riosity, feels weak and reacts with anger or disappointment. The emotion of trust is that which dissipates confusion, unblocks brain functions, retaining them open for learning and the discovery of the child’s skills. Trust is directed towards the individuals of the environment and the notion that participation and presence in learning is meaningful, that emotion should belong in the learning world. The child can respond to demands, offers and expectations, with the help of guidance, provided by role models. Role models help stabilize in the child’s brain his/her own internal self-efficacy and self-motivation during the process of learning. Roth (2003) discovered that credibility is a basic factor in interpersonal relationships and thus in the learning society. The student can understand whether the teacher is mo- tivated, familiar with the material taught and in agreement with what he/she is teaching.
The learning social environment should practically document the value of knowledge and offer the child the opportunity to actively participate in the arrangement of the learning world. Children should not be forced to become passive recipients of the learning material and means, they should be provided with the freedom of discovering and creating and allowed the room to think and resolve a problem. Attention should also be provided to each child’s specific needs and desires, and above all, the child should be rewarded. The brain is always open for learning and is first and foremost willing to respond and become oriented in the world, not just memorize knowledge.
5.1. Theories of Memory
In this chapter we shall consider various concepts and models of memory. We shall examine the factors affecting successful learning and why forgetting is useful. Memory is a sequence of three processes: encoding (acquisition of information), storage (constant mental representation of information) and recall (successful detection of stored information). The Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) model provides an exhibitive description of memory foundations. We shall examine this model. Memory control processes, with regard to information, are rehearsal, chunking and elaboration. These controlling processes determine the sensory register (visual, auditory), where insignificant information is easily forgotten. Information on which we focus, reaches the short-term memory, where it causes a proactive interference (previous knowledge disrupt the storage of new information) and retroactive interference (new information disrupt access to already stored information). Information stored and recalled, reach the long-term memory. We should mention here that the existence of visual memory (sensory memory for visual information) was proven by Sperling (1960) . Visual memory is a connecting link between perception and memory and can acquire several pieces of information within a short amount of time. Short-term memory acquires explicit dispatches, instantly queried. According to Atkinson and Shiffrin, information is carried from the sensory to the short-term memory, when we focus our attention to it. Information is retained only for a few seconds in the short-term memory, but it can be retained longer, via rehearsal (internal repetition). Rehearsal is an ability that allows us to handle the limited capacity of short-term memory. Personal capacity (chunking) of forming chunks (content with significance) largely depends on preexisting knowledge, and thus, the long-term memory.
Now we shall focus on the encode processes, the processes related to transferal to the long-term memory. Information which is retained for an ample amount of time in the short-term memory, manages to automatically enter the long-term memory. Time is not sufficient on its own, but level of processing is also important, determining the memory delivery quality. According to Morris (1997) an important part in this point is also played by the transfer-adequate processing between the encoding and recalls states. In other words, the more similar these processes are, the better the delivery of memory. Other factors positively contributing to the process are the organization of learning material and automatic generation of memory content. Slamecka and Graf (1978) have proven through research that cases of identifying words we generated on our own, have better outcomes in comparison to words we simply read, with regard to memory. This means that the material we generate ourselves, is better established in our memory, in relation to material we have passively acquired. A deeper processing (elaboration) enhances the understanding of the material and provides for its better establishment in the long-term memory, when combined with preexisting knowledge and exercises encouraging active interaction with material, and not mere comprehension.
A particular conceptualization of short-term memory is the working memory. Researchers Baddeley & Hitch (1974) challenged the operation of short-term memory as simple information storage, and concluded that it is a working memory. Short-term memory’s core and actual operation is to retain, modify and update information, new ones or those stored in the long-term memory, allowing the exchange of information between different activities. The working memory model consists of two components, the visual-spatial sketchpad (for visual and spatial information) and the phonological loop (for lingual information). Baddeley expanded the model, adding the episodic buffer, with multiple aspects and related to the long-term memory. This idea allows the learning of a foreign language and the learning of visual-spatial knowledge about the world. When we read, we activate the visual-spatial sketchpad. When we use our thinking to repeat what we have read, we need the phonological loop. The central executive coordinates exchange of information between these two systems. Lingual information transiently remains in memory, thanks to the phonological loop. Auditory information has simultaneous direct access to the phonological memory, while visual information (e.g. reading) may be transferred to phonological code, in order to acquire access to the phonological memory. Without the rehearsal, this information is lost.
Finally, we shall consider forgetting. Certainly, the ability and skill of recalling previous experiences help us avoid making the same mistakes in the present and future. But our ability to forget protects our cognitive system from being overloaded with useless information. Of course, forgetting does not only depend on time. The permanent characteristics of the process of forgetting are the following: decay (the passive eradication of traits of memory with the passing of time. This takes place when between encoding and recall, the activities that would lead to interference do not take place), retroactive interference (forgetting here is a consequences of processes performed simultaneously and affecting the consolidation process, thus having traits of memory not well-stored being disrupted by new information), dysfunctional guidelines for recall (here forgetting means that there is a weak association between the memory content and the recall guideline), inexistent recall guidelines (traits of memory for events we consider to have been forgotten, are suddenly recalled), retrieval induced inhibition (an active inhibition process of information, which is not required at a certain point in time. This is a transient dislocation of information, but its trait is never dissolved or destroyed), motivation forgetting. Forgetting is considered to be an erroneous delivery. Schacter (2003) discerns different omissions, that is, absent memories (Transience = reduced access to memory with the passing of time; Absent-mindedness = carelessness during encoding; Blocking = the information is stored, but at that given time the individual cannot recall it) and commissions, that is, erroneous memories (Misattribution = memory content listed under erroneous sources; Suggestibility = memory content for events that did not take place; Bias = current memory distorting past memories; Persistence = involuntary memory intrusions, which we cannot forget).
5.2. Memory in Neurodidactics
According to the traditional didactics and methods, learning is an instruction, that is, a processing and storage of knowledge provided. For neurodidactics, knowledge, not so much as an object but with regard to its significance, cannot be transferred. It can only be created anew within the brain of each student. Knowledge assimilation is performed unconsciously and is based on prerequisites framing learning (Roth, 2009: p. 58) . Each word and sentence acquires the identity of an event and is compared with the contents of lingual memory, that is, already existing knowledge carrying a semantic meaning are activated. The proper existing knowledge is recalled, related to new knowledge and thus creates new knowledge networks. Learning is an active process of meaning production (Roth, 2009: p. 64) . Memory performance which is strong (for instance, spatial orientation or visual imagination) should be linked to weak memory performance (e.g. number memory). A teacher should be very familiar with the student’s type of learning and memory, in order to apply the correct method in the school context. That is, he/she should present material with amendments, both lingual and visual. In such a learning framework, cognitive meaning is formed in the brain, and in particular in the limbic system, to which also transferred are affects, motivations, emotions and is, in a way, a controller of learning success. Here is the main evaluation system of our brain and if what is happening to us is good, beneficial and pleasant, thus it should be repeated. These evaluations are registered in the emotional experiential memory.
Knowledge memory consists of several modules which may work independently, but are interrelated (Markowitsch, 2002) . These modules are used to store various aspects of a content taught (individuals, facts, objects, places, names, new information, etc.) but these different aspects form a uniform semantic field. The greater the number of memory modules in which a material content is stored, the better the memory performance is, since recalling a certain aspect, enhances recollection of other aspects and finally the entire knowledge content (Roth, 2009: p. 66) . This is why it helps presenting information descriptively and in direct relation to daily living, in order for children to be able to use their imagination. This does not simply make a lesson more fun, but it increases the potential of connecting other new content with already existing one. If there are interwoven memory networks, each new element of content is quickly established and recalled. A lesson which is based on variety rejects memorization, in which memory networks are formed via mere repetition of content. Memorization always works when there is no interest for learning or preexisting knowledge. Thus, memorization promotes implicit learning, instead of semantic, in which the student enters the learning material and associates his/her own knowledge.
Information to which we pay attention and which we process, reaches the long-term memory. Transfer of information from the short-term to the long-term memory, is not a passive process. Information we learn, is abundant of associations to already stored sections in our memory. This takes place in the working memory, in which information is actively retained and controlled. The working memory may be limited in capacity, but a categorization or compaction of isolated information into clusters, can facilitate and lessen memory requirements. Long-term memory is unlimited, with regard to time and amount of memory sections (Markowitsch, 2005). This memory consists of different kinds of content processing, which, through the process of learning in a class, are connected in a single whole: 1) episodic memory, the content of which is autobiographical, that is, it refers to the individual itself and is emotionally evaluated, but according to the experiences stored, it can serve an anticipation for future actions (Tulving, 2002) . 2) The deepest system is the semantic memory, which is also called a knowledge system. The greatest part of our knowledge is stored in the semantic memory, if at the same time the temporal-spatial context of the information acquisition is stored; that is, the framework of learning and the associated emotions. 3) Our perceptive memory allows us to identify objects, faces, sounds or other impulses, according to the emotion of familiarity and trust. 4) Priming memory, which is the improved delivery of unconscious perceptions’ recognition. 5) Procedural memory, which is our unconscious me- mory and contains motoric skills and routine acts. The content of this kind of memory cannot be verbalized, and any effort to verbalize it (that is, the explicit awareness of the course of such an action) can disrupt its smooth execution. The storage process is the formation of associations between learning impulses and the long-term memory contents. For instance, the organization of a complex material makes its storage simpler. Grouping a vocabulary using certain criteria with regard to its content or phonetics can also help. There are similar options for the recalling process, reducing its demands and using external impulses-guidelines, which may be verbal or visual. The limbic system structures (with most important among them, the amygdala and the hippocampus) as well as the cortex structures play a decisive part in the storage and consolidation of episodic and semantic content.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
|||Arnold, M. B. (1960). Emotion and Personality. Psychological Aspects, Vol. 1. New York: Columbia University Press.|
|||Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An Introduction to Motivation. New York: Litton Educational Publishing.|
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human Memory: A Proposed System and Its Control Processes. In K. W. Spence, & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 2, pp. 89-195). New York: Academic Press.
|||Azrin, N. H., & Holz, W. C. (1966). Punishment. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application (pp. 213-270). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.|
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working Memory. In G. A. Bower (Ed.), Recent Advances in Learning and Motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47-89). New York: Academic Press.
|||Bailey, D., Bruer, J., Symons, F., & Lichtman, J. (2001). Critical Thinking about Critical Periods. Baltimore, ML: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co.|
|||Bandura, A. (1976). Lernen am Modell. Ansatze zu einer sozial-kognitiven Lerntheorie. Stuttgart: Klett.|
|||Bauer, J. (2009). Kleine Zellen, grobe Gefühle—wie Spiegelneurone funktionieren. Die neurobiologischen Grundlagen der “Theory of Mind”. In Hermann, U. (Ed.), Neurodidaktik. Grundlagen und Vorschlage für gehirngerechtes Lehren und Lernen (2nd ed., pp. 49-57). Weinheim & Basel: Beltz Verlag.|
Brown, R., & Kulik, J. (1977). Flashbulb Memories. Cognition, 5, 73-99.
Cannon, W. B. (1927). The James-Lange Theory of Emotions: A Critical Examination and an Alternative Theory. The American Journal of Psychology, 39, 106-124.
|||Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). Evolutionary Psychology and the Emotions. In M. Lewis, & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (2nd ed., pp. 91-115). New York: Guilford.|
|||Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Irrtum—Fühlen, Denken und das menschliche Gehirn. München: List.|
|||Ekman, P. (1972). Universals and Cultural Differences in Facial Expressions of Emotion. In J. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 19, pp. 207-282). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.|
Fazio, R. H. (2001). On the Automatic Activation of Associated Evaluations. An Overview. Cognition & Emotion, 15, 115-141.
|||Fodor, J. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.|
Fridlund, A. J. (1991). The Sociality of Solitary Smiles: Effects of an Implicit Audience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 229-240.
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503.
|||Heider, F. (1975). Psychologie der interpersonalen Beziehungen. Stuttgart: Klett.|
Hermann, U. (2008). Lernen—Vom Gehirn aus betrachtet. Wie schulisches Lernen verbessert werden kann: Neurowissenschaften und Padagogik auf dem gemeinsamen Weg zur Neurodida-ktik.
Heckhausen, H., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Thought Contents and Cognitive Functioning in Motivational versus Volitional States of Mind. Motivation & Emotion, 11, 101-120.
Hoppe, F. (1931). Erfolg und Mierfolg. Psychologie Forschung, 14, 1-62.
|||Horstmann, G., & Dreisbach, G. (2012). Allgemeine Psychologie 2 kompakt: Lernen, Emotion, Motivation, Gedachtnis. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag.|
|||Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of Behavior: An Introduction to Behavior Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.|
|||Hüther, G. (2009). Die Bedeutung sozialer Erfahrungen für die Strukturierung des menschlichen Gehirns. Welche sozialen Beziehungen brauchen Schüler und Lehrer? In U. Hermann (Ed.), Neurodidaktik. Grundlagen und Vorschlage für gehirngerechtes Lehren und Lernen (2th ed., pp. 41-48). Weinheim: Beltz Verlag.|
Isen, A. M. (1999). Positive Affect. In T. Dalgleish, & M. J. Power (Eds.), Handbook of Cognition and Emotion (pp. 521-539). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
James, W. (1884). What Is an Emotion? Mind, 9, 188-295.
Jones, M. C. (1924). A B1 Laboratory Study of Fear: The Case of Peter. Pedagogical Seminary, 31, 308-315.
|||Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, Surprise, Attention, and Conditioning. In B. A. Campbell, & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment Aversive Behavior (pp. 279-296). New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts.|
|||Kuhl, J., & Goschke, T. (1994). A Theory of Action Control: Mental Subsystems, Modes of Control, and Volitional Conflict-Resolution Strategies. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and Personality: Action Versus State Orientation (pp. 93-124). Gottingen: Hogrefe.|
|||Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Affective Ratings of Pictures and Instruction Manual. Technical Report A-8. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.|
|||Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion und Adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.|
|||LeDoux, J. E. (1998). The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.|
Levey, A. B., & Martin, I. (1975). Classical Conditioning of Human Evaluative Responses. Behavioral Research & Therapy, 13, 221-226.
|||Lewin, K. (1964). Die Psychologische Situation bei Lohn und Strafe. Darmstadt: Wissenscha- ftliche Buchgesellschaft.|
|||Markowitsch, H. J. (2002). Dem Gedachtnis auf der Spur. Vom Erinnern und Vergessen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.|
Miller, G. A. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, plus or minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1997). Levels of Processing versus Transfer Appropriate Processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533.
|||Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.|
Ortony, A., Clore, G., & Collins, A. (1988). The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Premack, D. (1963). Rate Differential Reinforcement in Monkey Manipulation. Journal for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 81-89.
|||Prinz, W. (2005). An Ideomotor Approach to Imitation. In S. Hurley, & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on Imitation: From Neuroscience to Social Science (pp. 141-156). Cambridge: Bradford.|
|||Recorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A Theory of Pavlovian Conditioning: Variations in the Effectiveness of Reinforcement and Nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black, & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts.|
|||Roth, G. (2003). Fühlen, Denken Handeln. Frankfurt Am: Suhrkamp.|
|||Roth, G. (2009). Warum sind Lehren und Lernen so schwierig? In U. Hermann (Ed.), Neurodidaktik. Grundlagen und Vorschlage für gehirngerechtes Lehren und Lernen (2th ed., pp. 58-68). Weinheim: Beltz Verlag.|
Russell, J. A. (1991). In Defense of a Prototype Approach to Emotion Concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 37-47.
|||Sachser, N. (2009). Neugier, Spiel und Lernen: Verhaltensbiologische Anmerkungen zur Kindheit. In U. Hermann (Ed.), Neurodidaktik. Grundlagen und Vorschlage für gehirngerechtes Lehren und Lernen (2th ed., pp. 19-30). Weinheim: Beltz Verlag.|
|||Schacter, D. L., Chiao, J. Y., & Mitchell, J. P. (2003). The Seven Sins of Memory: Implications for the Self. In J. LeDoux, J. Debiece, & H. Moos (Eds.), The Self: From Soul to Brain (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Vol. 1001) (pp. 226-239). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.|
Seligman, M. E. P. (1970). On the Generality of the Laws of Learning. Psychological Review, 77, 406-418.
Skinner, B. F. (1963). Operant Behavior. American Psychologist, 18, 503-515.
Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The Generation Effect: Delineation of a Phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592-604.
Spence, K. W. (1958). A Theory of Emotionally Based Drive (D) and Its Relation to Performance in Simple Learning Situations. American Psychologist, 13, 131-141.
Sperling, G. (1960). The Information Available in Brief Visual Presentations. Psychological Monographs, 74, 1-29.
Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic Memory: From Mind to Brain. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 53, 1- 25.
|||Weiner, B. (1980). Human Motivation. New York: Holt.|
|||Wundt, W. (1922). Vorlesungen über die Menschen und Tierseele (7th ed.). Leipzig: Voss.|
Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.