You are on page 1of 5

Janella Hope B.

Umali

COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY WORDS


CHAPTER 7: Mental Images and Propositions -handily capture abstract and categorical information in a manner that
KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION is symbolic of whatever the words represent
-the forms for what you know in your mind about things, ideas, events -usually convey information sequentially
in the outside world
┌ Pictures in Your Mind: Mental Imagery
MENTAL REPRESENTATION OF KNOWLEDGE IMAGERY
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGISTS -mental representation of things that are not currently seen or sensed
-would directly observe how each of use represents knowledge by the sense organs (hearing, smell, taste)
-taking a series of snapshots of ongoing knowledge representations in
the human mind MENTAL IMAGERY
-direct empirical methods are not available at present -can represent things that you have never experienced
-may even represent things that do not exist outside the minds of the
RATIONALIST APPROACH person creating the image
-we try to deduce logically how people represent knowledge -can help improve memory

EPISTEMOLOGY **most research has focused on visual imagery


-the study of nature, origins, and limits of human knowledge
EXTREME VIEW OF IMAGERY
TWO KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE STRUCTURES: -all images of everything we ever sense may be stored as exact copies
DECLARATIVE KNOWLEDGE of physical images
-facts (birth date) -realistically, to store every observed physical image in the brain
seems impossible (inadequate capacity)
PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE
-procedures that can be implemented (driving) Dual-Code Theory: Images an
┌ d Symbols
**Distinction: knowing that and knowing how DUAL-CODE THEORY
-PAIVIO
EXPERIMENTAL WORK -use both pictorial (image) and verbal codes for representing
-researchers indirectly study knowledge representation because they information in our minds
cannot look into people’s minds directly -two codes organize information into knowledge that can be acted on,
-they observe how people handle various cognitive tasks that require stored somehow, and later retrieved for subsequent use
the manipulation of mentally represented knowledge
ANALOG CODES
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL STUDIES -mental images
-use one of two methods: -resemble the objects they are representing
(1) They observe how the normal brain responds to various -the mental images we form in our minds are analogous to the
cognitive tasks involving knowledge representation physical stimuli we observe
(2) They observe the links between various deficits in knowledge
representation and associated pathologies in the brain
SYMBOLIC CODE
-words
┌ Communicating Knowledge: Pictures versus Words
-form of knowledge representation that has been chosen arbitrarily to
-Knowledge can be presented in different ways in your minds: it can
stand for something that does not perceptually resemble what is
be stored as a mental picture or abstract propositions
being represented
-a symbol may be anything that is arbitrarily designated to stand for
SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION
something other than itself
-relationship between the word and what is represents is simply
arbitrary
-their use requires the application of rules **VERBAL INFORMATION -seems to be processed differently than
pictorial information
PICTURES
Supporting evidence:
-aptly capture concrete and spatial information in a manner analogous
 Actual visual perception could interfere with simultaneously
to whatever they represent
visual imagery - the need to produce a verbal response could
-convey all features simultaneously
interfere with the simultaneously mental manipulation od words
-in general, any rules for creating or understanding pictures pertain to
 Brooks: a visual task requiring a visual response and a verbal
the analogous relationship between the picture and what it
task requiring a verbal response - assumed that both task and
represents
response required the same system for completion
-help ensure as much similarity as possible between the picture and
 A response involving visual perception can interfere with a task
the object it represents
involving manipulations of a visual image - a response involving

Janella Hope B. Umali


Janella Hope B. Umali

verbal expression can interfere with a task involving mental ┌ Do Propositional Theory and Imagery Hold Up to their
manipulations of a verbal statement promises?
-TWO DISTINCT CODES:
(1) Imaginal (analogical) code
Limitations of Mental Images
(2) Verbal (symbolic) code
AMBIGUOUS FIGURE
-meaning that it can be interpreted in more than one way
┌ Storing Knowledge as Abstract Concepts: Propositional Theory
-often used in studies of perception
PROPOSITIONAL THEORY -determine whether mental representations of images are truly
-Conceptual-propositional theory analogical to perceptions of physical objects
-Propositional theory
-we do not store mental representations in the forms of images or **Chambers and Reisberg’s findings: people plainly do not use images
mere words to represent what they see. An alternative and more plausible
-we may experience our mental representations as images, but these explanations is that a propositional code may be override the imaginal
images are epiphenomena code in some circumstances.

EPIPHENOMENA **Visual images can be distorted through verbal information


-secondary and derivative phenomena that occur as a result of other **Semantic (verbal) information tends to distort recall of visual
more basic cognitive processes images in the direction of the meaning of the images

MENTAL REPRESENTATION ┌ Limitations of Propositional Theory


-MENTALESE -we do not necessarily need a propositional code to manipulate
-more closely resemble the abstract form of a proposition information, but we can manipulate mental imagery directly

PROPOSITION PROPOSITIONAL CODES


-is the meaning underlying a particular relationship among concepts -are less likely to influence imaginal ones when participants create
their own mental images
┌ What is a Proposition? -may influence imaginal ones - occur when the picture used to create
PREDICATE CALCULUS an image is ambiguous or rather abstract
-to express the underlying meaning of a relationship
-attempts to strip away the various superficial differences in the ways **Mental reinterpretation of ambiguous figures involves
we describe the deeper meaning of a proposition: TWO MANIPULATIONS:
[Relationship between elements] ([Subject element]), [Object (1) MENTAL REALIGNMENT of the reference frame: involve a
element]) shift in the positional orientations of the figures on the mental “page”
or “screen” on which the image is displayed
┌ Using Propositions (2) MENTAL RECONSTRUAL (reinterpretation) of the parts of
-may be used to describe any kind of relationship the figure
-Key idea: propositional form of mental representation is neither in
words nor in images. Rather, it is an abstract form representing the SUPPORTING HINTS:
underlying meanings of knowledge
IMPLICIT REFERENCE ATTENTIONAL HINT
FRAME HINT -were directed to attend to regions
PROPOSITIONAL VIEW -first shown another ambiguous of the figure where realignments
-both images and verbal statements are mentally represented in figure involving realignment of or reconstruals were to occur
terms of their deep meanings, and not as specific images or words the reference frame
-both are encoded and stored as propositions CONSTRUALS FROM “GOOD”
EXPLICIT REFERENCE FRAME PARTS
PROPOSITIONAL REPRESENTATIONS OF UNDERLYING HINT -asked to construe an image from
MEANINGS -asked to modify the reference parts determined to be “good”
ACTIONS SPATIAL POSITIONS frame by considering either (objective and empirical criteria)
-action, agent of action, object -vertically higher position “conceptual hint” or “abstract rather than from parts determined
hint” to be “bad” (similar criteria)
ATTRIBUTES CLASS OR CATEGORY
-external surface characteristic, MEMBERSHIP **some spontaneous reinterpretation of mental images for
attribute, object -categorical membership, category, ambiguous figures may occur - images of figures that may be
member reinterpreted without realigning the reference frame

**process involved in constructing and manipulating mental images


are similar to the processes involved in perceptual processes

Janella Hope B. Umali


Janella Hope B. Umali

FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE -response times are longer for DEGRADED STIMULI (blurry,
-refers to individuals using about the same operations to serve about incomplete, less informative)
the same purposes for their respective domains -response times longer for complex items and for unfamiliar figures
-older adults have more difficulty with this task
**multiple codes rather than just a single code
PRACTICE EFFECTS
MENTAL MANIPULATIONS OF IMAGES -benefit of increased familiarity
FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE HYPOTHESIS -improvements in performance associated with increased practice
-although visual imagery is not identical to visual perception, it is -when participants have practice in mentally rotating particular figures
functionally equivalent to it (increasing their familiarity), their performance improves (not
-strongly analogous to each other - they can accomplish the same applicable to novel figures)
goals -children and young showed speedier response times when given
-analogous to the physical percepts they represent opportunities for practice
-suggest that we use images rather than propositions in knowledge
representation for concrete objects that can be pictured in the mind **Mental Rotation: Automatic process for school-aged children and
adults
┌ Principles of Visual Imagery -familiarity with the items and practice with MR appear to enhance
-some principles of how visual imagery may be functionally equivalent response times
to visual perception
-guide for designing and evaluating research on imagery ROBERT KAIL
-enhanced response times=result of increasing automatization of the
RONALD FINKE’s principles of visual imagery: task across the years of childhood and adolescence
(1) Mental transformations of images and our mental movements -automatization - sign of more effective visuospatial skills = increased
across images correspond to those of physical objects and percepts speed =increased accuracy in spatial memory
(2) Spatial relations among elements of a visual image are analogous
to those relations in actual physical space ┌ Neuroscience and Mental Rotation
(3) Mental images can be used to generate information that was not -PRIMARY MOTOR CORTEX: is activated when participants imagine
explicitly stored during encoding manually rotating a stimulus (but not when they imagine a rotation
(4) Construction of mental images is analogous to the construction of driven by an electric motor)
visually perceptible figures -areas associated with Hand movement were particularly active during
(5) Visual imagery is functionally equivalent to visual perception in MR
terms of the processes of the visual system used for each -prior physical rotation of the objects affected the way their brains
later processed the MR of images of those images
┌ Neuroscience and Functional Equivalence -EARLY VISUAL CORTEX: first area that receives input form the
-imagery can evoke responses in high-level visual brain areas and the retina when we see an object (areas 17 and 18)
VISUAL PRIMARY CORTEX - areas that are highly involved in the
processing of visual stimuli we see with our eyes ┌ Gender and Mental Rotation
-Studies showed that while both imagery and perception used similar -young children - no gender differences
brain areas, the contributions of the areas and their levels activation -men and women use different strategies to solve mental rotation
differed depending on whether the participants actually saw or just problems
mentally imagined an object - no visual input from the eyes during WOMEN
imagery, which leads to a decrease in information compared with -less parietal activation
visual perception -exhibit additional inferior frontal activation
=TWO CONSEQUENCES: -spatial tasks involve both sides of the brain
 INTERNAL PROCESSING -proportionally greater amount of gray matter in the parietal lobe -
-less complex because there is less information to deal with performance disadvantage for MR tasks
 SIGNAL
MEN
-less differentiated between different brain regions
-right side dominates the spatial tasks

┌ Mental Rotations
┌ Zooming in on Mental Images: Image Scaling
-can be rotated just like physical objects
-we use mental images the same way we use our actual perceptions
-zoom into mental images to see more details of a specific area or we
-resolution is limited
can scan across an image form one point to another
-seeing details of large objects is easier than seeing such details of
small ones
┌ How does Mental Rotation Work? -we respond more quickly to questions about larger objects we
MENTAL ROTATION observe than to questions about small ones we observe
-involves rotationally transforming an object’s visual mental image -the larger the eye on the scree, the more details we can see
-to rotate objects at larger angles of rotation takes longer **Research suggests,
-whether the objects are rotated clockwise, counterclockwise or in the -on visual perception it is easy to control the sizes of the objects
third dimension of depth makes little difference you see

Janella Hope B. Umali


Janella Hope B. Umali

-on image size controlling the sizes of people’s mental images is **Limits to the analogy -perception and imagery- ambiguous figures
more difficult and unfamiliar mental manipulations
=use relative size as a means of manipulating image size
┌ Do Experimenters’ Expectations Influence Experiment Outcomes?
**Supports the ff: -experimental participants performing visualization tasks may be
(1) Functional equivalence hypothesis: when we see something in responding in part to the demand characteristics of the task (result
front of our ”mental eye”, it takes children and adults about the same from the experimenters’ expectations regarding the outcomes)
amount of time to perceive it, just as it would if we saw something in
real life ┌ Johnson-Laird’s Mental Modes
(2) Dual-code view in two ways: -distinguished from others because of its criterion = verbal expression
a) For adults and older children, responses based on the use MENTAL REPRESENTATION
of imagery differed from responses based on propositions -may take any of three forms: propositions, images or mental models
b) Development of propositional knowledge and ability does
not occur at the same rate as the development of imaginal PROPOSITIONS
knowledge and ability (children slower) = supports Pavio’s -are fully abstracted representations of meaning that are verbally
notion of two distinct codes expressible

┌ Examining Objects: Image Scaling


MENTAL MODELS
-KEY IDEA: images can be scanned in much the same way as physical
-knowledge structures that individuals construct to understand and
percepts can be scanned
explain their experiences
-our strategies and responses for imaginal scanning should be the
-models are constrained by the individuals’ implicit theories about
same as for perceptual scanning
these experiences, which can be more or less accurate
-the further away from each other the objects were, the longer it took
-model depends on your beliefs about them
participants to scan from one object to the other
-applied to a broad range of cognitive phenomena (visual perception,
-they actually scan the image as needed for a response
memory, comprehension of text passages and reasoning)
-provide an additional means of representation in addition to
SHEPARD AND METZLER propositions and visual images
-found linearly increasing reaction times for mental rotations as the -not mutually exclusive with these other two forms, but they are
angle of rotation increased complementary to them
-provide a way of explaining empirical findings (haptic and auditory
┌ Representational Neglect forms of imagery) which seem quite different from visual images
SPATIAL NEGLECT
-person ignores half of his or her visual field HAPTIC (TOUCH-BASED) “IMAGERY”
-suggests alternative modalities for mental imagery
REPRESENTATIONAL NEGLECT -shares a number of features with visual imagery - similar brain areas
-a person asked to imagine a scene and then describe it ignores half of are active during both types of imagery
the imagined scene -involves the formation of a mental model that is analogous, in some
-when presented by an image, they described the entire image respects, to visual imagery
-when the image was removed and were asked to describe from -easier to conceptualize auditory images in terms of mental models
memory, they failed to describe the left portion than strictly in terms of the kinds of pictorial mental representations
-present only when a vantage point is given of which speak when they think of visual imagery
-it is likely that there exists complete knowledge of the scene, but that
knowledge sometimes is not accessible when the patient generates a AUDITORY MODALITY
mental image -participants took longer mentally to shift a sound upward in pitch
than downward
**often occur together, they can also occur independently -when one generates an auditory image, the same brain areas as
those involved in hearing are engaged
SYNTHESIZING IMAGES AND PROPOSITIONS
DUAL-CODE THEORY FAULTY MENTAL MODELS
-knowledge is represented both in images and in symbols
-responsible for many errors in thinking
-experience: useful tool for the repair of faulty mental models
PROPOSITIONAL THEORY (explicitly= helpful)
-knowledge is represented only in underlying propositions, not in the
form of images, words or other symbols ┌ Neuroscience: Evidence for Multiple Codes
-abstract form representing the underlying meanings of knowledge -neuropsychological findings may circumvent many issues of demand
characteristics in resolving the dual-code controversy
MENTAL IMAGERY -does not eliminate experimenter biases regarding where to look for
-appears functionally equivalent to perception in many ways lesions or the deficits arising from them
-mental rotation, image scalling (sizing), and image scanning

Janella Hope B. Umali


Janella Hope B. Umali

┌ Left Brain or Right Brain: Where is information manipulated? **people use both an analogical code and propositional code for
RIGHT LEFT imaginal representations such as images of maps
-represent and -more proficient in representing and
manipulate manipulating verbal and other SPATIAL-FRAMEWORK THEORY
visuospatial knowledge symbol-based knowledge -when people construct a mental model of the space around them,
in a manner similar to -human brain has the ability to manipulate they often orient themselves on their body along three axes:
perception imaginal components and symbols and to up-down(quickest), front-back and left-right(longest)
-human brain generate entirely new information
represents knowledge ┌ Rules of Thumb of Using Our Mental Maps: Heuristics
in a manner that is **CORBALLIS HEURISTICS
analogous to our -humans alone can conceive what they -rules of thumb
physical environment have never perceived -lead to a distortion of our mental images,
-use of this in manipulating cognitive maps suggests that propositional
┌ Two Kinds of Images: Visual versus Spatial knowledge affects imaginal knowledge - when people are solving
VISUAL IMAGERY problems and answering questions about images
-refers to the use of images that represent visual characteristics -conceptual information seems to distort mental images -
(colors and shapes) propositional strategies
-event-related potentials: compared brain processes associated with
visual perception to brain processes associated with visual imagery **Distortions seem to reflect a tendency to regularize features of
-visual perception: ERPs are elevated in the occipital region mental maps - angles, lines and shapes are represented as more like
pure abstract geometric forms than they really are
SPATIAL IMAGERY
-refers to images that represent spatial features (depth dimensions, EXAMPLES:
distances and orientations) Right-Angle Bias
Symmetry Heuristic
**FARAH Rotation Heuristic
NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE: cognitive architecture includes Alignment Heuristic
representation of both the visual appearance and spatial structure of Relative-Position Heuristic
objects
SEMANTIC OR PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
SPATIAL COGNITION AND COGNITIVE MAPS -can influence our imaginal representations of world maps
SPATIAL COGNITION
-deals with the the acquisition, organization and use of knowledge FUSIFORM FACE AREA
about objects and actions in 2-D and 3-D space -imagining a face

COGNITIVE MAPS PARAHIPPOCAMPAL PLACE AREA


-internal representations of our physical environment, particularly -imagining a scene associated wit particular place
centering on spatial relationships
-seem to offer internal representations that stimulate particular PARIETAL AREA
spatial features of our external environment -imagining objects
-EDWARD TOLMAN (rat=maze) -visual-space analysis in both imagery and visual-perception

**Our imagery abilities are potential keys to our survival and to what
┌ Of Rats, Bees, Pigeons, and Humans
makes us intelligent in our everyday lives
LEFT HIPPOCAMPUS
-crucial for the perception of landmarks within the environment
┌ Creating Maps from what you hear: text maps
-we may able to create cognitive maps from a verbal descriptions
RIGHT HIPPOCAMPUS
-may be as accurate as those created from looking at a graphic map
-sensitivity to global features of the environment
-construction of mental imagery may involve both: process analogous
to perception and processes relying on propositional representations
THREE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE
LANDMARK ROUTE-ROAD SURVEY
-particular features -involves specific -involves estimated
at a location pathways for moving distances between
-based on both one location to landmarks, much as
imaginal and another they might appear on
propositional -based on both survey maps
representations procedural -may be represented
knowledge and by imaginally or
declarative propositionally
knowledge

Janella Hope B. Umali