Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Forgetting May be Part of the Remembering Process

Posted by samzenpus on Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:11 PM
from the what-was-I-talking-about dept.
CFTM writes "The New York Times is running an interesting article about how human memory works and the theorized adaptive nature of forgetfulness". From the article, "Whether drawing a mental blank on a new A.T.M. password, a favorite recipe or an old boyfriend, people have ample opportunity every day to curse their own forgetfulness. But forgetting is also a blessing, and researchers reported on Sunday that the ability to block certain memories reduces the demands on the brain when it is trying to recall something important. The study, appearing in the journal Nature Neuroscience, is the first to record visual images of people's brains as they suppress distracting memories. The more efficiently that study participants were tuning out irrelevant words during a word-memorization test, the sharper the drop in activity in areas of their brains involved in recollection. Accurate remembering became easier, in terms of the energy required."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:16PM (#19419841)
    I hope I remember to smoke more pot.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:16PM (#19419847)
    Stop making excuses for dupes.
  • by Scoth (879800) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:18PM (#19419851)
    The question I've always had is more along the lines of the filing system - there are times that I can't remember any part of something until someone reminds me of some small part, and it all comes flooding back. That means it was all in there somewhere, I just couldn't find it. I'm wondering what might cause that, and what might be done to improve it. Or, as the article is saying, perhaps we're not meant to?
    • by buswolley (591500) on Thursday June 07 2007, @12:05AM (#19420171) Journal
      I happen to be a memory researcher at a major University. I also happen to be on a project very similar to the one in the article. However, we are doing the fMRI imaging with children of different ages, as a developmental study. We also piloted adults, and replicating results similar to the ones in the article. Interesting. Of course, I cannot speak about the research in much detail. Journals don't like that much.

      As to your question, I could tell you a lot about why this is so. 1st, cued recall is much easier than free recall. The cue helps stimulate the appropriate associative networks facilitating recall. In particular, a primary focus of mine is cued recall, or recognition. I use the dual process model of recognition: Recollection and Familiarity.

      Familiarity, as experienced, is the feeling of familiarity we get when we see something that we've seen before, aside from actually remembering anything about it, which is recollection.

      I highly recommend the seminal: Yonelinas. A.P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517.

      You can get it here: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/labs/Yonelinas/index _files/page0003.htm [ucdavis.edu]

      • by syousef (465911) on Thursday June 07 2007, @01:48AM (#19420623) Journal
        Of course, I cannot speak about the research in much detail. Journals don't like that much

        You're a scientist and a researcher working at a (public??) university but can't speak about what you do. What's wrong with this picture? Rampant unchecked capitalism is little better than rampant unchecked communism.
        • by buswolley (591500) on Thursday June 07 2007, @02:11AM (#19420713) Journal
          Of course, I agree wholeheartedly. Researchers could speak of it all they want, but doing so may jeopardize their chances of being published. Journals like to have the first press release.
        • by yali (209015) on Thursday June 07 2007, @02:26AM (#19420793)

          You're a scientist and a researcher working at a (public??) university but can't speak about what you do.

          That's an overstatement. The poster was referring to a specific study that has been submitted to a journal. Journals consider their mission to publish original data and findings, and won't accept stuff that has been previously published. Some interpret "prior publication" quite broadly to include many forms of dissemination of findings, including stuff posted on the web. (This is prevalent in psychology [apa.org], where there is no equivalent to arXiv.org [arxiv.org] for preprints.) It's not right, and it's changing slowly, but until it gets better researchers have to play along.

          Moreover, there are potential ethical issues with disseminating findings that have not yet been subjected to peer review. Many scientists consider peer review to be an integral part of the scientific process, because it provides a form of quality control and ensures a minimum standard for findings and conclusions that the scientific community will communicate the the public. Some publicity-hungry researchers violate this, but many others do care about it.

          Once the study in question has been peer reviewed and accepted for publication, I'm sure the poster will be happy to tell you all about it.

          • by smallfries (601545) on Thursday June 07 2007, @03:35AM (#19421015) Homepage
            Although it also depends on the subject. In CS it is common to publish work three times, firstly at a workshop, then at a conference, and finally at a journal. Each level of the pyramid is happy as long as the work hasn't been that high before. Even before any of these it is common to release a tech report or an eprint to "get a flag in the ground". Part of the difference in culture comes from the turn around time on research.

            The ethical issues are still the same though. Most "blind" review is not blind after a little googling, although preprints of the work do make that a little easier. Work in CS doesn't have such a binary quality control. There is an ordering between the different types of publications, but it isn't as important as the quality of the venue. I can think of some really prestigious workshops with 60:1 acceptance ratios against some pretty crappy journals that are 3:1.
        • by Torvaun (1040898) on Thursday June 07 2007, @02:44AM (#19420859)
          Now, that makes all sorts of sense. My brother, my father and I are all ADHD. We are also the kings of pretty much any trivia contest you care to mention. I can recall massive selections of dialogue from movies verbatim after a single viewing. I've been going off of the assumption that it was the result of random hyperfocusing, but it could be the failure to forget.
    • by SeekerDarksteel (896422) on Thursday June 07 2007, @12:21AM (#19420289)
      In artificial neural networks, there are structures called auto-associative memory networks. The networks are "trained" on certain patterns, then when it receives one of those patterns as input, it outputs a pattern closer to the pattern it was trained on. If you make it recursive (and your network is good enough), you can take as input a pattern that contains only a fragment of one of the patterns it was trained on and get as output the pattern you trained on. It's quite likely that something like that is going on inside our brains to store memories in some fashion, but on a far more complex scale than we can describe at this point.
  • by Timesprout (579035) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:18PM (#19419855)
    I'm sure I will have remembered by the time the dupe gets here though
  • by CrazyJim1 (809850) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:25PM (#19419889) Journal
    This is all stuff I figured out. Despite the fact I thought it up, it could still be wrong.

    If you spend processes on thinking, you can lose your process of memory. Ie: You can get distracted if something comes up and you forget what you were doing. Or you walk into a room thinking about the football game, and forget why you came into the room to begin with. I think smart people who are in a constant line of thought as such they sacrifice less important parts of their memory and only remember big things. Now this article makes me even happier because I always think and hardly take time to remember.

    Want to hear the funny part? I don't remember what the article actually says. I think it said that if you forget trivial stuff that the more important stuff will be easier to remember. I'll go re-read it now.
  • by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:29PM (#19419911) Homepage Journal

    An old couple both have Alzheimer's. One day they're watching TV and an ad for a burger place comes on.
    Man says: "Hey, want to make some burgers?"
    Woman says: "Sure, what to you want on yours?
    Man: "I want lettuce, tomatoes and onions. Don't forget; lettuce, tomatoes and onions."
    Woman: "Got it. Lettuce, tomatoes and onions."
    A good hour goes by and she finally comes from the kitchen and hands her husband a plate of bacon and eggs. He says "You idiot! You forgot the toast!"

  • Simpsons (Score:4, Funny)

    by _pi-away (308135) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:30PM (#19419917) Homepage
    "Remember when I took that home wine-making course and forgot how to drive?"

    "That's because you were drunk!"

    "And how!"
  • by rlp (11898) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:51PM (#19420091)
    Personally, I think that ...

    Exception in thread "Surf" java.lang.NullPointerException
    at Slashdot.Post(Slashdot.java:1061)
    at Slashdot.Read(Slashdot.java:75)
    at MyBrain.main(MyBrain.java:4038)

  • by Nutty_Irishman (729030) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:54PM (#19420105)
    Learning to forget is probably more beneficial to humanity in the long run. How many times have you sat around and wasted time thinking about things you wish you could forget (ex's, deceased family members, disturbing conversations, etc.). At times, learning to forget is exactly what we need to move on with our lives.
  • Contradiction (Score:4, Informative)

    by DynaSoar (714234) on Wednesday June 06 2007, @11:58PM (#19420125) Journal
    The primary study quoted supposedly shows less brain activity (in reality it shows less oxy/CO2 swapping, which is frequently mistaken for a measure of brain activity) when some memories are suppressed. Then they quote Anderson (U. of Oregon) who more properly identifies such suppression as active inhibition. Active inhibition is a form of activity. It should show up as a "lighting up" on the fMRI scan. In light of this, what the primary study shows is nothing. It's a failure to find active inhibition. Some results are notable by their absence. Saying your results show something when they in fact fail to is entirely different.

    "Recall" itself is a misleading term. We don't recall anything. We reconstruct. All memories are in some part false because they're generally fast-as-possible good-enough guesses by the brain. Keeping that in mind helps one understand that the creation of memories requires both active agglomeration of relevant components and active inhibition of the irrelevant. Once you grasp that, then you can try to figure out how the hell that lump of meat knows what's relevant and what's irrelevant when it's trying to put together what we perceive as memories before we get to perceive them, and you can then be as woefully ignorant about what's really going on as the people in the article as well as myself.
  • Not for me! (Score:4, Funny)

    by frrrrrspl (1112559) on Thursday June 07 2007, @12:07AM (#19420197)
    I cannot remember that I have ever forgotten anything.
  • In the late 1980s, I participated for about a year on the DARPA neural network tools panel. If I remember correctly (ha :-) it was Francis Crick who suggested that REM sleep was like simulated annealing; that is, serving the function of adding some randomness to a neural network so that we could forget meaningless things that happened to us during the day.
  • by Bellum Aeternus (891584) on Thursday June 07 2007, @03:35AM (#19421017)
    Finally, a good excuse for forgetting my girlfriend's birthday: I'm remembering something "more important". Wait... that won't work.

    Yes, I post on slashdot. Yes, I have a real, live, breathing girlfriend. :-P
      • Re:State recall (Score:5, Informative)

        by dabraun (626287) on Thursday June 07 2007, @03:16AM (#19420957)

        I am(not officially) a subject for memory studies having to do with alcholol. The wierd thing is that when I am completely sober I cannot remember many things from when I was previously drunk off my ass, but, if that drunk off my ass state is re-introduced, I can remember everthing.

        It's called state dependent learning and it's a widely known concept.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-dependent_learn ing [wikipedia.org]

        I believe you can, in fact, learn to be a better drunk driver.