Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Jm/Fragmente/Sichtung v

< Jm

31.371Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0 Teilen

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.


10 ungesichtete Fragmente: "verdächtig" oder "Keine Wertung"

[1.] Jm/Fragment 274 01 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:19 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 6. January 2014, 02:00 Hindemith
Fragment, Hupbach et al 2007, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 274, Zeilen: 1-9
Quelle: Hupbach et al 2007
Seite(n): 49, Zeilen: r.col: 22ff
Nader and colleagues (2005) propose a reconsolidation process involving three steps: (1) Reactivation of the existing memory returning it to a labile state, (2) modification of the existing memory, and (3) reconsolidation of the modified memory over a period of time. Both Experiments 2a and 2b clearly demonstrated the first two steps (the reminder reactivated the original memory trace, and the presentation of the new triplet-forming stimulus modified the existing memory). These experiments also served to answer the question concerning whether the original memory was altered immediately or whether, as assumed by Nader (2003), memory modification involves a time-dependent reconsolidation process. Nader et al. (2005) propose a reconsolidation process involving three steps: (1) Reactivation of the existing memory returning it to a labile state, (2) modification of the existing memory, and (3) reconsolidation of the modified memory over a period of time. While Experiment 1 clearly demonstrates the first two steps (the reminder reactivated the memory for the original list, and the presentation of the new list modified the existing memory), an open question is whether memory was altered immediately or whether, as assumed by Nader (2003), memory modification involves a time-dependent reconsolidation process.
Anmerkungen

The source is not referenced.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[2.] Jm/Fragment 208 01 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:19 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 6. January 2014, 08:51 Hindemith
Fragment, Hupbach et al 2007, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 208, Zeilen: 1-13
Quelle: Hupbach et al 2007
Seite(n): 47, Zeilen: abstract
[Hupbach and colleagues] (2007) demonstrated the reconsolidation phenomenon in episodic memory in humans. University students learned a list of objects on Day 1. On Day 2, they either received a reminder or not, and then learned a second list. Memory for List 1 was tested immediately on Day 2 (Experiment 2) or on Day 3 (Experiment 1). Although the reminder did not moderate the number of items recalled from List 1 on either day, participants who received a reminder incorrectly intermixed items from the second list when recalling List 1 on Day 3. Experiment 2 showed that this effect did not occur immediately and was therefore not timedependent. The reminder did not affect memory for List 2 on Day 3 (Experiment 3). As such, modification occurred only for the original memory (i.e., List 1). This study demonstrates the integral role of reminders in the modification of episodic memory, that reconsolidation of episodic memory is time-dependent, and, contrary to previous reconsolidation findings, that reconsolidation is also a constructive process which supports the integration of new information into a memory trace. Recent demonstrations of “reconsolidation” suggest that memories can be modified when they are reactivated. Reconsolidation has been observed in human procedural memory and in implicit memory in infants. This study asks whether episodic memory undergoes reconsolidation. College students learned a list of objects on Day 1. On Day 2, they received a reminder or not, and then learned a second list. Memory for List 1 was tested immediately on Day 2 (Experiment 2) or on Day 3 (Experiment 1). Although the reminder did not moderate the number of items recalled from List 1 on either day, subjects who received a reminder incorrectly intermixed items from the second list when recalling List 1 on Day 3. Experiment 2 showed that this effect does not occur immediately and thus is time-dependent. The reminder did not affect memory for List 2 on Day 3 (Experiment 3), demonstrating that modification occurred only for the original memory (List 1). The study demonstrates the crucial role of reminders for the modification of episodic memory, that reconsolidation of episodic memory is time-dependent, and, in contrast to previous reconsolidation findings, that reconsolidation is also a constructive process, one that supports the incorporation of new information in memory.
Anmerkungen

The source is referenced, but it is not made clear that the formulations of the source have been taken as well.

Note also that the sentence following "This study demonstrates" could be understood as describing the research undertaken by the author of the thesis, and not as describing the research of Hupbach et al. (which in the reminder of the paragraph is referred to in past tense).

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[3.] Jm/Fragment 069 01 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:15 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 6. January 2014, 18:36 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Scanlon et al 2006, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 69, Zeilen: 1
Quelle: Scanlon et al 2006
Seite(n): 7, Zeilen: -
Jm69diss.png Jm69a source.png

Jm69b source.png

Anmerkungen

The captions in the thesis and the source are identical.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[4.] Jm/Fragment 073 21 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:16 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 6. January 2014, 19:29 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Scanlon et al 2006, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 73, Zeilen: 21-24
Quelle: Scanlon et al 2006
Seite(n): 6, Zeilen: 2nd col: 2ff
The Brain Electrical Source Analysis (BESA) technique employed throughout the current thesis attempts to maximize spatial resolution through the use of multiple source algorithms, creating source montages which have been shown to allow the location of ERP potentials to be displayed at a much higher spatial resolution (Scherg, Bast & Berg, 1999) To combat this problem, source analysis software packages have been developed (e.g. BESA; MEGIS software) that attempt to maximize spatial resolution through the use of multiple source algorithms, creating source montages (see Figure 5). This has been found to allow the location of ERP potentials to be displayed at a much higher spatial resolution (Scherg, Bast & Berg, 1999).
Anmerkungen

A reference to the source is not given.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[5.] Jm/Fragment 240 01 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:19 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 7. January 2014, 23:27 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, Nyberg et al 1996, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 240, Zeilen: 1-4
Quelle: Nyberg et al 1996
Seite(n): 138, Zeilen: 15ff
According to this model, the left prefrontal cortex (PFC) is differentially more involved in retrieval of information from semantic memory, and in simultaneously encoding novel aspects of the retrieved information into episodic memory (i.e., updating), than is the right prefrontal cortex. The right prefrontal cortex, on the other hand, is differentially more involved in episodic memory retrieval than is the left prefrontal cortex. The model can be summarized as follows. The left prefrontal cortex is differentially more involved in retrieval of information from semantic memory, and in simultaneously encoding novel aspects of the retrieved information into episodic memory, than is the right prefrontal cortex. The right prefrontal cortex, on the other hand, is differentially more involved in episodic memory retrieval than is the left prefrontal cortex.
Anmerkungen

The source is not given here, but at the beginning of the paragraph.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[6.] Jm/Fragment 276 16 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:19 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 7. January 2014, 23:35 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, Nyberg et al 1996, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 276, Zeilen: 16-21
Quelle: Nyberg et al 1996
Seite(n): 138, Zeilen: 16ff
Interestingly, regarding frontally-mediated activation, according to the HERA model (Nyberg et al., 1996; see Introduction to Experiment 2), the left prefrontal cortex is differentially more involved in retrieval of information from semantic memory, and in simultaneously encoding novel aspects of the retrieved information into episodic memory, than is the right prefrontal cortex. The right prefrontal cortex, on the other hand, is differentially more involved in episodic memory retrieval than is the left prefrontal cortex. The model can be summarized as follows. The left prefrontal cortex is differentially more involved in retrieval of information from semantic memory, and in simultaneously encoding novel aspects of the retrieved information into episodic memory, than is the right prefrontal cortex. The right prefrontal cortex, on the other hand, is differentially more involved in episodic memory retrieval than is the left prefrontal cortex.
Anmerkungen

The source is given, but it is npot made clear that the explanation of the HERA model is taken verbatim from the source.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[7.] Jm/Fragment 353 16 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:23 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 9. January 2014, 16:14 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, Nadel et al 2002, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 353, Zeilen: 16-21
Quelle: Nadel et al 2002
Seite(n): S8, S9, Zeilen: S8: r. col: 41ff; S9: l.col: 8ff
More specifically, while not interfering with memory for the individual items, which are represented in cortex, stress impaired the ability of the hippocampus to code the context, and to bind the items and context into a contextually-specific episode. Without the hippocampus acting as a contextual anchor, ‘true’ details are more easily confused with ‘false’ details of a similar appearance and nature (Nadel et al., 2002). While not interfering with memory for the individual words, which are represented in cortex, stress impairs the ability of the hippocampus to code the spatial context, and to bind the words and specific details associated with the words into a contextually-specific episode.

[page 9]

Without the hippocampus acting as a spatial-contextual anchor, veridical details (such as the words themselves) are more easily confused with ‘false’ details (such as critical lures) of a similar appearance and nature.

Anmerkungen

The Source is given at the end of the copied text, as well as further up (not documented). However, it does not become clear that the text has been copied almost verbatim.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[8.] Jm/Fragment 041 08 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:11 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 9. January 2014, 16:52 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, Nadel et al 2002, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 41, Zeilen: 8-22
Quelle: Nadel et al 2002
Seite(n): S4, Zeilen: r.col: 1ff
Nadel and Payne (2002) predicted that if binding of the disparate elements that make up a given episode involves spatial context, then stress might disrupt it. However, if spatial context is not involved, stress should be without effect. The researchers induced false memories in participants using the Deese (1959), Roediger-McDermott (1995), or “DRM”1 paradigm. In brief, participants studied numerous lists of semantically associated words (e.g. candy, sour, sugar, bitter, chocolate, cake, etc.). Each list was followed by a recognition task that consisted of three types of words: words that were actually presented (e.g. sugar), unrelated distractor words that were not presented (e.g. hat), and words that are highly related to the theme or ‘gist’ of the list, but that were not presented (e.g. sweet), termed “critical lures”. Participants generally falsely remember many of these critical lures in DRM Experiments. In fact, the typical pattern of results reveals high rates of false recognition that under some conditions can equal or even surpass true recognition rates for correctly identified words (see Roediger et al., 1998). The researchers were concerned with the fate of false memories in this paradigm if participants were subjected to stress prior to performing the task.

1 This is not to be confused with the ‘Day Reconstruction Method’ of autobiographical recall.

We predicted that if binding involves spatial context, then stress might disrupt it. However, if spatial context is not involved, stress should be without effect.

[...]

[...] We induced false memories in our subjects using the Deese (1959), Roediger-McDermott (1995), or “DRM” paradigm. In brief, subjects study numerous lists of semantically associated words (e.g. candy, sour, sugar, bitter, chocolate, cake, etc.). Each list is followed by a recognition task that consists of three types of words: words that were actually presented (e.g. sugar), unrelated distractor words that were not presented (e.g. hat), and words that are highly related to the theme or ‘gist’ of the list, but that were not presented (e.g. sweet), called “critical lures”. Perhaps not surprisingly, subjects routinely falsely remember many of these critical lures in DRM experiments. In fact, the typical pattern of results reveals high rates of false recognition that under some conditions can equal or even surpass hit rates for correctly identified words (see Roediger et al. 1998).

We wondered about the fate of false memories in this paradigm if participants were subjected to stress before performing the task.

Anmerkungen

The source is given, and it is clear that the experiments and results of Nadel et al. are reported here. What is not clear to the reader is that this reporting is done with the words of Nadel et al..

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[9.] Jm/Fragment 007 14 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 11. January 2014, 07:04 (Kybot)
Erstellt: 10. January 2014, 00:35 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, The Brain 2007, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 7, Zeilen: 14-16
Quelle: The Brain 2007
Seite(n): 1 (Internetquelle), Zeilen: 5. paragraph
The hippocampus proper is composed of regions with tightly packed pyramidal neurons, mainly areas CA1, CA2, and CA3. This region is referred to as the ‘trisynaptic circuit’ or ‘trisynaptic loop’ of the hippocampus (Anderson, Bliss & Skrede, 1971). The hippocampus proper is composed of regions with tightly packed pyramidal neurons, mainly areas CA1, CA2, and CA3. [...] This is what is called the trisynaptic circuit or trisynaptic loop of the hippocampus.
Anmerkungen

The source is not given.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

[10.] Jm/Fragment 199 05 - Diskussion
Bearbeitet: 25. March 2014, 15:31 (Hindemith)
Erstellt: 25. March 2014, 15:31 Hindemith
Fragment, Jm, KeineWertung, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel, Wikipedia Anterior cingulate cortex 2007, ZuSichten

Typus
KeineWertung
Bearbeiter
Hindemith
Gesichtet
No.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 199, Zeilen: 5-8
Quelle: Wikipedia Anterior cingulate cortex 2007
Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: -
Further, the anterior cingulate cortex is connected with the prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex as well as the motor system and the frontal eye fields, thereby rendering it a an integral region for processing top-down and bottom-up stimuli and assigning appropriate control to other areas in the brain. The ACC is connected with the prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex as well as the motor system and the frontal eye fields (Posner & DiGirolamo, 1998) making it a central station for processing top-down and bottom-up stimuli and assigning appropriate control to other areas in the brain.
Anmerkungen

The source is not given.

Sichter
(Hindemith)

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki