medigraphic.com

2006, Número 3

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Rev Hosp M Gea Glz 2006; 7 (3)


Sistema automatizado para el estudio de la memoria visual de corto plazo

Rodríguez SJ, Fajardo DG, Mata MP

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 72
Paginas: 108-117
Archivo PDF: 277.02 Kb.


RESUMEN

La memoria de corto plazo se ha considerado como un conjunto de capacidades cognitivas mediante las cuales los seres humanos retienen información, lo que permite la reconstrucción de experiencias anteriores, generalmente para propósitos que se les presentan en la vida diaria. Se ha estudiado mediante la aplicación de diferentes escalas, pero hasta el momento se le ha dado poca importancia a su exploración automatizada. Este trabajo describe una prueba accesible para examinar diferentes aspectos de la memoria visual de corto plazo. Los procesos memorísticos que son evaluados por esta versión de programa independiente son similares a otras pruebas como la que se realiza con la subescala de dígitos de Wais. El próximo paso es la validación del programa mediante la realización de pruebas y análisis para determinar si en su conjunto funciona de manera correcta y consistente, de acuerdo con las especificaciones y requerimientos del sistema.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Lu ZL, Neuse J, Madigan S, Dosher BA. Fast decay of iconic memory in observers with mild cognitive impairments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102(5):1797-802.

  2. Cameron KA, Haarmann HJ, Grafman J, Ruchkin DS. Long-term memory is the representational basis for semantic verbal short-term memory. Psychophysiology 2005;42(6):643-53.

  3. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In: KW Spence, JT Spence (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol 2. London: Academic Press. 1968.

  4. Macken WJ, Jones DM. Redification of phonological storage. Q J Exp Psychol A 2003;56(8):1279-88.

  5. Towse JN, Hitch GJ, Hamilton Z, Peacock K, Hutton UM. Working memory period: the endurance of mental representations. Q J Exp Psychol A 2005;58(3):547-71.

  6. Baddeley A. Memoria Humana. Teoría y práctica. Ed. McGraw Hill, 1999.

  7. Miller, G. The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two. The Psychological Review 1956;63:81-97.

  8. Mohr HM, Goebel R, Linden DE. Content- and task-specific dissociations of frontal activity during maintenance and manipulation in visual working memory. J Neurosci 2006;26(17):4465-71.

  9. Hsin-Kai Wu, Priti Shah.. Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education Volume 88, 2004;Issue 3:465-92.

  10. Escala de Inteligencia para Adultos de Wechsler. Ed. Manual Moderno. 1981.

  11. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 1948;27:379-423 and 623-656, July and October.

  12. Oberauer K, Suss HM. Working memory and interference: a comment on Jenkins, Myerson, Hale, and Fry. Psychon Bull Rev 2000;7(4):727-33.

  13. Towse JN, Hitch GJ, Hutton U. On the interpretation of working memory span in adults. Mem Cognit 2000;28(3):341-48.

  14. Ollis S, Button C, Fairweather M. The influence of professional expertise and task complexity upon the potency of the contextual interference effect. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2005;118(3):229-44.

  15. Hashimoto A, Watanabe S, Inui K, Hoshiyama M, Murase S, Kakigi R. Backward-masking: the effect of the duration of the second stimulus on recognition of the first stimulus. Neuroscience 2006;137(4):1427-37.

  16. Akyurek EG, Hommel B. Short-term memory and the attentional blink: capacity versus content. Mem Cognit 2005;33(4):654-63.

  17. De Fockert JW, Rees G, Frith CD, Lavie N. The role of working memory in visual selective attention. Science 2001;291(5509):1803-6.

  18. Foos PW, Goolkasian P. Presentation format effects in working memory: the role of attention. Mem Cognit 2005;33(3):499-513.

  19. Cinan S, Tanor O. An attempt to discriminate different types of executive functions in the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Memory 2002;10(4):277-89.

  20. Tombaugh TN, Rees L, Baird B, Kost J. The effects of list difficulty and modality of presentation on a computerized version of the Paced Serial Addition Test (PSAT). J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2004;26(2):257-65.

  21. Suchan B, Linnewerth B, Koster O, Daum I, Schmid G. Cross-modal processing in auditory and visual working memory. Neuroimage 2005:8.

  22. Delvenne JF. The capacity of visual short-term memory within and between hemifields. Cognition 2005; Jul;96(3), B79-B88.

  23. Sperling G. The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs 1960;74:1-29.

  24. Luck, Vogel. The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature 1997;390:279-281.

  25. Alvarez GA, Cavanagh P. The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by visual information load and by number of objects. Psychological Science 2004;15(2):106-111.

  26. Lacey S, Campbell C. Mental representation in visual/haptic crossmodal memory: evidence from interference effects. Q J Exp Psychol (Colchester) 2006;59(2):361-76.

  27. Mulligan NW. The emergence of item-specific encoding effects in between-subjects designs: perceptual interference and multiple recall tests. Psychon Bull Rev 2002;9(2):375-82.

  28. Waters G, Caplan D, Yampolsky S. On-line syntactic processing under concurrent memory load. Psychon Bull Rev 2003;10(1):88-95.

  29. Bartha MC, Martin RC, Jensen CR. Multiple interference effects in short-term recognition memory. Am J Psychol 1998;111(1):89-118.

  30. Laman FM, Gray WD. Forgetting to remember: the functional relationship of decay and interference. Psicol Sci 2002;13(1):27-33.

  31. Blank H. Another look at retroactive and proactive interference: a quantitative analysis of conversion processes. Memory 2005;13(2):200-24.

  32. Cowan N, Johnson TD, Saults JS. Capacity limits in list item recognition: evidence from proactive interference. Memory 2005;13(3-4):293-99.

  33. Waters G, Caplan D, Yampolsky S. On-line syntactic processing under concurrent memory load. Psychon Bull Rev 2003;10(1):88-95.

  34. Costa A, Alario FX, Caramazza A. On he categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm. Psychon Bull Rev 2005;12(1):125-31.

  35. Todd J, René M. Capacity of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex. Nature 2004;42:751-54.

  36. Fortin C, Masse N. Order information in short term memory and time estimation. Mem Cognit 1999;27(1):54-62.

  37. Morey CC, Cowan N. When do visual and verbal memories conflict? The importance of working-memory load and retrieval. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 2005;31(4):703-13.

  38. Goolkasian P, Foos PW. Bimodal format effects in working memory. Am J Psychol 2005;118(1):61-77.

  39. Shih SI. Recall of two visual targets embedded in RSVP Streams of distractors depends on their temporal and spatial relationship. Percep Psychophys 2000;62(7):1348-55.

  40. Silverberg N, Buchanan L. Verbal Mediation and memory for novel figural designs: a dual interference study. Brain Cogn 2005;57/2:198-209.

  41. Doherty-Sneddon G, Bonner L, Bruce V. Cognitive demands of face monitoring: evidence for visuospatial overload. Mem Cognit 2001;29(7):909-19.

  42. Baddeley A, Chincotta D, Stafford L, Turk D. Is the Word length effect in STM entirely attributable to output delay? Evidence from serial recognition. Q J Exp Psicol A 2002;55(2):353-69.

  43. Tremblay S, Nicholls AP, Parmentier FB, Jones DM. Visual distraction and visuo-spatial memory: a sandwich effect. Memory 2005;13(3-4):357-63.

  44. Henson R, Hartley, Burgess N, Hitch G, Flude B. Selective interference with verbal short-term memory for serial order information: a new paradigm and tests of a timing-signal hypothesis. Q J Exp Psychol A 2003;56(8):1307-34.

  45. Paas F, Adam JJ. Effects of distractor load and temporal target-distractor separation on numerical comparison performance: a stimulus-competition approach. Psychol Rep 2002;90(3 Pt 1):889-906.

  46. Goh WD, Pisoni DB. Effects of lexical competition on immediate memory span for spoken words. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2003; 56(6):929-54.

  47. Ruusuvirta T. Proactive interference of a sequence of tones in a two-tone pitch comparison task. Psychon Bull Rev 2000;7(2):327-31.

  48. Radvansky GA, Copeland DE. Working memory span and situation model processing. Am J Psychol 2004;117(2):191-213.

  49. Lavie N, De Fockert J. The role of working memory in attentional capture. Psychon Bull Rev 2005;12(4):669-74.

  50. Waller D. Egocentric and nonegocentric coding in memory for spatial layout: Evidence from scene recognition. Mem Cognit 2006;34(3):491-504.

  51. Goolkasian P, Foos PW. Bimodal format effects in working memory. Am J Psychol 2005;118(1):61-77.

  52. Tubau E, Lopez-Moliner. Spatial interference and response control in sequence learning: the role of explicit knowledge. Psychol Res 2004;68(1):55-63.

  53. Bourke PA, Duncan J. Effect of template complexity on visual search and dual-task performance. Psychol Sci 2005;16(3):208-13.

  54. Silverberg N, Buchanan L. Verbal mediation and memory for novel figural designs: a dual interference study. Brain Cogn 2005;57(2):198-209.

  55. Bayliss DM, Jarrold C, Gunn DM, Baddeley AD. The complexities of complex span: explaining individual differences in working memory in children and adults. J Exp Psychol Gen 2003;132(1):71-92.

  56. Folan JC, de Montfort SM. Visual memory and auditory recall in anatomy students. Med Educ 1986;20(6):516-20.

  57. Khalil MK, Paas F, Johnson TE, Payer AF. Interactive and dynamic visualizations in teaching and learning of anatomy: a cognitive load perspective. Anat Rec B New Anat 2005;286(1):8-14.

  58. Giannini AJ, Giannini JN, Condon M. Use of tangential visual symbols to increase the long-term learning process: applications of linkage in teaching pharmacological principles of addiction. J Clin Pharmacol 2000;40(7):708-12.

  59. Uribe JI, Ralph WM Jr, Glaser AY, Fried MP. Learning curves, acquisition, and retention of skills trained with the endoscopic sinus surgery simulator. Am J Rhinol 2004;18(2):87-92.

  60. Feigin DS, Smirniotopoulos JG, Neher TJ. Retention of radiographic anatomy of the chest by 4th-year medical students. Acad Radiol 2002;9(1):82-8.

  61. Curran VR, Aziz K, O’Young S, Bessell C. Evaluation of the effect of a computerized training simulator (ANAKIN) on the retention of neonatal resuscitation skills. Teach Learn Med 2004;16(2):157-64.

  62. Ricer E. Does a high tech (Computerized, Animated, Powerpoint) presentation increase retention of material compared to a low tech (Black on Clear Overheads) presentation? Teaching and Learning in Medicine 2005;17(2):107-111.

  63. Burns DJ, Ladd MV. The simultaneous learning effect: why does simultaneous task learning improve retention? Am J Psychol 2006;119(3):385-405.

  64. Ariza M, Pueyo R, Junque C, Mataro M, Poca MA, Mena MP, Sahuquillo J. Differences in visual vs verbal memory impairments as a result of focal temporal lobe damage in patients with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj Sep;20(10):1053-59.

  65. Parmentier FB, King S, Dennis I. Local temporal distinctiveness does not benefit auditory verbal and spatial serial recall. Psychon Bull Rev 2006;13(3):458-65.

  66. Tremblay S, Saint-Aubin J, Jalbert A. Rehearsal in serial memory for visual-spatial information: evidence from eye movements. Psychon Bull Rev 2006;13(3):452-57.

  67. Van Uffelen JG, Chin A Paw MJ, Klein M, van Mechelen W, Hopman-Rock M. Detection of memory impairment in the general population: screening by questionnaire and telephone compared to subsequent face-to-face assessment. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006 Oct 17.

  68. Wingen M, Langer S, Ramaekers JG. Verbal memory performance during subchronic challenge with a selective serotonergic and a mixed action antidepressant. Hum Psychopharmacol 2006;21(7): 473-79.

  69. Ballard JC. Computerized assessment of sustained attention: A review of factors affecting vigilance performance. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 1997;18:843-63.

  70. Psych/Lab TM para Windows V 1.0 Adam Oei and Laurence R Hrtley. The effects of caffeine and expectancy on attention and memory. Human Psychopharmacol Clin Exp 2005;20:193-202.

  71. Tar now E. Proactive Interference, retroactive interference - what about self-interference? A new interpretation of the regency-primacy shift. Meds cape Gen Med 2005;7(1):5.

  72. Denney CB, Rapport MD, Chung KM. Interactions of task and subject variables among continuous performance tests. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 2005;46:4,420-35.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com