned phonenumbers we are
not currently thinking about
yes no
Memory content durable?
Memorycontent
currentlyavailable?
yes
no
Discuss
• Do the introspectively compelling properties of availability and durability provide an argument for postulating the existence of memory subsystems?
• What type of evidence would be needed to establish the existence of functionally different memory subsystems?
Classroom demonstration
dog
chair
coat
tree
table
flower
pants
sofa
mouse
horse
video
salad
shoe
• Instruction– 14 words are going to be
presented to you each for 1 s.
– try to remember as many as possible
– after the presentation, write down the words you remember in any order you like
dog
chair
coat
tree
table
flower
pants
sofa
mouse
horse
video
salad
shoe
Serial position effect
3 6 9 12 15serial position
recall idealized diagram!
20%
40%
60%
80%
Interpretation
3 6 9 12 15serial position
recall idealized diagram!
20%
40%
60%
80%short-termmemoryeffect
long-termmemoryeffect
Variation A of the experiment
nice
rainy
fast
bright
noble
round
blond
sunny
green
high
cheap
small
soft
tired
• Instruction– 14 words are going to be
presented to you
– try to remember as many as possible
– after the presentation, count backward from 315 for 20 sec
– then write down the words you remember
nice
rainy
fast
bright
noble
round
blond
sunny
green
high
cheap
small
soft
tire
Serial position effect: exp. A
3 6 9 12 15serial position
recall idealized diagram!
20%
40%
60%
80%
Cognitive Architecture: Memory model of Atkinson & Shiffrin (1971)
Sensory registers
visual..
auditory
Long term store
unlimited capacity
Response output
Enviromental input
Short term store
Temporyworking memory(limited capacity)
Multi-component working memory
• Baddeley (1992)– Phonological loop
– Visuo-spatial sketchpad
– Central executive
Visuo-spatial sketch pad
Phonological loop
Central executive
Experimental/Empirical Research Strategy in Cognitive Science
Human cognition as an object ofinvestigation
Computational theory
Data Hypothesis aboutspecific situations
modeling
prediction
experiment
derivation
revise
Forgetting
• Underwood (1957) reviewed forgetting over 24-hour retention interval– 80% forgotten, if 15 or more lists had been previously
learned
– 20- 25% if no earlier list had been learned
• Der Spiegel 14/1993: Wissenszwerge unter Druck: „Und von dem was bei Hörern, Lesern und Sehern ankommt, vergessen sie innerhalb von 24 Stunden mehr als 80 Prozent“. P. 150
Two-process theory of memory
• Recall = Search + Decision (i.e. retrieval + recognition)
• Recognition = Decision
• Whereas Recall involves two fallible stages, recognition involves only one
• Bahrick (1970): Pr (recall) = Pr (retrieval) * Pr (recog.)yielded good prediction of empirical results
Recognition and Recall Experiment
Four Stages• 1) Pairs of words are presented (cue + to-be-
remembered word); study second word (e.g. BLACK of word-pair; the cues (train) need not be remembered but might be helpful– train - BLACK
• 2) Freely associate to the cues which will be presented; write the words on the left side of a sheet of paper– bed - ?
• 3) Recognition task• 4) Recall task
Experiment by Tulving & Thomson (1973)
• 1) Study a word list with weak associates: pretty - BLUE
• 2) Write down what comes to mind from strong associates of the target word:– sky - ? (BLUE)
• 3) Recognition test (recall in the presence of the target):– BLUE; did it occur on list 1? Only 24 % yes answers
• 4) Cued recall test:– pretty - ? BLUE; 63 % of the words are correctly recalled
Classroom demonstration
BED
REST
AWAKE
TIRED
DREAM
WAKE
SNOOZE
BLANKET
DOZE
SLUMBER
SNORE
NAP
PEACE
YAWN
• Instruction– You will be presented with
three lists of English words
– Afterwards you will perform numerical tasks
– and your memory will be tested.
DROWSY
Classroom demonstration
STEAL
ROBBER
CROOK
BURGLAR
MONEY
COP
BAD
WOOD
CUSHION
SWIVEL
STOOL
SITTING
ROCKING
BENCH
ROB
JAIL
GUN
VILLAIN
CRIME
BANK
BANDIT
CRIMINAL
TABLE
SIT
LEGS
SEAT
COUCH
DESK
RECLINER
SOFA
Solve arithmetic problems
• 83 * 20 =
• 70 * 19 =
• 29 * 31 =
• Memory test
Recognition test on April, 21, 2002 in class; 45 participants
NO YES How confident are you: (1= not at all, 7=very)
objectively
DREAM 5 40 7 yes
FORK 45 0 7 no
WEATHER 45 0 6 no
BRACELET 45 0 5 no
CHAIR 10 35 4 lure
ROBBER 20 25 7 yes
STOOL 5 40 7 yes
TRAFFIC 45 0 6 no
Recognition test (continued)
NO YES How confident? objectively
SNOOZE 0 45 7 yes
COUCH 5 40 6 yes
RADIO 43 2 6 no
JAIL 10 35 6 yes
SLEEP 5 40 6 lure
SAND 45 0 7 no
BLANKET 25 20 6 yes
THIEF 42 3 5 lure
Bransford, Barclay & Franks (1972)
• 1a. Three turtles rested on a floating log, and a fish swam beneath them.
• 1b. Three turtles rested on a floating log, and a fish swam beneath it.
• 2a. Three turtles rested beside a floating log, and a fish swam beneath them.
• 2b. Three turtles rested beside a floating log, and a fish swam beneath it.
• Recognition test:
– When 1a was heard, false alarms on 1b
– When 2a was heard, only rare false alarms on 2b
Practical problems of memory
• Eyewitness testify that they recognize a person as having caused the accident or having committed the crime
• adults recover „repressed memories“ of sexual and/or physical abuse they suffered in childhood
• Can we trust their memory, when the event occurred a day, a month, a year, many years ago?
• Are these so called recovered memories genuine or are they false memories (i.e. the event never happened)
Influence of post-event informationLoftus & Palmer (1974)
• Memory for an incidence can be systematically distorted by questioning that occurs subsequently
• Film with multiple car accidents is shown.
• Participants describe what has happened.
• Questions– A) No question about car speed (control group).
– B) About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
– C) About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
• One week later all participants were asked: Did you see broken glass?
Estimated speed of car
Incorrect memories
Memory is suggestible
• Source misattribution: Believing sth that never happened
• Misinformation acceptance: additional information becoming part of a genuine experience
• Overconfidence in memory: Misremember what we have experienced
•Repeated exposure to misinformation
•Imagining that sth happened increases memory that it did happen
•Misinformation effects occur even when participants are warned beforehand
Individual differences (Tomes & Katz 1997)
• People accepting misinformation, tend to have
– Poor general memory
– High scores on imagery vividness
– High empathy scores
Bransford & Johnson (1972)
• The procedure is actually quite simple. First you arrange items into different groups. Of course one pile may be sufficient depending on how much there is to do. If you have to go somewhere else due to lack of facilities, that is the next step; otherwise, you are pretty well set. It is better not to overdo things. That is, it is better to do too few things at once than too many. In the short run this may not seem important, but complications can easily arise. A mistake can be expensive as well.
Recall and comprehension of „washing clothes“ story (Bransford & Johnson, 1972)
Summary of lecture (Memory)
• Empirical Precison: Forgetting and the differentiation betweeen short term and long term effects
• Formal Specification: The use and usefulness of computational models
• Experimental Demonstrations:– Distinction between explicit (verbal tasks) and implicit memories (behavioral
tasks) – Context effects (encoding specificity, mood congruency, transfer appropriate
processing) in recall (action oriented) and recognition (perception oriented)– „False memories“ and the distortions of memories, but also the improvement of
memory by topical information
• References: – Any recent text book on Cognitive Psychology (e.g. Eysenck & Keane, 2000,
Kellogg, 2003, or Sternberg, 2003)