Cognitive psychology � reading aloud

theory - number of stages between the presentation of word on page and muscles moving to speak

priming experiment � chance of recognising the target word (shown for longer) is greater if the subject is primed, by being shown either similar letters (letter level) or word in similar semantic category (word level)

 

       word on page

       pattern falls on retina

       letter recognition

       word recognition

       production of a motor plan

       muscles move

       word produced

Computational model

Levels of explanation

�as if� explanation - no idea what�s going on in the brain, but it�s as if the information excitation is flowing from here to there �

is that useful?

or is it only useful if I can show you what�s going on at the neuronal level

1.     describe the behvaviour

processing one word speds processing of related words

2.     produce an abstract model

can reproduce the behaviour � nodes representing words with activation passing between them

i.e. activation speeds processing

3.     identify the brain mechanism actually implementing the behaviour

e.g. voluntary action <= dopamine flowing in the basal ganglia

Computational model

building a computational model demonstrates that the explanation adequately explains the phenomenon � concretises the claim

leads connectionist modelling (central to many areas)

connectionism = sophisticated + developed version of interactive activationist model

activation flows from one level to another or within a level � either excitatory (pointed triangle arrow) or inhibitory (blob arrow)

trying to get from the outside world to the model�s knowledge of a domain

 

Interactive activation model

(Rumelhart & McClelland, 1981)

the presence of a feature excite/inhibit the presence of each letter

neuronally-inspired � its basic element leads back (conceptually mimic) some aspects of the way the brain works

neurons are all about integrating information

connections are very cheap and profligate

always/never been the case that there�s a correlation between horizontal

classical conditioning (fundamental aspect of the way the NS works) - events in the outside world and internal states of knowledge

in this model, letter-level and word-level information are different

at a conceptual level,

1.     sums up info � some exc, some inhib � if > threshold, then it fires

the model is not completely arbitary � based loosely on the brain

the threshold for �T' is such that it would only fire if both the mid-vertical bar and the top-horizontal bar were present, which would only be > threshold if there were no inhibitions present (e.g. diagonal bars)

info proc = a very large number of feature detectors operating in parallel � trying to provide evidence about the state of the world to a system which works out on the basis of how the outside world�s been in the past

could a system evolved the make certain survival-based decisions about the outside world learn to read?

the model takes all the four letter words in English with frequency > 2 per million (1179) � obviously an over-simplification, but at least realistic in scope

the model really works � if forces the modeller to concretise/make explicit what is happening

can test to see whether it matches the RT (reaction time) data for normals

2.     system operates by constraint satisfaction

the node which has most things consistent with it (i.e. the largest number of exc inputs) = the most active

the decisions are the best bet about the input given all available sources of information

this is how the brain works

doesn�t require certainty

mutual inhibition then suppresses all alternatives

if 2 paths which are almost identical, then the slightly more exc N inhibits the other one more, which inhibs the 1st slightly less

positive feedback � ensures that come to decisions quickly

but: if it was just noise, then it would magnify the noise (inherent instability)

what actually happens if given a degraded stimulus?

e.g. could be worK or worR or worD?

so although the evidence for K and R is equal at the letter-level

the activations for the diff words at word-level passes back down to the letter-level to further activate the �K� detector

we always work in a noisy environment � e.g. listening in a crowded room or reading a hand-written script

 

Word superiority effect

(Reicher 1969)

how does the model relate to normal data?

present (i) a word (�work�) or (ii) a letter (�***k�), followed by mask, so that identification = 50%

ask whether the letter was a �D� or a �K�? (can�the answer by guessing a word)

result: subjects do better in (i) than (ii)

inference: easier to detect a letter in a word than in isolation

how can you know about a word before you know about the letters of which it is composed?

the model shows that knowledge about a word influences knowledge about the letters which make it up

model shows that it makes snese to see the perception of words as involving independent stages of letter and word ID, confirming the evidence from both patients & normals

converging operations

 

Scarborough et al (1977)

read a word aloud

more common words �/span> quickly read it (frequency effect)

the NS processes things more quickly if it�s seen them before

if seen recently, quickly (repetition effect)

the NS finds it easier to access information which it has just accessed

interaction � the effect of repetition has a larger effect on low-freq words than high-freq words

 

Oldfield & Wingfield (1965)

name a picture

the more common the word, the quicker

if you repeat the pic, repeat it quicker the 2nd time

inference: information in the brain is not stored like a dictionary (having looked up a word many times before does not make it easier to find again)

memory is adaptive to the use made of it

information used frequently/recently is easier to get at

 

high freq words have lwer mean naming latency than low freq words

interacts with regularity � �have� is irregular to pronounce

exceptionally low freq word which is irregular has much higher mean latency than high freq irregular word

subtle diffces in speed of processing �/span> inferences about the brain mech

 

if something seen frequently � stored so easier to access (freqency effect)

if the brian has a lot of similar xps, benefits from them (regularity effect) - asumes new xps will be like them

the way the brain stores information is diff to how it is sotred in phys media

 

possible stages between seeing a word and pronouncing it

computation model can be built in which flow of activation between nodes representing what the sys knows about current stim/past xp

can that give us explanation for freq, repetn and regy effects?

it can do that

varying the strength of the connection can model the frequency effect (frequent use builds strong connections and activation in nodes with strong connections builds up faster)

time-lapsed recency

how quick the route regularity

does the fact that we have a computn model which gives the correct answer mean that we know any more about the way the brain does it?

no, because we still don�the know anything about how the brian does it

yes, because it�s brain-like and replicates results