DUAL-CODE POSITION Lecturer: Dr. Benjamin Amponsah, Dept. of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

College of Education School of Continuing and Distance Education

2014/2015 – 2016/2017

DUAL-CODE POSITION

Lecturer: Dr. Benjamin Amponsah, Dept. of Psychology, UG, Legon Contact Information: bamponsah@ug.edu.gh

Session Overview

• We examine the argument of dual-code position. An

argument suggesting that there are two different modes of representing information in the brain and the implications. This theory has implications for why visual and concrete material is better recalled than abstract material.

Slide 2

Session Objectives

• Explain the dual-code hypothesis
• Describe the nature of visual coding or

representation

• Describe the nature of verbal coding or

representation

• Evaluate the implications of the two modes of

mental representation

Slide 3

Session Outline

The key topics to be covered in the session are as follows:

• Topic One: Dual-code hypothesis - background
• Topic Two: Experimental Procedure
• Topic Three: Implications of theory

Slide 4

Reading List

• Ashcraft, M. H. (2006). Cognition (4th edn.), London: Pearson

Education Int.

• Galotti, K. M. (2004). Cognitive Psychology: In and out of the

laboratory (3rd Edn.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

• Hunt, R. R. & Ellis, H. C. (1999). Fundamentals of Cognitive

Psychology (6th edn.), New York: McGraw-Hill.

• Willingham, D, B. (2001). Cognition: The thinking animal. NJ:

Prentice-Hall.

Slide 5

DUAL-CODE HYPOTHESIS - BACKGROUND

Topic One

Slide 6

Background

• Allan Paivio (1969, 1971, 1983) created the dual-

code hypothesis to explain the working of mnemonics.

• The theory has become significant in explaining

how information is represented in memory. What is mnemonics?

• An umbrella term covering any technique for

committing material to memory or for improving

• ne’s memory. Some of the commonly used

techniques are peg word system and method of loci.

Slide 7

Representation in Memory

– According to Paivio, information in long-term memory contains two distinct coding systems for representing information to be stored. The two forms are: verbal or imagery (visual) codes. – Any event or object which can be described may be stored in a verbal code. Verbal code contains information about an item’s abstract linguistic meaning. – Any event or object which can be visualized can be stored in an imaginal code (mental pictures of some sort that represent what the item looks like).

Slide 8

Representation in Memory

– This position argues that the memory system will work better when both verbal and imaginal systems are brought to bear on a specific memory. – Again, It argues that pictures should be better remembered than words, because pictures can be represented both visually and verbally.

Slide 9

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Topic Two

Slide 10

Assumptions

• Striking experimental findings that support

these contentions.

– Every to-be-remembered items can be coded either verbally or visually and in some cases both. – Pavio’s idea is that pictures and concrete words give rise to both verbal labels and visual images, that is, they have two possible internal codes or mental representations.

Slide 11

Assumptions

• According to Paivio, visual images will produce

better memory because the visual image retains more detail than the verbal code.

• This seems to confirm the saying that pictures are

best remembered than words.

• Abstract words on the other hand, have only one

kind of code or representation – verbal code. (Abstract words are difficult if not impossible to code visually compared to concrete words.)

Slide 12

Experimental Procedure

• One study by Paivio (1965) provided evidence to support the

hypothesis.

• Experiment

– Subjects were randomly assigned to four conditions in an

• experiment. They were to learn one of four lists of noun

pairs. – First list included pairs in which both referred to concrete

• bjects (e.g., book/table).

Slide 13

Experimental Procedure

 First list included pairs in which both referred to concrete objects (e.g., book/table).  The second list included pairs in which the first noun was concrete and the second abstract (e.g., chair/justice)  The third list was converse of the second (e.g., freedom/dress)  The fourth contained pairs of abstract nouns (e.g., beauty/truth)

Slide 14

Findings

– Of possible 16 correct responses, participants averaged 11.41, 10.01, 7.36, and 6.05 for concrete/concrete, concrete/abstract, abstract/concrete and abstract/abstract lists respectively.

Slide 15

IMPLICATIONS OF THEORY

Topic Three

Slide 16

Discussion

– Paivio assumed that the more concrete the noun, the richer the image and the more elaborated the internal code. – Where possible, participants formed visual images of the noun pairs, whereas it was difficult in the case of verbal materials or in their combinations. – When items are coded using both images and verbal labels the chances of the learner’s retrieving them are

• bviously better. If the learner forgets the verbal label, he

might still access the visual image or vice versa.

Slide 17

Discussion

– Items coded only by verbal labels are disadvantaged. If the verbal label is forgotten, the learner has less to go on.

• There is an experiment by Conezio and Haber (1970)

confirming the adage that “a picture is worth a thousand words”.

• They showed subjects 2,560 pictures of complex visual
• scenes. Each picture was shown for 10 seconds.

Slide 18

Other Supporting Findings

• In a recognition test subjects were able to remember

correctly 93% or a total of 2380 pictures. This is remarkably higher than is usually obtained with verbal material.

• In another experiment pictorial experiment by Standing

(1973), subjects could remember 73% of 10,000 pictures.

• The evidence supports Paivo’s claim that pictures and

concrete objects are better remembered than verbal or abstract material and reflects how information is represented in the long-term memory.

Slide 19

Criticisms

• As plausible as Paivio’s ideas are, some criticisms have

been levelled.

• His theory failed to talk about associations that are

formed between the noun pairs.

Slide 20

Sample Questions

• Why is the dual-code hypothesis important to us?
• A picture is worth a thousand words. Discuss?
• To what extent do you agree that the concrete words

have more internal representations than abstract words?

Slide 21

References

• Paivio, A. (1965). Abstractness, imagery and meaningfulness

in paired-associate learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4, 32-38.

• Paivio, A. (1969). Mental imagery in associative learning and
• memory. Psychological Review, 76, 241-263.
• Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York:

Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

• Paivio, A. (1983). The empirical case for dual coding. In J. C.

Yuille (Ed.) Imagery, memory and cognition (pp.307- 332). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

• Standing, L., Conezio, J., & Haber, R. N. (1970). Perception and

memory for pictures: Single trial learning of 2560 visual

• stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 19, 73-74.

Slide 22