Familiaridade interfere no reconhecimento e na natureza da representação memorizada, não no processo de recuperação

Isabella Wada e Pucci, César Aléxis Galera

Resumo


Nossa capacidade de armazenamento é maior para estímulos com os quais estamos mais familiarizados.  No entanto, os processos específicos afetados pela familiaridade ainda são pouco conhecidos. Nós investigamos o efeito da familiaridade sobre a recuperação de representações visuais em uma tarefa de reconhecimento utilizando o paradigma de dicas retroativas. A natureza das representações recuperadas foi investigada  através do Ruido Visual Dinâmico (RVD). A familiaridade, definida como a exposição repetida ao mesmo conjunto de estímulos, foi manipulada entre grupos de participantes (N = 32). O desempenho na tarefa de reconhecimento  de ambos os grupos melhora ao longo da sessão, mas de forma mais acentuada no grupo que trabalhou com estímulos de familiaridade alta. O  processo de recuperação independe da familiaridade, entretanto a representação mais familiar mostra-se mais suscetível a interferência do RVD, sugerindo que a exposição repetida aos mesmos estímulos permitiu a  geração de  representações visuais mais estáveis.

Palavras-chave


Memória de Trabalho; Unitização; Ruído Visual Dinâmico.

Texto completo:

PDF

Referências


Ahmad, F. N., Fernandes, M., Hockley, W. E. (2015). Improving associative memory in older adults with unitization. Neuropsychol. Dev. Cogn. Sect. B Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 22(4), 452–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2014.980216.

Baddeley, A. (2007). Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford: Clarendon.

Bader, R., Opitz, B., Reith, W., Mecklinger, A. (2014). Is a novel conceptual unit more than the sum of its parts?: FMRI evidence from an associative recognition memory study. Neuropsychologia, 61, 123–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.06.006.

Bower, G. H. (2000). A brief history of memory research. The Oxford handbook of memory, 3-32.

Brady, T. F., Störmer, V. S., & Alvarez, G. A. (2016). Working memory is not fixed-capacity: More active storage capacity for real-world objects than for simple stimuli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(27), 7459–7464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1520027113.

D’Angelo, M. C., Smith, V. M., Kacollja, A., Zhang, F., Binns, M. A., Barense, M. D., & Ryan, J. D. (2016). The effectiveness of unitization in mitigating age-related relational learning impairments depends on existing cognitive status. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 23(6), 667–690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2016.1158235.

Delhaye, E., & Bastin, C. (2018). The impact of aging on associative memory for preexisting unitized associations. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 25:1, 70-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2016.1263725.

Galera, C., & Quinn, G. (2014, julho). Visual buffer and retrieval of visual information from working memory. Comunicação apresentada em International Conference on Working Memory. Cambridge, UK.

Goldstone, R. L. (2000). Unitization during category learning. Journal of Experimental psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 26, 86-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.26.1.86.

Griffin, I. C., & Nobre, A. C. (2003). Orienting attention to locations in internal representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 1176–1194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/089892903322598139.

Hebb, D. O. (1961). Distinctive features of learning in the higher animal. In B. F. Delafresnaye (Ed.), Brain mechanisms and learning (pp. 37–46). Oxford: Blackwell.

James, T. W., & Gauthier, I. (2006). Repetition induced changes in BOLD response reflect accumulation of neural activity. Human brain mapping, 27(1), 37-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002 / hbm.20165.

Kandel, E., Schwartz, J., Jessell, T., Siegelbaum, S., & Hudspeth, A. J. (2014). Princípios de Neurociências-5. AMGH Editora.

Kibbe, M. M., & Feigenson, L. (2016). Infants use temporal regularities to chunk objects in memory. Cognition, 146, 251–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.022.

Kosslyn, S. M. Image and Brain: The Resolution of the Imagery Debate. Cambridge: Mit Press, p 516, 1994.

Kosslyn, S. M., Thompson, W. L., & Ganis, G. (2006). The case for mental imagery. Oxford University Press.

Landman, R., Spekreijse, H., & Lamme, V. A. F. (2003). Large capacity storage of integrated objects before change blindness. Vision Research, 43, 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00402-9.

Lepsien, J., & Nobre, A. (2006). Cognitive control of attention in the human brain: Insights from orienting attention to mental representations. Brain Research, 1105, 20-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jbrainres.2006.03.033.

Li, B., Mao, X., Wang, Y., & Guo, C. (2017). Electrophysiological Correlates of Familiarity and Recollection in Associative Recognition: Contributions of Perceptual and Conceptual Processing to Unitization. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11:125. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00125.

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1985). Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 159-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.114.2.159.

McLaren, I. P. L., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2000). An elemental model of associative learning: I. Latent inhibition and perceptual learning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28, 211-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200258.

Memel, M., & Ryan, L. (2017). Visual integration enhances associative memory equally for young and older adults without reducing hippocampal encoding activation. Neuropsychologia, 100, 195-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.04.031.

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043158.

Orme, E., Brown, L., & Riby, L. (2017). Retrieval and monitoring processes during visual working memory: An ERP study of the benefit of visual semantics. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. p. 1080. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01080.

Parks, C. M., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2015). The importance of unitization for familiarity-based learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(3), 881-903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000068.

Perlman, A., Pothos, E. M., Edwards, D. J., & Tzelgov, J. (2010). Task-relevant chunking in sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(3), 649-661. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017178.

Pucci, I. W; Galera, C. A (2014, setembro). Recuperação da Informação da memória de Trabalho Visual: A necessidade de um buffer visual. Pôster apresentado no 22° Simpósio Internacional de Iniciação Científica da USP (SIICUSP), Ribeirão Preto, SP.

Quinn, J. G., & McConnell, J. (1996). Indications of the functional distinction between the components of visual working memory. Psychologische Beitrage, 38(3-4), 355–367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713755613.

Reder, L. M., Liu, X. L., Keinath, A., & Popov, V. (2016). Building knowledge requires bricks, not sand: The critical role of familiar constituents in learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 271–277. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0889-1.

Reder, L. M., Paynter, C., Diana, R. A., Ngiam, J., & Dickison, D. (2007). Em B. Ross& A. S. Benjamin (Eds.). The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 271–312). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Riby, L. M., & Orme, E. (2013). A familiar pattern? Semantic memory contributes to the enhancement of visuo-spatial memories. Brain and cognition, 81(2), 215-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2012.10.011.

Robey, A., & Riggins, T. (2017). Increasing relational memory in childhood with unitization strategies. Memory & Cognition, 46(1), 100-111. http://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0748-6.

Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime reference Guide (Version 1.2). Psychology Software Tools Inc.

Schyns, P. G., Goldstone, R. L., & Thibaut, J. P. (1998). The development of features in object concepts. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 1-17. http://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0140525X98000107.

Shiffrin, P. G., & Lightfoot, N. (1997). Perceptual learning of alphanumeric-like characters. Em R. L. Goldstone, P. G. Schyns, & D. L. Medin (Eds.). The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 36, pp. 45-82). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117(1), 34-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.117.134.

Souza, A. S., & Oberauer, K. (2016). In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(7), 1839-1860. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1108-5.

Vagnot, C. (2014). Efficacité d'une activité discriminante: quand isolation et action participent à l'émergence d'un jugement de reconnaissance. Dissertação de doutorado, Psychologie Université Paul Valéry-Montpellier-III, França.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2020.1.29844

e-ISSN: 1980-8623 | ISSN-L: 0103-5371


Exceto onde especificado diferentemente, aplicam-se à matéria publicada neste periódico os termos de uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional, que permite o uso irrestrito, a distribuição e a reprodução em qualquer meio desde que a publicação original seja corretamente citada.