Human Memory: Memory and Attention (Research Proposal Sample)

Human Memory: Memory and Attention Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Course Name Instructor’s Name Submission Date Abstract This report aims at exploring the interrelationship between human memory and attention. The study collected data from 24 subjects using Pygame library in Python. This report discusses two recent evidence lines that explain this interdependence. The first evidence is that memory has limited capacities. The study results show that attention defines what can be encoded and it plays a complex role in unconscious memory formation. Such memories are encoded even once there is an alternative concurrent task, although the stimulus that is being encoded should be chosen from other rival stimuli. The second evidence is that memories from past experiences guide what to be attended to. Medial temporal lobe and hippocampus structures are important to memory and are used in attention operations, and memory influences the frontal-parietal network recruited in spatial positioning. Therefore, exploring the relations between memory and attention can provide different understandings of these fundamental cognitive neuroscience topics. Human Memory: Memory and Attention Introduction During modern neuroscience and psychology, attention and memory have enjoyed the main stage as important intellectual function processes. This report has emphasized these function processes as distinct topics. Studies on memory have classically not investigated roles of encoding modulation and attentional selection, while attention researches ignore the significant role of past knowledge and perceptual experience. However, because memories have limited capacities, it is important to know the information chosen for encoding. Similarly, because attention works in a somewhat stable domain, it is important to depend on previous experience to maximize selection. Indeed, some memory and attention aspects might reflect similar processes (Chen & Hutchinson, 2018). For instance, memory retrieval may reflect selective attention from to the internal representation. Classic psychologists like William James revealed long ago that an object, when attended to, can be memorized, whereas one inattentively can leave without traces (James, 2018). Recently, leading neuroscientists have revealed that the most significant problem for Eric Kandel for current century neuroscience is understanding how attention controls the process that stabilizes experiential memories (Kandel, 2018). This report reviews the progress to understand the connections between memory and attention in the neural system. Literature Review The literature shows tradeoffs in stimulation between states involved in attention-demanding activities. According to De Brigard (2018), such adjustments are not limited to dual-task states. Even in the course of the experiment, a default brain network region that might be active throughout relaxation end up deactivated, revealing every other form of interchange (Shipstead, Martin & Nespodzany, 2018). The deactivation is relative to the project and would possibly reflect the processing resources' availability. Mashburn, Tsukahara and Engle (2020) study show that decrease in activity in later midline areas, including the inferior precuneus and cingulate, correlates with higher episodic next memory. Yuen (2021) conclude that stimulation within the anterior cingulate and precuneus cortex are repetition attenuation predictive. These encodings appear to reflect the supply of popular attentional resources since they expect subsequent memory under retrieval and encoding conditions (Walker, Aswad & Lacroix, 2021). Atkinson Shiffrin memory theory is the multi-store memory model also referred as modal model proposed in 1968 which is the structural model. Atkinson suggested that memory consist of three different stores known as long-term memory, short-term memory, and sensory register (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1977). According to attention gate framework, attention controls the transmission of the pulses triggered by pacemakers to memory. Ferguson and Gillock (2021) conducted a study that revealed that the memories-guided spatial orientation recruits similar neural mechanisms mediating visually based spatial orientation. The study question for this research is “What is the interrelationship between attentions and memory?” General objective To determine the interrelationship between attentions and memory. Hypotheses H0: There is significant interrelationship between attentions and memory. H1: There is no significant interrelationship between attentions and memory. Specific objectives * To determine the use of attention at encoding * To determine the use of attentional resources * To determine the importance of selective attention * To determine the effect of memory on attention Methodology Participants The study involved 24 subjects, 12 male youths with mean age of 25.1 ± 1.9 years and 12 female youths with mean age of 26 ± 6 years. All participants were corrected-to-normal vision with right-handed, no psychological disorders history and were simple based on the study purpose. The participants were rewarded for their contribution. The study involved experimental method performed in line with the pertinent regulations and rules, and the study ethics was approved. Participants provided filled informed consents based on the Human Research Ethics Committee. Experimental Design The experimental activity was designed using Pygame library in Python. Every participant performed a probable verbal estimation duration activity of 45s, 60s or 90s in one-task condition or in double-task condition. In one-task condition, every participant specially performed duration estimation preferring full attention deployment towards effectiveness. In double-task condition, every participant concurrently executed duration estimations and the n-back memory tasks. The experimental operation asked participants to divide their attention between working memory and timing. In the double-task, the typical trial involved the visual n-back working memory task throughout the duration trial. Study Materials The study material involved in the data collection involves the pygame library which is the open-source unit for Python programming languages. Another material used was the n -back tasks which are constant performance tasks mostly used as the assessment in memory psychology and neuroscience to measure the capacity of working memory. The other materials involved in data collection were chunks. Procedure In n-back tasks, visual stimuli had white fifty-point Calibri font with upper case letters aligned on the grey context. The streams of letters were built by linking different random-created-letter chunks each with ten stimuli and the target letter located in the pseudo-random point on each chunk to have a uniform attention deployment on each n-back task. Every letter was offered for 600 milliseconds with 500 milliseconds inter-stimulus intervals. Four n-back levels were applied. In these 0-back conditions, every participant was asked to identify a letter C from streams of letters offered sequentially on the display by pressing a space-bar as the attentional regulation condition. In the 1st, 2nd and 3rd-back conditions, every participant was requested to press a space-bar where the nth stimulus and current stimulus were equal. The greater the nth positions, the greater the memory demand task. Every participant group performed many n-back task versions. Feedback group participants were given response feedbacks and when the member response was the success, the letter presented on the monitor could turn green, or else, it could turn red meaning error. No feedbacks were given to No Feedback group participants. Study Results To ensure that every participant performed the working memory task properly during the double-task condition, the study assessed the performance of participants in every n-back task. The rate of participant hit rate reduced parametrically as the function of optimizing working memory load regardless of feedback. The main working memory load effects on HR independently for No Feedback is Z1-back vs 0-back = 5.915, where P < 0.001 Z2-back vs 1-back = 11.185, where P < 0.001 Z3-back vs 2-back = 5.822, where P < 0.001; for Feedback participant group is Z1-back vs 0-back = 0.865, where p = 0.8 Z2-back vs 1-back = 13.463, where p < 0.001 Z3-back vs 2-back = 9.024, where p < 0.001. Based on these equations, a main significant Group effect was identified on hit rate showing that giving feedback to participant surprisingly reduced their overall working task performance.  Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1: The working memory and attention effect on the elapsed time estimation (Walker, Aswad & Lacroix, 2021). Discussion Attention at Encoding Many people need to understand how to advance memory. Attention improves memory encoding through these modulation details remain unresolved. While it is uncontended that focusing on or attending the event improves the possibility of future memory. It is not known how attention improves, modulates, and boosts implicit, unconscious memory. Improvements in intelligence imaging revealed these traces of implicit memories in the cognizance. Similar approaches have helped determine which brain state is expected to cause better memory retrieval and encoding. To attend means processing resources allocated to the task. Attention involves choosing what deserves the resources and inhibiting other matters from getting them. This is the similarity to a resource requiring activities, like exercising. The difference between selection and resources is important to understand how attention moderates memory. For instance, explicit memory can be impaired in social research if resources are shared ...