Langston psy 4040 cognitive psychology notes 5
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 76

Imagery PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 83 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Langston, PSY 4040 Cognitive Psychology Notes 5. Imagery. An Exercise. Imagine a dinner plate. It has spaghetti around the top rim. There is a carrot in the middle, pointing down. There are two fried eggs under the spaghetti. There ’ s a banana along the bottom rim. What do you see?.

Download Presentation

Imagery

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Langston psy 4040 cognitive psychology notes 5

Langston, PSY 4040

Cognitive Psychology

Notes 5

Imagery


An exercise

An Exercise

  • Imagine a dinner plate.

  • It has spaghetti around the top rim.

  • There is a carrot in the middle, pointing down.

  • There are two fried eggs under the spaghetti.

  • There’s a banana along the bottom rim.

  • What do you see?


Questions

Questions

  • What is a mental image?

    • How is it like reality, how is it different?

    • Does an image use the same neural hardware as experience?

  • Depending on how we answer the first set of questions, how do we know what’s real?


Architecture

Architecture

Recall our box model:

Sensory

Store

Filter

Pattern

Recognition

Selection

STM

LTM

Input

(Environment)

Response


Working memory

Articulatory

Loop

Visuo-Spatial

Sketchpad

Central Executive

Working Memory

We modified short-term memory into working memory:


Imagery

Imagery

  • Imagery is going to cover more than one box.

    • In working memory, it’s going to be in the visuo-spatial sketchpad.

    • It’s also going to influence long-term memory.


Plan of attack

Plan of Attack

  • How can we assess imagery (mostly a working memory issue)?

  • How does imagery affect memory (mostly a long-term memory issue)?

  • What are images (a test of the cognitive psychology paradigm)?

  • How do we maintain contact with reality?


Assessing imagery

Assessing Imagery

  • Spatial ability is somewhat independent of verbal ability. We can test it using methods similar to operation span or digit span.

  • I have two examples of operation span-type tasks:


Assessing imagery1

Assessing Imagery

  • Cube folding: Will the arrows touch if you fold these into cubes?


Assessing imagery2

Assessing Imagery

  • Cube task: Where does the X end up?


Assessing imagery3

Assessing Imagery

  • Note how both of these involve storage and processing.

  • In a college population, we see more variability in spatial ability than in verbal ability. Why?


Imagery and memory

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • Mental rotation tasks suggest that you use images in working memory in an analog way.

    • Shepard and Metzler (1972): Rotate images, look at response time.


Imagery and memory1

Imagery and Memory

  • Shepard & Metzler (1972):

    • A: “Same” rotated in picture plane.

    • B: “Same” rotated in depth.

    • C: Different.

Shepard & Metzler (1972, p. 702)


Imagery and memory2

Imagery and Memory

  • Shepard & Metzler (1972):

Shepard & Metzler (1972, p. 702)


Imagery and memory3

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • We can look at our CogLab results here…


Imagery and memory4

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • Other tasks also suggest analog use of images in working memory.

    • For example, imagine these times on an analog clock face. Which of each pair has a bigger angle between the hands?

      • 4:10 and 9:23

      • 3:20 and 7:25

      • 2:45 and 1:05

      • 3:15 and 5:30


Imagery and memory5

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • Scanning tasks show that the farther apart two things are on an image, the longer it takes to mentally scan from one to the other (e.g., Kosslyn, Ball, & Reiser, 1978).


Imagery and memory6

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

    • Memorize this map…

    • There’s a hut, a tree, a rock, a lake, a well, sand, and grass.

    • Hear the name of an object, then another. Imagine a black dot zipping from one to the other on the shortest path.

    • Push a button when it gets there.

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 51)


Imagery and memory7

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 52)


Imagery and memory8

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 52)


Imagery and memory9

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • We’re eventually going to have to address some problems with knowing if people are really using images, or if there are task demands that make the results come out this way.

    • Did Kosslyn et al.’s (1978) instructions cause the effect? Yes.


Imagery and memory10

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 54)


Imagery and memory11

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 54)


Imagery and memory12

Imagery and Memory

  • Kosslyn et al. (1978):

Kosslyn et al. (1978, p. 54)


Imagery and memory13

Imagery and Memory

  • Images in working memory:

    • Kosslyn et al. (1978) say it shows evidence for imagery, but that people don’t always use it.

    • Which is right?


Imagery and memory14

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning pictures (long-term memory):

    • Shepard (1967): Present 612 pictures or words with a recognition test. After 2 hours approximately 100% accuracy for pictures, 88% for words. After a week about 88% for both.

    • Standing (1977): Learn 1,000 words, 1,000 simple pictures, or 1,000 bizarre pictures. After 2 days recognition memory was 61.5% for words, 77% for pictures, and 88% for bizarre pictures.

    • Summation: Memory for pictures is better than memory for words, especially early on.


Imagery and memory15

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • If pictures are better, will forming images help memory? Yes.

    • Let’s start with a demonstration of the importance of the concrete-abstract dimension…


Imagery and memory16

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • We’ll consider mnemonic devices (memory tricks) in the long-term memory unit, but let’s look at an imagery-based one here.

    • Demonstration of the peg-word system:

      • Learn your system by heart.

      • Use the system to learn a list.

      • For example, if “one is a horse” and you need to buy floor polish, you could imagine a horse polishing the floor. For recall, you say “one is a horse” and that’s your cue.


Imagery and memory17

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • Paivio (1969) proposed a dual-code hypothesis to explain results like these.

      • Concrete words and pictures and effective peg-word systems generate two codes in memory, a verbal code and an image code.

      • Abstract words and ineffective peg-word systems only generate a verbal code.

      • Having two codes gives you a greater variety of cues that you could use to recall, and more chances to recall.


Imagery and memory18

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • More dual-code stuff.

      • A symbolic distance effect occurs when it’s easier to make judgments about items that are farther apart on a dimension than it is to make judgments about items that are close on a dimension.

      • For example:

        • The fly is bigger than the flea.

        • The mouse is bigger than the fly.

        • The rabbit is bigger than the mouse.

        • The dog is bigger than the rabbit.

        • The horse is bigger than the dog.


Imagery and memory19

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • Symbolic distance effect questions (true or false):

      • The fly is bigger than the flea.

      • The horse is bigger than the mouse.

      • The rabbit is bigger than the dog.

      • The mouse is bigger than the fly.

      • The dog is bigger than the horse.

    • Flea-Fly-Mouse-Rabbit-Dog-Horse


Imagery and memory20

Imagery and Memory

  • Learning with images:

    • More dual-code stuff.

      • Picture symbolic distance effect tasks are easier than verbal symbolic distance effect tasks (pictures access the system directly, verbal has to be recoded).

      • It’s pretty odd that the exact sentence you saw before (The fly is bigger than the flea) takes longer to verify than a new sentence (The horse is bigger than the mouse) if you don’t have images.


Structure of images

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Propositions: It’s essentially a verbal/symbolic thing. The feeling that you have an image is epiphenomenal, there isn’t really an image.

    • Pictures in the head: Images are what they feel like, a picture in the head whose properties are like the properties of the real thing.

    • Perceptual processing: Images use the same perceptual hardware you use to see, just not so much.

    • We’ll consider each.


Structure of images1

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Propositions

      • We’ll think about this later…


Structure of images2

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • It’s obviously not a literal picture. For example, a picture of a tomato is red, if you have an image of one, it’s not actually red.

      • Can we see if images and pictures are different? Yes.


Structure of images3

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Pictures support processing that images don’t.

      • For example, you can reverse pictures, but most people report that reversing images is very hard (relative to with a picture).


Structure of images4

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Pictures support processing that images don’t.

      • For example, it’s harder to decompose an image than it is to decompose a picture.

      • Let’s try a couple of examples:


Structure of images5

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Get a clear mental image of the picture below:


Structure of images6

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Are the following shapes in the picture you just saw?


Structure of images7

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head


Structure of images8

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Get a clear mental image of the picture below:


Structure of images9

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • Are the following shapes in the picture you just saw?


Structure of images10

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head


Structure of images11

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Pictures in the head

      • On the other hand, you can reinterpret images, but you have to be able to overcome low-level grouping processes (Finke, Pinker, & Farah, 1989).

      • For example:

        • Think of a lower-case k.

        • Imagine a circle around it, just not touching it.

        • Now, cut off the bottom half of the k.

        • What do you have?


Structure of images12

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • If images use visual hardware and words don’t, verbal and image information should not interfere. If they all use the same hardware, you should see interference.

      • Brooks (1968) looked at this. Let’s look at his task:


Structure of images13

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • Brooks’ (1968) task: Present block letter and answer sheet. Point to the Y or N depending on whether the corner is at an extreme part of the figure.

        YN

        YN

        YN

        YN

        YN

        YN


Structure of images14

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • Brooks’ (1968) task: Participants memorized the figure and then answered yes and no by pointing. They could also just make verbal responses. Pointing made it really hard.

      • On the other hand, when the task was to memorize a list of sentences and make judgments about the words, pointing was easier.

      • This suggests that images are using visual/perceptual hardware.


Structure of images15

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • On the other hand, images don’t seem to give after-effects.

      • Get a clear mental image of this flag.

      • What should happen if you maintain the image for a minute?


Structure of images16

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • Now stare at the dot for a minute and see what happens.


Structure of images17

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Use of the perceptual apparatus

      • Images should probably produce similar effects if they’re perceptual.


Imagery applications

Imagery Applications

  • Estes, Verges, & Barsalou (2008)

    • Reading words should lead to mental simulations of the words, using perceptual hardware.

    • Part of this simulation is location.

    • Trial:

      • Prime: Cowboy

      • Word: hat

      • Target: Letter (top or bottom of the screen)

    • If you simulate the location, then hat should interfere with letters at the top (you’re using that perceptual hardware). Boot would be opposite.


Imagery

Bear


Imagery

Snout


Imagery

A


Imagery applications1

Imagery Applications

Estes et al. (2008, p. 95)


Imagery applications2

Imagery Applications

  • Estes, Verges, & Barsalou (2008)

    • Sure enough, letters in objects’ typical locations took longer to identify.


Imagery applications3

Imagery Applications

  • Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)

    • Spatial iconicity effects also suggest that location is part of the representation of words and that location simulation is part of comprehension.

    • Present a pair of words, are they related?

      • Attic

      • Basement

    • Or

      • Basement

      • Attic


Imagery applications4

Imagery Applications

  • Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)

Zwaan & Yaxley (2003, p. 956)


Imagery applications5

Imagery Applications

  • Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)

    • When vertical arrangements were correct, participants were faster than when they were incorrect.

    • Again, location seems to be part of the understanding of a word.


Aside

Aside

  • We don’t address brains much in this class.

  • But, in this case reaction times may be too crude to detect whether or not “typical arrangement” is part of your semantic representation.

  • What follows is partially derived from Kutas and Federmeier (2000; doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01560-6)


Aside1

Aside

  • With event-related potentials (ERPs) you can measure changes in EEG as a result of presenting an event.

  • The figure on the next slide has lots of examples of N400: “a negative component peaking around 400 ms after stimulus-onset [that] has been shown to vary systematically with the processing of semantic information” (p. 463).


Imagery

Kutas & Federmeier (2000, p. 465)


Aside2

Aside

  • Will you get an N400 when you present stimuli from Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)?

  • Three kinds of comparisons:

    • Iconicvs.Unrelated

      AtticWitch

      BasementMedian


Imagery

Hubbard (2012, p. 17)


Aside3

Aside

  • Will you get an N400 when you present stimuli from Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)?

  • Three kinds of comparisons:

    • Reverse Iconicvs.Unrelated

      BasementWitch

      AtticMedian


Imagery

Hubbard (2012, p. 18)


Aside4

Aside

  • Will you get an N400 when you present stimuli from Zwaan & Yaxley (2003)?

  • Three kinds of comparisons:

    • Iconicvs.Reverse Iconic

      AtticBasement

      BasementAttic


Imagery

Hubbard (2012, p. 19)


Structure of images18

Structure of Images

  • Images could be:

    • Which is it?

      • We’re going to leave this issue unresolved. I think there is enough evidence to suggest that images are more than purely verbal/symbolic information (propositions). The extent to which they’re using perceptual hardware is something we won’t resolve here, but it’s an interesting cognitive question.

      • Something to noodle on: Can embodiment resolve some of this?

      • Something to noodle on: Can techniques like ERP help with this?


Reality monitoring

Reality Monitoring

  • If images use perceptual hardware, how do you know what you imagined vs. what you saw?

    • Cognitive hypothesis:

      • Lots of perceptual information with a little cognitive in the memory is probably something you saw.

      • Lots of cognitive with a little perceptual is probably something you imagined.


Reality monitoring1

Reality Monitoring

  • If images use perceptual hardware, how do you know what you imagined vs. what you saw?

    • Finke, Johnson, and Shyi (1988): Manipulate difficulty. Harder image work takes more attention and should be less confused with imagined events than easier image work.


Reality monitoring2

Reality Monitoring

  • If images use perceptual hardware, how do you know what you imagined vs. what you saw?

    • Complete these images:


Reality monitoring3

Reality Monitoring

  • If images use perceptual hardware, how do you know what you imagined vs. what you saw

    • Letters and numbers are easier, and it was harder for people to tell which ones they had seen as whole shapes and which ones they completed.

    • So, reality monitoring and errors are partly a function of effort.


End of imagery show

End of Imagery Show


  • Login