Lab #5 Neuropsychology -2

docx

School

University of Colorado, Boulder *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

4155

Subject

Psychology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by bengoldberg402

1. What is the sentence superiority effect? Be sure to describe the different conditions needed to examine sentence superiority. - The Sentence superiority effect is a cognitive phenomenon observed in psychology in regards to the study of memory and processing. Specifically, finding people tend to remember words or information better when they are presented in a meaningful sentence compared to just presented in isolation. In the study, the participants (individuals with amnesia and healthy controls were presented with a sentence condition. Meaning they were exposed to a series of words arranged in coherent sentences and provided meaningful context to the words just presented. The list condition is where the participants were presented with the same words but arranged randomly or without any meaningful structure, this served as a comparison to memory recall. After exposure to both of these conditions, the participants were tested on their memory recall ability. They were asked to recall as many words as possible. 2. What is the visuospatial bootstrapping effect? Be sure to describe the different conditions needed to examine visuospatial bootstrapping. - This effect helps explore how immediate digit recall is influenced by the presentation of digits in either a typical or atypical visuospatial context. The study examines whether individuals with amnesia can benefit from this effect provided by a typical keypad layout. The typical Keyboard condition is where a sequence of digits were presented to the participants as if they were entering these digits into a typical numeric keypad. Similar to the layout of numbers on a telephone keypad which represented the typical visuospatial context. The next condition is the atypical keypad condition where the same sequences of digits were presented by the digits were arranged in an unfamiliar atypical layout on the screen which disrupted the usual visuospatial context. After exposure to both of these conditions, participants were tested on their immediate digit recall abilities. They were asked to recall the sequences of digits they had seen in the order presented. 3. According to the introduction, briefly explain why the prior effects indicate an interaction between short-term memory (STM) and long-term memory (LTM)? - In the intro of this study, it is suggested that effects indicate an interaction between short-term memory and long-term memory due to various studies that have shown that STM performance can be influenced and improved by the presence of the information stored in LTM. in other terms, there is evidence to say that the contents of LTM can enhance the processes of STM. 4. According to the introduction, what approach do the authors say they use to understand if the hippocampus is necessary for STM/LTM integration (e.g., what is the study’s approach)? Briefly, what does this approach entail? - In the introduction, the authors mention that they used a lesion based approach

to understand if the hippocampus is necessary for the integration of short term memory and long term memory. This involves studying individuals with damage to the hippocampus which is typically due to brain lesions or injury and examine their performance in tasks that require the transfer of information between STM and LTM. They hope by comparing the performance of individuals with hippocampus damage to that of healthy controls, this will help determine whether or not the hippocampus is critical for the STM/LTM transition. 5. In the Experiment 1 results, (a) did the size of the sentence superiority effect differ between amnesic patients and normal control subjects? Think: what variable’s main effect or interactions between variables would answer this question? (b) Report the ANOVA results that support this conclusion (e.g., F(df1, df2) = X, p = Y). - No, the size of sentence superiority effect did not change between amnesic patients and normal control subjects. The conclusion is based on the absence of an interaction between the group (patient, control) variable and the context (list and sentence) variable in ANOVA. The results that support this is (F(1,22) <1, p = 0.75). 6. In the Experiment 1 results, (a) did the size of the sentence superiority effect differ between amnesic patients with damage limited to the hippocampus (H) and those whose MTL damage extended beyond the hippocampus (H+)? (b) Report the ANOVA results that support this conclusion (e.g., F(df1, df2) = X, p = Y). - The size of the sentence superiority did not differ between amnesic patients with damage limited to the hippocampus and those whose MTL damage extended beyond the hippocampus. The interaction between the group (H-only patients and H+ patients) and context (list, sentence) were not significant. (context x group, F(1,4) = 0.21, p = .67). 7. What do the Experiment 1 results suggest about the necessity of the hippocampus and MTL cortex for observing the sentence superiority effect? - This suggested that both the hippocampus and the MTL cortex are not necessary for observing the sentence superiority effect. This conclusion comes from that amnesic patients (H-only patients and H+ patients) both exhibited a similar sentence superiority effect. 8. In the Experiment 2b results, (a) did the size of the visuospatial bootstrapping effect differ between amnesic patients and normal control subjects? (b) Report the ANOVA results that support this conclusion (e.g., F(df1, df2) = X, p = Y). - The size of the visuospatial bootstrapping effect did not differ significantly between amnesic patients and normal control subjects. The interaction effect of group (patient, control) and keypad context is F(1,22) < 1.0, p > .97. 9. In the Experiment 2b results, (a) did the size of the visuospatial bootstrapping effect differ between amnesic patients with damage limited to the hippocampus (H) and those whose MTL damage extended beyond the hippocampus (H+)? (b) Report the ANOVA results that

support this conclusion (e.g., F(df1, df2) = X, p = Y). - The size of the visuospatial bootstrapping effect did not differ between amnesic patients with damage limited to the hippocampus (H) and (H+). There is no significant main effect of group (H-only vs. H+) on the visuospatial bootstrapping effect (context x group interaction, F(1,3) < 1.0, p = 0.77). 10. What do the Experiment 2 results suggest about the necessity of the hippocampus and MTL cortex for observing the visuospatial bootstrapping effect? - The results suggested that the necessity of the hippocampus and MTL cortex for observing the visuospatial bootstrapping effect may not be as critical as it is for other memory related effects. 11. From the General Discussion, (a) summarize the domain-specific theories of hippocampal function the authors discuss on p. 278, and (b) name and provide an example of the associations important for these theories. - The domain specific theories of hippocampal function suggest that the hippocampus is not necessary for all types of memory association and that the role may be more specific in linking particular types of information. In particular, they think that the hippocampus is primarily needed for linking cross-domain representations between non-adjacent and weakly connected neocortical regions. An example of the association important for these theories involve linking info from different cognitive domains. For example, associations between items that belong to different categories or domains such as item-location associations (associating an object with its spatial location) or face-voice associations (connecting a person’s face with their voice). 12. What do the results of these studies suggest about extending the domain-specific theories to the binding of information across STM and LTM (STM-LTM integration) and why? (Hint: this can be answered in one sentence) - The results of the studies suggest that domain specific theories of hippocampal function may not apply to the binding of information between STM and LTM. Because both within domain and cross domain STM-LTM integration appear to be intact in amnesia. 13. In the General Discussion, what two memory models do the authors discuss in relation to their own results? - They discuss Baddeley’s revised working memory model and state-based models of STM. 14. Your textbook distinguishes between lesion studies using the single case and group approaches. Which approach, or perhaps combination of approaches, did this study use? - The study primarily focused on the group approach in lesion studies. They conducted experiments with a group of amnesic patients and a group of healthy control subjects to make comparisons and come up with conclusions about the effect of hippocampal damage on the STM-LTM integration. The study also

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

mentions individual patient data but the main approach was to compare groups rather than focus on single cases.

Related Documents

Quiz- The Christian Counselor's Ministry and Roles .docx

The Theories on Lifespan Development.docx

3.docx

Copy of PSYC 3111 Group Activity #6 .pdf

Movie Paper Instructions Spring 2023_9c25e4e9b5fc97b3e1c393e687f8fb01 copy.pdf

AB 1.docx

Annotated Bibliography W 2.docx

SWLS.docx

Quiz #1 Chapters 1-3- Attempt review.pdf

Quiz_ History of Schooling_Teaching and Learning.pdf

Untitled document (2).pdf

Textbook Critique Paper Proposal 1.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780134477961

Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White

Publisher:PEARSON

Cognitive Psychology

Psychology

ISBN:9781337408271

Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.

Publisher:Cengage Learning,

Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...

Psychology

ISBN:9781337565691

Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780393265156

Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga

Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company

Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...

Psychology

ISBN:9781285763880

Author:E. Bruce Goldstein

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)

Psychology

ISBN:9781305652958

Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz

Publisher:Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780134477961
Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Publisher:PEARSON
Cognitive Psychology
Psychology
ISBN:9781337408271
Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.
Publisher:Cengage Learning,
Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...
Psychology
ISBN:9781337565691
Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780393265156
Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga
Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company
Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...
Psychology
ISBN:9781285763880
Author:E. Bruce Goldstein
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)
Psychology
ISBN:9781305652958
Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz
Publisher:Cengage Learning