The Standard Model of Information Processing - Essay Example

? Social and Cognitive Bases of Behavior Introduction: Question The standard model of information processing is the most widely used. The model is based on the original work of Atkinson and Shiffrin. The theory hypothesized that new information has to be received and manipulated before it is stored (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). It also recognizes three stages of memory which include sensory, short-term or working, and long-term memories (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). Psychologists, in the past few decades, have performed several studies to justify the authenticity of this model. Consequently, they have formulated other theories that favor or criticize the standard model of information processing. Driscoll defined the pattern of recognition as the process where environmental stimuli are recognized as exemplars of principles and concepts already in the memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). She was determined to prove how new stimuli is received through sensory memory. To accomplish this study, she analyzed three models of pattern recognition which includes the prototype, feature analysis, and template matching (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). The template matching model asserts that in human brain, there are literal representations of previous stimuli originally held in the mind. Recognition, therefore, occurs when a new stimuli is matched with its perfect specimen originally stored in the memory. The prototype model asserts that the stored unit of information is an abstracted form of the original information. Pattern recognition will then take place when a new stimulus is compared to the prototype (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). However, some stimuli closely matches with the prototype, and when this takes place, new information can be developed as the existing class. Template matching and prototype models are similar in the sense that they match an incoming stimulus with another already stored in the mind (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). Feature analysis model, on the other hand, analyzes the characteristics of incoming information, other than comparing it with that stored in the memory. Studies also established that maintenance rehearsal schemes are used to store information in the memory for a short time. However, more complex analysis is required to transfer it into the long-term memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). There are several suggested methods of encoding; however, the three basic ones, which relates to standard information processing model, are as different. First, a new stimulus that exactly matches an existing structure in the memory is simply added to the mental and no change is made. Second, when an incoming stimulus does not exactly match the existing structure, it will respond by allowing the new stimulus to make additional changes which may eventually change the existing structure, thus broadening how that structure is defined in the memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). Finally, if the incoming information is totally different from the existing structure, then totally different one will be created in the memory. The process of receiving new stimulus takes place in the short-term memory just like it happens in a computer through the Random Access Memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). According to Abott, long-term memory is the permanent store in the brain where encoded information is stored, and it can reside in dominant state till it is fetched back into consciousness (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). For stored information to be re-processed, the long-term memory has to communicate with the short-term memory. Critics of standard information processing model base their arguments on the forms of storage availed in the long-term memory. If the knowledge unit is verbal rather than pictorial, then it would be easier to store information in words form other than in pictures. Similarly, if it were the reverse, then pictures will be readily and easily stored in the memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). According to these people, psychologists supporting standard information processing model should clearly state the type of knowledge unit and the type of memory structure found in the long-term memory. Cognitive phenomena are closely linked to the concept of language and logic functions of the brain, including self. Cognitive behaviors are manipulated by the information that is stored in the long-term memory (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). They also rely on the manner in which the short-term memory interprets the stored information. Recognition is the best cognitive phenomenon accounted for by the Standard model of information processing. Receiving new stimulus, processing it in the short-term memory, and matching it with an existing structure in the long-term memory, helps people in recognizing most things and information in the physical world. In a simpler form, the three stages of memory help in recognition of people, names, digits, and places among other physical things. Studies that support standard information processing stages have been conducted over the past years; however, the question to establish the type of knowledge unit stored in the long-term memory and the real structure of the long-term memory has not been well dealt with (Craik & Lockhart, 2008). Therefore, in order to validate the significance of the standard model, new researches should focus on the discussion of the long-term memory, as this will help in further understanding of how information is stored in it. Question # 2 False memories are phenomena where an individual remember an event happening in his or her life. However, that event did not actually happen their lives (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Most of the false memories are harmless, for example, when one remembers disagreeing with someone else, yet they never argued. However, in the judicial system, cases of harmful false memories have been experienced where some people have been charged innocently. Theoretical approaches to false memories have been investigated to establish their relationship with what happened in the real life situation. It has been proved that most studies on false memories do not resemble the phenomena in real life. According to Hyman and Kleinknecht, this difference results because the presented information is analyzed in relation to plausibility. In addition, memory has to be constructed based on schematic knowledge, and personal suggestions, experiences, and present situational demands (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Finally, the interviewees must commit a source monitoring error in which the false memory is acknowledged as representing the initial event other than misinformation given following the event (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Memory in the laboratory requires the ability to determine the source of information accurately. One of the aspects commonly applied is the reality monitoring ability (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Reality monitoring is the ability to differentiate between memories generated by internal mental process and those based on external events. However, these studies are susceptible to misinformation because they correlate to fantasy proneness, hypnotic suggestibility, dissociativity, absorption, and vividness of visual imagery (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). However, in order for false memory in real life to develop, the event under study must be deemed to be plausible; the person must believe that the event must have happened to him, and they must analyze their fantasies and thoughts about the event as actual memories (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). The differences between false memory in the laboratory and in real life, as presented above, are significant in showing how studies in false memory do not link to those happening in real life situations. Less externally-valid stimuli only creates fantasy proneness which correlates to paranormal beliefs. Many of our experiences are usually forgotten, and they are normally constructed in a manner that is inaccurate, generalized, incomplete, or distorted (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). According to Schema theory, experience and prior knowledge that were gained through a valid stimuli help in making exact claims, other than less-valid ones that make believer rate demonstrations as more “paranormal” (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Less-valid stimuli also make believers be less accurate in remembering “important” information. Studies on false/recovered memories should be conducted with caution, with a primary focus on susceptibility to information, verbal suggestion, and basic unreliability of human memory. Current studies are also supporting the notion that proponents of paranormal belief are more susceptible to false memory, even for non-paranormal events (Roediger & McDermott, 2005). Therefore, future studies on false or recovered memories should be directed to further researches on the relationship with childhood trauma reports. They should also validate their research findings with a wide array of experimental techniques. This will reduce the gap between the relationship of false/recovered memory studies and their implications in the real life situation. References Craik F, Lockhart R. S. (2008). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior , 671–684. Roediger H. L, McDermott K. B. (2005). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Vol 21(4) , 803-814. Read More