Notes for 10/25/03
Ex) Have you stopped beating your wife? If yes, assume they were beating wife, if no, assume they still are beating their wife. No other alternatives.
Bandwagon- If x is popular, then x is correct.
Ex) Hoover vacuum is America's vacuum, therefore is the best vacuum
- Classical Storehouse Metaphor
~people thought it was simple and appealing
~some thought it was vague because non-empirical
- Are the alternatives any better?
~yes, more functional and detailed
- What principles are used with alternatives (question #1)?
-old system: "grandmother cell": actually nothing that localized
-new idea: what is actually taking place in time is different from time to time
-What does categorization say about early categories?
~i.e. babies crying response- do they only have one category to start, and then can later separate and make distinctive cries?
- the probably don't have the same categorization from the beginning, not the same brain involvement
~ ecological approach- 2nd design principle from chapter 10 because must be complete and situated to interact with environment. This is a somewhat radical idea that suggests memory is not in brain, but is the sensory systems interacting with the environment.
1) Talk about the differences between the storehouse metaphor and Broca's view.
- Broca's does not believe memory is as abstract, sensory motor area is involved
- This view says that we don't have memory of the words themselves, but how to
2) Do you agree with the authors that it is not a good idea to couple memory a priori with consciousness, or may consciousness be important in memory?
- Consciousness is important, rehearsal is conscious.
- The authors suggest that explicit memory doesn't really matter. They assume
that explicit memory will just come out, but it is equally relevant.
- ex) Oliver Sachs: no explicit, has implicit, but can still perform physical tasks
3) The book talks about many memory systems and how the storehouse model cannot accommodate all of these systems. Do you think there is an actual system that controls all memory or are they just local entities that all effect each other?
- Many modules, splicing memory in different ways.
-All under one central system
-Modules work together and can be studied independently.
- can't know if they are separate until you destroy one and others are fine
- ex) Aspen trees, all individual, but largest organism in the world
4) Obviously complete-agent systems need memory to survive interactions with the environment. Organisms developed memory to survive on this planet and as such would lead a person to think it has evolved just as everything else has. Do you think that global memory systems suggested in the ecological approach were once single systems that didn't overlap each other?
-Do primitive organisms rely on more simple systems?
- ex) smell for elephants
- If we use two separate ideas of cross-modal processes
5) Please review the idea of the global chaotic attractor and the sentence "a chaotic attractor is a region in phase sequence that is bounded but whose trajectory cannot be predicted" cuz I was all like, HUH?
- If you view as a dynamical system you would have a lot of dimensions which
would give you face space.
-Behavior is described as a trajectory through the space, this is one equation.
-Chaotic= small changes = change in whole trajectory
6) Since we know that removing or damaging parts of the temporal lobe causes memory failure, does the idea of localized function (storehouse metaphor) really suck as bad as ch. 15 suggests?
- Storehouse can be part of the model- strong for explicit which is also thrown out
- can still think of storage and retrieval without localization.
7) I don't see how recall can be a type of recategorization. If anyone can help me out I'd appreciate it.
- Anytime you recall a memory, you have to change that memory after retrieval.
Always trying to remember specifics, you recategorize to find invariance which
can only be found in interplay with behavior.
8) I think because the brain is so plastic, many approaches to memory can be proven false in some way. My question is can an approach be postulated without combining many if not all of the theories of memory?
- Yes- approach would just have to be focused. Would need qualified theory
9) Describe the differences between long-term and short-term memory as it might be applied to the ecological approach.
-Changes in environmental interaction is different
-Ecological approach may not distinguish
10) Can you explain figure 15.6? I found it to be rather busy and confusing
- different inputs make different pathways.
- if combine two, creates a whole new pathway
11) There is a view that if you memorize something in a room, then you will be better able to remember that thing in that room than somewhere else.
- context memory: ecological approach, cues from environment, incorporate into memory using embedded global system
12) Would a robot/computer be able to pick up on implicit memory? Wouldn't this be less obvious for them and therefore difficult to process?
-Yep- they don't have a capacity limitation for explicit memory, they take in everything
13) I don't understand the "attractors and memory" view, can you go over this?
- When you go through process, create staple attractors
- i.e. waving fingers, either together or exactly opposite
Or horses gating, if at certain speed, fit into one gate
- Because of dynamics of a system, only certain attractors emerge.