# Current Projects

+ Development of Episodic Memory -- the ability to bind
+ Development of Episodic Memory -- sources of noise
+ Selective Attention and the Development of Category Learning
+ Early Word Learning through Context

Development of Binding in Episodic Memory

[TOP]

The formation of episodic memory requires one to not only remember what happened but also where, and when it happened. Therefore, one needs to bind these elements in a coherent memory structure for accurate recall in the future. The research shows that some of these binding structures (e.g. 3-way binding structure; Humphreys, Bain, & Pike, 1989) vastly develop even after the age of 7. The results indicate that some of the components in episodic memory have a longer developmental trajectory than was usually assumed. Along with these findings, we have also developed a computational model based on a Multinomial Processing Tree model that decomposes different binding structures into meaningful parameters. Recently we are trying to identify the neural bases and genetic factors of these different binding structures (collaborators: Per B. Sederberg, & Christopher W. Bartlett).

• Yim, H., Dennis, S. J., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2013). The Development of Episodic Memory: Items, Contexts, and Relations. Psychological Science, 24, 2163-2172.

• Yim, H., Osth, A. F, Sloutsky, V. M. & Dennis, S. J. (2018). Evidence for the Use of Three-way Binding Structures in Associative and Source Recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 100, 89-97.

Sources of Noise (Interference) in Episodic Memory Development

[TOP]

Memory research has shown that memory interference stems from different aspects of our previous experience. However, even though children accumulate experience throughout development, and the potential for interference may increase, memory performance typically improves. What prevents interference from overwhelming memory as children acquire experience? We show that this change is linked to the ability to distinguish memory representations from each other, and that this ability develops at a faster rate than that of experience accumulation. We show that the ability to distinguish specific items from each other emerges early in development while the ability to distinguish different contexts undergoes more protracted development. Therefore, theoretically, this work substantially advances our understanding of different sources of interference in memory development, while also providing a method that decomposes the effects from experience and maturation, which can be used in cognitive development research more broadly.

• Yim, H., Osth, A. F., Sloutsky, V. M., & Dennis, S. J. (2022). Sources of Interference in Memory across Development. Psychological Science, 33(7), 1154-1171. [PDF]

• Schubert, T. (2022, August, 10). Memory interference changes across age (featuring Yim, Osth, Sloutsky & Dennis, 2022), Nature Reviews Psychology. [LINK]

Selective Attention and the Development of Category Learning

[TOP]

Selective attention plays an important role in category learning (Kruschke, 1996; Nosofsky, 1986). However, immaturities of top-down attentional control during infancy coupled with successful category learning suggest that early category learning is achieved without attending selectively. This implies that adults and infants use different systems when learning a category. The research provides evidence that a compression-based system is a default for infants during category learning compared to a selective attention based system for adults (Sloutsky, 2010). We have shown that infants (compared to adults) lack selective attention during category learning, and use a more distributed attention mechanism. Due to the distributed attention mechanism infants do not show cost of selective attention (interference from the previously learned category when learning new categories) (Best, Yim, Sloutsky, 2013). Moreover, ongoing research additionally examines the effects of category structure (i.e. denser/sparser categories) and supervision during category learning in adults, children, and pigeons (collaborators: Edward A. Wasserman, & Leyre Castro Ruiz).

Experimental results coupled with ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992) simulations show that greater ability to use selective attention during category learning enables a broader generalization accompanied with a cost of selective attention. On the other hand, the lack of selective attention avoided cost of selective attention while limits the kind of categoires that could be learned (i.e., denser categories) and generalization.

• Yim, H., Castro, L., Wasserman, E. A., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2014). The interaction of supervision and category structure in category learning: a comparative approach. In P. Bello, M. Guarini, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.) Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 787-792). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

• Best, C. A., Yim, H., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2013). The Cost of Selective Attention on Category Learning: Developmental Differences between Adults and Infants. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116, 105-199.

• Yim, H., Best, C. A., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2011). Cost of Attention as an Indicator of Category Learning. In L. Carlson, C. Holscher, & T. Shipley (Eds.) Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1724-1729). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

Early Word Learning through Conext (descriptions are coming soon!)

[TOP]