Building knowledge requires bricks, not sand: The critical role of familiar constituents in learning

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Lynne M. Reder ; Xiaonan L. Liu ; Alexander Keinath…
• 关键词：Episodic memory ; Human memory and learning ; Working memory ; Encoding effects
• 刊名：Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：February 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：23
• 期：1
• 页码：271-277
• 全文大小：431 KB
• 参考文献：Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412.CrossRef
  Bird, C. P., Nicholson, A. J., & Ringer, S. (1978). Resistance of the spacing effect to variations in encoding. The American Journal of Psychology, 91, 713–721.CrossRef
  Blumenfeld, R. S., & Ranganath, C. (2006). Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex promotes long-term memory formation through its role in working memory organization. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 916–925.CrossRef PubMed
  Braver, T. S., Cohen, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., & Noll, D. C. (1997). A parametric study of prefrontal cortex involvement in human working memory. NeuroImage, 5, 49–62.CrossRef PubMed
  Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55–81.CrossRef
  Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155.CrossRef PubMed
  Criss, A. H., Aue, W. R., & Smith, L. (2011). The effects of word frequency and context variability in cued recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(2), 119–132.CrossRef
  DeWitt, M. R., Knight, J. B., Hicks, J. L., & Ball, B. H. (2012). The effects of prior knowledge on the encoding of episodic contextual details. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(2), 251–257.CrossRef
  Diana, R. A., & Reder, L. M. (2006). The low-frequency encoding disadvantage: Word frequency affects processing demands. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(4), 805–815.PubMedCentral PubMed
  Ebbinghaus, H. (1964). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York, NY: Dover.
  Elman, J. L. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition, 48(1), 71–99.CrossRef PubMed
  Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Teschromer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.CrossRef
  Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.CrossRef PubMed
  Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1985). The mirror effect in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 13, 8–20.CrossRef
  Glenberg, A. M. (1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 7(2), 95–112.CrossRef
  Greene, R. L. (1989). Spacing effects in memory—Evidence for a 2-process account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 371–377.
  Hintzman, D. L. (1974). Theoretical implications of the spacing effect. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Theories in cognitive psychology: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 77–99). Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.
  Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446.PubMedCentral CrossRef PubMed
  Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319, 966–968.CrossRef PubMed
  Kirchner, W. K. (1958). Age-differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 352–358.CrossRef PubMed
  Madan, C. R., Glaholt, M. G., & Caplan, J. B. (2010). The influence of item properties on association-memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 46–63.CrossRef
  Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.CrossRef PubMed
  Multhaup, K. S., Balota, D. A., & Cowan, N. (1996). Implications of aging, lexicality, and item length for the mechanisms underlying memory span. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(1), 112–120.CrossRef
  Nelson, A., & Shiffrin, R. (2013). The co-evolution of knowledge and event memory. Psychological Review, 120, 356–394.CrossRef PubMed
  Nimmo, L. M., & Roodenrys, S. (2002). Syllable frequency effects on phonological short-term memory tasks. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 23(04), 643–659.CrossRef
  Poppenk, J., Kohler, S., & Moscovitch, M. (2010). Revisiting the novelty effect: When familiarity, not novelty, enhances memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1321–1330.PubMed
  Postman, L., & Knecht, K. (1983). Encoding variability and retention. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(2), 133–152.CrossRef
  Reder, L. M., Angstadt, P., Cary, M., Erickson, M. A., & Ayers, M. (2002). A reexamination of stimulus-frequency effects in recognition: Two mirrors for low- and high-frequency pseudowords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 138–152.PubMedCentral PubMed
  Reder, L. M., Nhouyvanisvong, A., Schunn, C. D., Ayers, M. S., Angstadt, P., & Hiraki, K. (2000). A mechanistic account of the mirror effect for word frequency: A computational model of remember-know judgments in a continuous recognition paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 294–320.PubMed
  Reder, L. M., Paynter, C., Diana, R. A., Ngiam, J., & Dickison, D. (2007). In B. Ross & A. S. Benjamin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 271–312). New York, NY: Academic Press.
  Reder, L. M., Victoria, L. W., Manelis, A., Oates, J. M., Dutcher, J. M., Bates, J. T., … Gyulai, F. (2012). Why it’s easier to remember seeing a face we already know than one we don’t: Pre-existing memory representations facilitate memory formation. Psychological Science, 24(3), 363–372.
  Ross, B. H., & Landauer, T. K. (1978). Memory for at least one of two items: Test and failure of several theories of spacing effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(6), 669–680.CrossRef
  Simon, H. A. (1974). How big is a chunk? Science, 183(4124), 482–488.CrossRef PubMed
  Tulving, E., & Kroll, N. (1995). Novelty assessment in the brain and long-term-memory encoding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 387–390.CrossRef
  Tulving, E., Markowitsch, H. J., Craik, F., Habib, R., & Houle, S. (1996). Novelty and familiarity activations in PET studies of memory encoding and retrieval. Cerebral Cortex, 6, 71–79.CrossRef PubMed
  
• 作者单位：Lynne M. Reder (1) (2)
  Xiaonan L. Liu (1) (2)
  Alexander Keinath (1) (2)
  Vencislav Popov (1) (3)
  
  1. Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA
  2. Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA
  3. Department of Cognitive Science and Psychology, New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria
  
• 刊物主题：Cognitive Psychology;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1531-5320

文摘

Despite vast efforts to better understand human learning, some principles have been overlooked; specifically, that less familiar stimuli are more difficult to combine to create new knowledge and that this is because less familiar stimuli consume more working memory resources. Participants previously unfamiliar with Chinese characters were trained to discriminate visually similar characters during a visual search task over the course of a month, during which half of the characters appeared much more frequently. Ability to form associations involving these characters was tested via cued recall for novel associations consisting of two Chinese characters and an English word. Each week performance improved on the cued-recall task. Crucially, however, even though all Chinese character pairs were novel each week, those pairs consisting of more familiar characters were more easily learned. Performance on a working-memory task was better for more familiar stimuli, consistent with the claim that familiar stimuli consume fewer working memory resources. These findings have implications for optimal instruction, including second language learning. Keywords Episodic memory Human memory and learning Working memory Encoding effects