Questions related to Semantic Memory
Currently we are working on a review that surveys the cognitive/neural mechanisms of tactile working memory. We propose a sensory recruitment model, which suggests that prefrontal regions interact with somatosensory cortex to encode, maintain and retrieve tactile working memory. Please leave your email address if of interests.
In case of verbal fluency tasks (e.g. category/phonemic fluency), both "spoken" and "written" responding format have their advantages. Although there is not much research about this topic, I would suppose that these two forms might differ not only quantitatively (e.g. systematically less written words form due to writing time cost and more control over the responses) but also substantially (e.g. the task partially differ in underlying processes or their relative loadings).
My question is whether these two forms are equivalent (one can be linearly transformed to another) or hardly ever. Thank you for sharing any experience or relevant resource about this issue,
EDIT: the question is related to intact/healthy individuals.
Hopefully this is quite a simple question:
I'm going to be running some masked semantic congruence priming studies, and am looking for suitable stimuli. Put simply, semantic congruence studies typically show that a target word (e.g., HAWK) is semantically categorised (e.g., Is this an animal?) faster when preceded by a category-congruent/semantically-related prime word (e.g., eagle) compared to when preceded by a semantically unrelated word (e.g., knee).
The first thing I want to do is to replicate the classic finding using a larger set of stimuli. I will need at least 90 target words, each with a semantically-related prime-word. In line with previous studies (e.g., Quinn & Kinoshita, 2008), a lot of my stimuli will be drawn from McRae et al.'s set of feature norms (which is particularly useful for identifying members of the 'animal' category that have high semantic feature overlap; e.g., cat-dog; sheep-goat; etc.). But to reach 90 targets (each with a semantically similar prime), I will probably need to find a similar, but more dense database.
Ideally, I'm after an easy userface where I can simply input a target word (e.g., hand) that belongs to a category I'm using for the categorisation task (e.g., is this a body-part?) and it provides a list of the most semantically similar words from that category (e.g., if the category is 'body parts' it might output 'head, ankle, shin, foot, etc.). I'm aware there are a few solutions out there - whether it be measures semantic feature overlap or co-occurrence (e.g., wordnet, COALS, LSA, HAL) but I'd favour something with an interface that is easy to use, or even just a large datafile similar to McRae's 2005 set.
Thanks a lot!
Quinn, W.M. and Kinoshita, S. (2008) Congruence effect in semantic categorization with masked primes with narrow and broad categories. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 286–306.
McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 37, 547–559.
Is there any evidence for typicality effects in memory retrieval? For example, if I ask you to recall an example of a fruit you have eaten, would you be more likely to retrieve a memory of eating an apple (a more typical fruit) compared to a fig (a less typical fruit)?
I have seen this demonstrated in categorization tasks, but I am not familiar with any research on this in the context of memory.
Although the importance of enabling students to create episodic and semantic memories during the learning process has long been acknowledged, this issue has not been adequately addressed in educational research. This is particularly true for the 'social contagion of memories' which refers to the memories implanted by others (e.g., teachers, friends, parents) via social interactions. In fact, this implantation process almost entirely occurs in an implicit manner and has important conclusions for learning because, for example, students' memories may be contaminated by others' knowledge, perceptions, beliefs, and emotions during the learning process. If this is the case, I strongly believe that we may benefit from the effects of the mentioned social process (i.e., social contagion of memory) by using memory contagion strategies in educational settings such as classrooms. Yet, at this point, an important question arises: What are these strategies?
I am currently carrying out a study on verbal fluency and have found that the processes underlying this task are semantic memory and executive function. However, others have described the underlying processes as executive and verbal ability. The latter involves lexical retrieval from the mental lexicon. Does the difference in terms stem from the fact that these terms come from different disciplines (one from Neuropsychology and the other Psycholinguistics) or are they different concepts? Thank you
I would like to understand how my results fit within the levels of processing framework. However, I am only familiar with the original work that was completed in the 70s.
What sources (preferably review article(s)) might you recommend for obtaining a contemporary understanding of this phenomenon?
I am not saying how people are influenced by networks (social network, neuron networks, etc.), I am saying how people process information or stimuli that is organized in a network way (like gestalt organization).