If a purposeful activity is carried out to memorize a specific material, then we are talking about voluntary activity (for example, a student is preparing for an exam). If memorization is not purposeful, they speak of involuntary memory (so, for example, we can remember that it rained yesterday and snowed the day before yesterday).
Involuntary memorization is not necessarily weaker than voluntary memorization. On the contrary, it often happens that involuntarily memorized material is reproduced better than material that was specially memorized. For example, an involuntarily heard phrase or perceived visual information is often memorized more reliably than if we were trying to memorize it on purpose. The material that is in the center of attention is involuntarily remembered, and especially when a certain mental work is associated with it, when the material is of interest and fills some gap in the picture of the world.
The work of short-term memory is carried out constantly, interesting and useful is deposited in long-term memory, chaotic, boring and useless is ignored and replaced in consciousness by other material. When we try to remember something in an arbitrary sense (what we need, not what we want), we:
We concentrate our attention on what we need,
We use all sorts of mnemonic means (for example, we use associations in our minds, we just repeat many times),
We encourage ourselves.
This is the arbitrary nature of the work of memory. Small amounts of boring information can be memorized quite easily in this way. However, there is no particular guarantee that this information will remain in long-term memory. Interest is very important for successful memorization, and, unfortunately or joyfully, it is difficult for them to manage. Self-hypnosis can act as a substitute for interest: "This is very important, this must be remembered."
The work of voluntary or involuntary memory is closely related, depends on the work of voluntary or involuntary attention. The effectiveness of voluntary memory depends on concentration, stability of voluntary attention. As for involuntary processes, the mechanism is as follows: a potentially interesting object attracts and retains attention, involuntary attention triggers the processes of involuntary short-term and long-term memory.
Depending on the goals of the activity, memory is divided into involuntary and voluntary.
Involuntary memory is memorization and reproduction, in which there is no special purpose to remember or remember something. What affects involuntary memorization? What situations are involuntarily "engraved" in our memory? Domestic psychologist P.I. Zinchenko (1961) conducted a series of experiments aimed at studying voluntary and involuntary memorization. The experimenter, unexpectedly for the subjects, asked them to recall everything that they remembered on the way from home to work and tell them. The study found that subjects most often memorized:
- what they did (and not what they thought about);
- what contributed or hindered the goal;
- something strange and unusual;
- what was associated with the range of knowledge and interests of the subject.
The author compared the productivity of involuntary memorization of the same material depending on what place this material occupies in the structure of activity (motive, goal, way of performing the activity). A convincing result was obtained: the material associated with the goal is remembered better than the material associated with the conditions for achieving the goal. Background stimuli were the worst remembered.
PI Zinchenko also investigated the peculiarities of memorization, depending on how active and meaningful was that mental work, "within which memorization was carried out." The subjects were given the task of mechanically memorizing words or finding a semantic connection between words. It was shown that the more the content of words was comprehended and the more activity was required during this comprehension, the better the words were remembered. So, psychologists concluded that involuntary memorization depends on the main line of activity in the course of which it was carried out, and on the motives and intentions that determine this activity.
Arbitrary memory sets itself the task of specifically remembering something, memorizing what is necessary. In this case, the processes of memorization and reproduction act as special, mnemonic actions. Many experiments have also been devoted to the study of this aspect of the memorization process.
So, in Russian psychology since the 1960s. studied the role of mnemonic means in the organization and functioning of the mnemonic system. AA Smirnov (1966), considering the genesis of the mnemonic function, emphasized the role of external supports of memorization. The terms "externally and internally mediated memory" were introduced by A. N. Leontiev (1972) to describe the process of "rotation" of symbolic means during memorization. Research by V. Ya. Liaudis (1976) showed that in the process of memory development in children, signs are first used to designate and external regulation of the internal plan of representations, and then they internalize and begin to perform a regulatory function in the processes of memorization and recall.
Memorization and reproduction, in which there is no special purpose of remembering or remembering something, is called involuntary memory.
Involuntary memorization - memorization that occurs without the intentional use of special means for better preservation of material in memory. Due to the fact that various memory processes serve the actual activity, the completeness, accuracy and strength of involuntary memorization depend on its goals and motives.
“Involuntary memorization can be considered immediate only in the sense that it is not associated with the use of means specifically aimed at the purpose of memorization. But it is also always mediated, albeit in a different way from voluntary memorization, if we proceed from the fact that any activity in which involuntary memorization is carried out is always associated with the presence of means corresponding to its goals and content ”. Involuntary memory, like involuntary attention, in principle, can also represent the "highest stage" of the development of the corresponding mental function. From this it follows that the involuntary is not a synonym for the lower. Vygotsky writes: “It is hardly possible to bring more compelling evidence in favor of the origin of secondary (voluntary. - GS) attention from primary than the fact from everyday experience that secondary attention inevitably turns into primary.” In other words, secondary voluntary again becomes involuntary, but being a "derivative" of the primary, i.e. mediated by its genesis, it no longer becomes "lower".
This view of involuntary memory primarily characterizes "the first studies of memory in Soviet psychology," which were conducted from the standpoint of a "cultural-historical direction" (Leontiev, 1928, 1931; Zankov, 1927; Vygotsky, Luria, 1930). The allocation of higher and lower forms in memory and, in connection with this, the impoverished characteristic of involuntary memorization characterizes the work of P.P. Blonsky (1935)
Involuntary memorization and activity
involuntary memorization of the subject preschooler
One of the most important researchers in the field of memory psychology is, of course, P.I. Zinchenko. Many of his publications and experiments are widely known. The most familiar and famous is the experiment with pictures and numbers.
“To reveal the regular connections and dependences of involuntary memorization on activity, it is not necessary to isolate certain material from it, but, on the contrary, to include it in any activity other than mnemonic, which is voluntary memorization.
The first task of such a study was to experimentally prove the very fact of the dependence of involuntary memorization on human activity. To do this, it was necessary to organize the activities of the subjects in such a way that the same material was in one case an object to which their activity was directed or which was closely related to this orientation, and in the other - an object not directly included in the activity, but located in the field. perception of the subjects, acting on their senses.
For this purpose, the following research methodology was developed.
The material of the experiments was 15 cards with a picture of an object on each of them. Twelve of these items could be classified into the following four groups: 1) a primus stove, a kettle, a saucepan; 2) drum, ball, teddy bear; 3) apple, pear, raspberry; 4) horse, dog, rooster. The last 3 cards were of different content: boots, a gun, a beetle. The classification of objects according to their specific characteristics made it possible to conduct experiments with this material not only with pupils and adults, but also with preschool children.
In addition to the image on each card, a number was written in black ink in its upper right corner; the numbers indicated the following numbers: 1, 7, 10, 11, 16, 19, 23, 28, 34, 35, 39, 40, 42, 47, 50.
The following 2 experiments were carried out with the described material.
In the first experiment, the subjects acted with the objects depicted on the cards. This action was organized and experienced in different ways with subjects of different ages. With preschoolers, the experiment was carried out in the form of a game: the experimenter conventionally designated a space on the table for the kitchen, children's room, garden and yard. The children were asked to lay out the cards on such bridges, on the table, to which they, in their opinion, were most suitable. They had to put cards not suitable for these places near themselves as "extra". It meant that the children would put a primus, a kettle, a saucepan in the "kitchen"; to the "children's room" - a drum, a ball, a teddy bear, etc.
In this experiment, pupils and adults were given a cognitive task: to arrange the cards into groups according to the content of the objects depicted on them, and put the "extra" ones aside separately.
After unfolding, the cards were removed, and the subjects were asked to recall the objects and numbers depicted on them. Preschoolers reproduced only the names of objects.
Thus, in this experiment, the subjects carried out cognitive activity or play activity of a cognitive nature, and not memorization activity. In both cases, they acted with the objects depicted on the cards: they perceived, comprehended their content, and arranged them into groups. The numbers on the cards in this experiment were not included in the content of the task, so the subjects did not need to show any special activity towards them. However, the numbers throughout the entire experiment were in the field of perception of the subjects, they acted on their sense organs.
In accordance with our assumptions, in this experience, objects should have been memorized, but numbers should not.
In the second experiment, other subjects were given the same 15 cards as in the first experiment. In addition, they were given a cardboard board on which 15 white squares were glued, equal in size to the cards; 12 squares formed a square frame on the shield, and 3 were arranged in a column.
Before the start of the experiment, the cards were laid out on the table in such a way that the numbers pasted on them did not create a certain order in their arrangement. For the time when the instruction of the experiment was presented to the subject, the cards were closed. The subject was given the task of placing cards in a certain order on each white square, laying out a frame and a column of them on the shield. The cards should be placed so that the numbers pasted on them are arranged in ascending order.
The compilation of an increasing numerical series, the given order of laying out a frame and a column with cards forced the subject to look for cards with certain numbers, to comprehend the numbers, to correlate them with each other.
In order to ensure that the subjects were serious about the task, they were told that this experiment would test their ability to work carefully. The subjects were warned that errors in the arrangement of numbers would be recorded and serve as an indicator of the degree of their attentiveness. For the same purpose, the subject was asked to check the correctness of the task: add up in his mind the last 3 numbers arranged in a column and compare their sum with the sum of these three numbers named by the experimenter before the experiment.
For the tested preschoolers, the following changes were made to the methodology of this experiment. Instead of a number, a special badge was pasted on each card. The fifteen badges were composed of a combination of three shapes (cross, circle, stick) and five different colors (red, blue, black, green, and yellow). The same badges were pasted on each square of the frame and column. The cards were placed in front of the subject so that the arrangement of the icons did not create the order in which these icons were located on the squares of the frame and column. The subject had to put on each square of the frame and column the card on which there was the same icon as on the square. The laying out of the frame and the column with cards was carried out in the same order as in the first version of the method, therefore, here too, the subject had to search for a specific card for each square with a corresponding icon. After completing the task, the subject was asked to name the objects depicted on the cards.
Thus, in the second experiment, the subjects carried out cognitive rather than mnemonic activity. However, pictures and numbers played here, as it were, in directly opposite roles. In the first experiment, the subjects of the subjects' activity were pictures, and numbers were the object of only passive perception. In the second experiment, on the contrary: the task of expanding the numbers in increasing magnitude made them an object of activity, and pictures - only an object of passive perception. Therefore, we had the right to expect exactly the opposite results: in the first experiment, pictures should be remembered, and in the second, numbers.
This technique was also adapted for the group experiment.
In both individual and group experiments, we dealt with involuntary memorization. The content of the tasks in the first and second experiments was cognitive, not mnemonic. In order to give the subjects the impression that our experiments had nothing to do with memory and to prevent them from developing a mindset for remembering, we presented the first experiment as an experiment in thinking aimed at testing classification skills, and the second as an experiment in testing attention.
The proof that we were able to achieve this goal was the fact that in both experiments the experimenter's proposal to reproduce pictures and numbers was perceived by the subjects as completely unexpected for them. This also applied to the objects of their activity, and especially to the objects of their passive perception (numbers in the first experiment and images of objects in the second).
How can we explain the resulting differences in memorizing pictures and numbers?
The main difference in the conditions of our experiments was that in the first experiment the objects of activity were pictures, and in the second, numbers. This determined the high productivity of their memorization, although the subject of activity in these experiments and the activity itself were different. The lack of purposeful activity in relation to the same objects, where they acted in the experiments as only background stimuli, led to a sharp decrease in their memorization.
This difference led to a sharp discrepancy in the results of memorization. This means that the reason for the high productivity of memorizing pictures in the first experiment and numbers in the second is the activity of our subjects in relation to them.
So, activity with objects is the main reason for involuntary memorization of them. This position is confirmed not only by the fact of the high productivity of memorizing pictures and numbers where they were the subject of the subjects' activity, but also by their poor memorization where they were only background stimuli. The latter indicates that memorization cannot be reduced to direct imprinting, i.e. to the result of one-sided influence of objects on the sense organs outside of human activity directed at these objects ...
At the same time, we did not get a complete, absolute non-memorization of numbers in the first experiment and pictures in the second, although these objects in these experiments were not the subject of the subjects' activity, but acted as background stimuli.
It seems to us that the position of the irreducibility of memorization to direct imprinting, dependence and conditionality of its activity by a person is important not only for understanding the processes of memory. It also has a more general, fundamentally theoretical significance for understanding the essence of the psyche, consciousness.
The facts obtained in our experiments, and the position that follows from them, do not agree with any kind of epiphenomenalistic concepts of consciousness. Any mental education - sensation, representation, etc. - is not the result of passive, mirror reflection, objects and their properties, but the result of reflection included in the effective, active attitude of the subject to these objects and their properties. The subject reflects reality and assigns any reflection of reality as a subject of action, and not a subject of passive contemplation.
The obtained facts reveal the complete inconsistency of the old associative psychology with its mechanical and idealistic understanding of the process of the formation of associations. In both cases, memorization was interpreted as direct imprinting at the same time. Inactive objects, without taking into account the actual work of the brain, realizing a certain human activity in relation to these objects ...
In the experiments described, we obtained facts characterizing two forms of involuntary memorization. The first one is the product of purposeful activity. This includes the facts of memorizing pictures in the process of their classification (first experiment) and numbers when the subjects compiled a numerical series (second experiment). The second form is the product of a variety of orientational reactions, which were evoked by the same objects as background stimuli. These reactions are not directly related to the subject of purposeful activity. This includes isolated facts of memorizing pictures in the second experiment and numbers in the first, where they acted as background stimuli.
The latter form of involuntary memorization has been the subject of many studies in foreign psychology. This memorization is called "accidental" memorization. In fact, such memorization by its nature is not accidental,
Purposeful activity occupies the main place in the life of not only humans, but also animals. Therefore, involuntary memorization, which is a product of such activity, is its main, most vital form. "
Thus, P.I. Zinchenko comes to the conclusion that “the objective content of activity and the nature of its course determine a certain dynamics of nervous processes in the brain. Thanks to this, more or less favorable conditions are created for the formation and consolidation of temporary connections, associations in accordance with the internal laws of higher nervous activity. "
A necessary condition for such memorization is the interaction of the subject with objects. Interaction can be carried out at different levels, act in various forms: from involuntary, unconscious orientational reactions to objects to conscious, purposeful and voluntarily controlled actions with them.
Involuntary memorization is naturally dependent on various aspects of the objective content of the activity and the nature of its course. The main regularity that characterizes this dependence, according to P. I, Zinchenko, is that the material that makes up the content of the main goal of the activity is best remembered: the material related to the methods and other conditions for achieving the goal is remembered much worse.
Also, the author notes, the positive influence of motives and methods of activity on the productivity of involuntary memorization turned out to be in direct proportion to how much they contribute to the creation of such a structure of activity in which orientation in stimuli and their reinforcement are most fully manifested.
In conditions when involuntary memorization is carried out using more active and meaningful methods of activity than voluntary, it turns out to be more productive than voluntary memorization.
The mnemonic attitude reveals its advantage over the cognitive one only when it is realized with the help of rational memorization techniques. The main unit in the analysis of structure - processes
memory, their functioning and development is the action of the subject. Therefore, the division of memorization processes (as well as other memory processes) into involuntary and voluntary is the main one, leading in the characterization of the functioning of the memory processes of their development. It makes it possible to overcome the false concept of mechanical and logical memory; it removes as opposition of higher forms of memory to lower ones,
so is the reduction of the former to the latter; it provides genetic continuity in the development of their physiological foundations, methods and forms of reflection of reality.
