Retrieval order variation in a deferred imitation task: Assessment of item-relational information processing among infants.

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 586-598
Author(s):  
Regina A. Kressley ◽  
Monika Knopf ◽  
Mariana P. Stefanova
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Relational Information ◽  
Deferred Imitation ◽  
Order Variation ◽  
Task Assessment

Local and Relational Aspects of Face Distinctiveness

1998 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helmut Leder ◽  
Vicki Bruce
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Face Processing ◽  
Similar Pattern ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Local Features ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Relational Information ◽  
Facial Information ◽  
The Face

Distinctiveness contributes strongly to the recognition and rejection of faces in memory tasks. In four experiments we examine the role played by local and relational information in the distinctiveness of upright and inverted faces. In all experiments subjects saw one of three versions of a face: original faces, which had been rated as average in distinctiveness in a previous study (Hancock, Burton, & Bruce, 1996), a more distinctive version in which local features had been changed ( D-local), and a more distinctive version in which relational features had been changed ( D-rel). An increase in distinctiveness was found for D-local and D-rel faces in Experiment 1 (complete faces) and 3 and 4 (face internals only) when the faces had to be rated in upright presentation, but the distinctiveness of the D-rel faces was reduced much more than that of the D-local versions when the ratings were given to the faces presented upside-down (Experiments 1 and 3). Recognition performance showed a similar pattern: presented upright, both D-local and D-rel revealed higher performance compared to the originals, but in upside-down presentation the D-local versions showed a much stronger distinctiveness advantage. When only internal features of faces were used (Experiments 3 and 4), the D-rel faces lost their advantage over the Original versions in inverted presentation. The results suggest that at least two dimensions of facial information contribute to a face's apparent distinctiveness, but that these sources of information are differentially affected by turning the face upside-down. These findings are in accordance with a face processing model in which face inversion effects occur because a specific type of information processing is disrupted, rather than because of a general disruption of performance.

Relational information processing of novel unrelated actions by infants

2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Knopf ◽  
Uta Kraus ◽  
Regina A. Kressley-Mba
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Relational Information

Relational Uncertainty and Relational Information Processing

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leanne K. Knobloch ◽  
Denise Haunani Solomon
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Relational Uncertainty ◽  
Relational Information

Language processing is not a race against time

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giosuè Baggio ◽  
Carmelo M. Vicario
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Human Brain ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Functions ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Language System ◽  
Moderating Factors

AbstractWe agree with Christiansen & Chater (C&C) that language processing and acquisition are tightly constrained by the limits of sensory and memory systems. However, the human brain supports a range of cognitive functions that mitigate the effects of information processing bottlenecks. The language system is partly organised around these moderating factors, not just around restrictions on storage and computation.

Design-Effects in Prospective and Retrospective Memory for Actions

2003 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Jahn ◽  
Johannes Engelkamp
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Prospective Memory Task ◽  
Retrospective Memory ◽  
Ample Evidence ◽  
Relational Information ◽  
Design Effects ◽  
Verbal Tasks ◽  
Within Subjects

There is ample evidence that memory for action phrases such as “open the bottle” is better in subject-performed tasks (SPTs), i.e., if the participants perform the actions, than in verbal tasks (VTs), if they only read the phrases or listen to them. It is less clear whether also the sole intention to perform the actions later, i.e., a prospective memory task (PT), improves memory compared with VTs. Inconsistent findings have been reported for within-subjects and between-subjects designs. The present study attempts to clarify the situation. In three experiments, better recall for SPTs than for PTs and for PTs than for VTs were observed if mixed lists were used. If pure lists were used, there was a PT effect but no SPT over PT advantage. The findings were discussed from the perspective of item-specific and relational information.

Attachment and Field Dependence: Individual Differences in Information Processing

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Vermigli ◽  
Alessandro Toni
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Field Dependence ◽  
Attachment Styles ◽  
Close Relationships ◽  
Adult Age ◽  
Males And Females ◽  
Figure Test ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Measure Field

The present research analyzes the relationship between attachment styles at an adult age and field dependence in order to identify possible individual differences in information processing. The “Experience in Close Relationships” test of Brennan et al. was administered to a sample of 380 individuals (160 males, 220 females), while a subsample of 122 subjects was given the Embedded Figure Test to measure field dependence. Confirming the starting hypothesis, the results have shown that individuals with different attachment styles have a different way of perceiving the figure against the background. Ambivalent and avoidant individuals lie at the two extremes of the same dimension while secure individuals occupy the central part. Significant differences also emerged between males and females.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document