首页> 外文OA文献 >Metamemory or just memory? : searching for the neural correlates of judgments of learning
【2h】

Metamemory or just memory? : searching for the neural correlates of judgments of learning

机译:元记忆还是记忆? :寻找学习判断的神经相关性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Judgments of Learning (JOLs) are judgments of the likelihood of remembering recently studied material on a future test. Although JOLs have been extensively studied, particularly due to their important applications in education, relatively little is known about the cognitive and neural processes supporting JOLs and how these processes relate to actual memory processing. Direct access theories describe JOLs as outputs following direct readings of memory traces and hence predict that JOLs cannot be distinguished from objective memory encoding operations. Inferential theories, by contrast, claim JOLs are products of the evaluation of a number of cues, perceived by learners to carry predictive value. This alternative account argues that JOLs are made on the basis of multiple underlying processes, which do not necessarily overlap with memory encoding. In this thesis, the neural and cognitive bases of JOLs were examined in a series of four ERP experiments. Across experiments the study phase ERP data showed that JOLs produce neural activity that is partly overlapping with, but also partly distinct from, the activity that predicts successful memory encoding. Furthermore, the neural correlates of successful memory encoding appear sensitive to the requirements to make a JOL, emphasising the close interaction between subjective and objective measures of memory encoding. Finally, the neural correlates of both JOLs and successful memory encoding were found to vary depending on the nature of the stimulus materials, suggesting that both phenomena are supported by multiple cognitive and neural systems. Although the primary focus was on the study phase ERP data, the thesis also contains two additional chapters reporting the ERP data acquired during the test phases of three of the original experiments. These data, which examined the relative engagements of retrieval processes for low and high JOL items, suggest that encoding processes specifically resulting in later recollection (as opposed to familiarity) form one reliable basis for making JOLs. Overall, the evidence collected in this series of ERP experiments suggests that JOLs are not pure products of objective memory processes, as suggested by direct access theories, but are supported by neural systems that are at least partly distinct from those supporting successful memory encoding. These observations are compatible with inferential theories claiming that JOLs are supported by multiple processes that can be differentially engaged across stimulus contents.
机译:学习判断(JOL)是对在将来的测试中记住最近学习过的材料的可能性的判断。尽管已经对JOL进行了广泛的研究,尤其是由于它们在教育中的重要应用,但是对于支持JOL的认知和神经过程以及这些过程与实际记忆处理的关系知之甚少。直接访问理论将JOL描述为直接读取内存跟踪之后的输出,因此可以预测JOL无法与目标内存编码操作区分开。相比之下,推理理论则认为JOL是许多线索评估的产物,学习者认为这些线索具有预测价值。这个替代的观点认为,JOL是基于多个基础过程而形成的,这些过程不一定与内存编码重叠。本文通过一系列的四个ERP实验来检验JOL的神经和认知基础。在整个实验阶段,研究阶段的ERP数据表明,JOL产生的神经活动与预测成功的记忆编码的活动部分重叠,但又部分不同。此外,成功的内存编码的神经关联似乎对制作JOL的要求敏感,强调了内存编码的主观和客观指标之间的密切互动。最后,发现JOL的神经相关性和成功的记忆编码取决于刺激材料的性质而变化,这表明这两种现象都受到多种认知和神经系统的支持。尽管主要侧重于研究阶段的ERP数据,但本文还包含另外两章,介绍了在三个原始实验的测试阶段中获得的ERP数据。这些数据检查了低和高JOL项目的检索过程的相对参与性,这些数据表明,编码过程特别导致以后的回忆(与熟悉程度相反)构成了制造JOL的可靠依据。总的来说,在这一系列ERP实验中收集的证据表明,直接访问理论并不暗示JOL不是目标存储过程的纯产物,而是得到了神经系统的支持,而神经系统至少部分不同于支持成功的内存编码的系统。这些观察结果与推理理论相称,推理理论声称JOL由多个过程支持,这些过程可以跨刺激内容有差别地参与。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号