Re: Zeigarnik revisited
I don't have a difinitive answer on this, but it would seem that an interrupting a task might make the task distinctive and cause some emotional reaction. Either of these might facilitate remembering. Milton Steinberg = while teaching a unit on STM/LTM in my Cognitive Psy class,the "Zeigarnik effect" came to mind.And I was wondering if there was an apparent conflict between it and "interference theory".It would seem that an interfering and disrupted task should not facilitate recall,but hinder it. Michael Sylvester Daytona Beach,Florida Milton Steinberg, Ph.D. Associate Professor in Psychology Marymount College, 1365 Tarrytown NY, 10591
Re: Zeigarnik revisited
If you use correlational opponent processing via wavelets or associational reciprocal inhibition as your model these conflicts may not seem as important. Stimuli would have natural wavelet structures which could result in speeding up learning from the Zeigarnik effect. Since memory is always updated or reprocessed, neurons would grow additional connections that would support integration of that information. Inference theory is also a natural for wavelet theory. Wavelet information that is congruent would allow associative memories - stimulus generalization. Wavelet information that is discrepant would result in interference. Ron Blue - Original Message - From: Michael Sylvester [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TIPS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 12:49 PM Subject: Zeigarnik revisited while teaching a unit on STM/LTM in my Cognitive Psy class,the "Zeigarnik effect" came to mind.And I was wondering if there was an apparent conflict between it and "interference theory".It would seem that an interfering and disrupted task should not facilitate recall,but hinder it. Michael Sylvester Daytona Beach,Florida
