Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

cog psych > Attention 1&2 > Flashcards

Attention 1&2 Flashcards

1
Q

Attention is

A

Goal oriented

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Attention varies in

A

Effort

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Pop out search tends to be

A

Very easy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Serial search tends to be

A

Much harder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Attention can be

A

Shifted and zoomed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Attention is selective

A

And acts as a filter

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Attention is limited

A

And acts as a resource, such as “amount of attention” or “paying attention)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Attention can be captured

A

You control your attention, but only to a degree

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Attention can be divided

A

For example between modalities, you can divide your attention between two things

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Broadbent wanted to know

A

Can we understand two simultaneous messages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Broadbent’s results

A

Only about 50% of questions were answered correctly, when listening to two simultaneous questions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Cocktail party problem

A

How do we recognize what one person is saying when others are speaking at the same time?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Cherry- condition 1

A

Two messages played in two ears, and repeat one message and ignore the other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Cherry- condition 1 result

A

Task is difficult but possible after many repetitions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Cherry- condition 2; dichotic listening

A

Two messages by the same speaker simultaneously played to different ears and instructed to shadow one speaker

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Conclusions from these attention experiments

A

Hard to attend to two messages that are not separable by physical cues, and with physical cues it is much easier, and we can attend to one message and know very little about the other one

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Broadbent’s filter theory

A

Senses -> short term store -> selective filter -> limited capacity channel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Broadbent’s filter theory

A

Senses -> short term store -> selective filter -> limited capacity channel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Short term memory store

A

Where information from multiple sensory inputs enters

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Simple physical stimulus properties are processed

A

In parallel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Selective filter

A

Identifies info for further processing and uses physical stimulus properties as the basis for selection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

The limited capacity channel

A

Is a serial processor; current term is the focus of attention in working memory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Selective filtering takes place before

A

Full meaning analysis can occur in the limited capacity channel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Own name effect

A

Evidence against early selection; 1/3 participants noticed own name when presented to irrelevant ear which shows it’s possible to recognize words without processing their meaning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

The own name effect suggests that the

A

Presumably unattended info was analyzed which isn’t consistent with early selection theory

26
Q

Message switching

A

Participants report info from irrelevant ear when messages switch from ear to ear, evidence against early selection

27
Q

Conditioning with electrical shocks

A

Words affect skin conductance responses and this shows that this isn’t consistent with early selection theory

28
Q

Alternatives to broadbent’s filter theory

A

Attenuation theory and late selection

29
Q

Attentuation theory

A

That the filter is not completely selective and explains for failures of early selection

30
Q

Late selection

A

Meaning is analyzed before input is filtered automatically and not capacity limited

31
Q

Leakage

A

Filter doesn’t block info from irrelevant channel but it does attenuate it and info from irrelevant channel leaks through the filter

32
Q

Slippage

A

If attention isn’t properly focused, then attention will slip to the irrelevant channel

33
Q

Spillover

A

If the relevant channel needs less attention than that available, attention will spill over to the irrelevant channel

34
Q

Lachter et al study shows that

A

Broadbent might have been incorrect

35
Q

Irrelevant channel

A

Is only irrelevant based on instruction

36
Q

Own name effect and working memory capacity conclusions

A

those with a low working memory capacity are more likely to let attention slip into the irrelevant channel and those with high working memory capacity are better able to control attention

37
Q

Channel switching experiment

A

Listening to two messages at the same time

38
Q

Channel switching experiment shows that

A

Subjects get confused when a semantically coherent message suddenly became incoherent and to resolve this confusion subjects reallocate attention

39
Q

Replicating electric shock conditioning

A

Attempted to replicate findings that skin conductance changes, which was found, but only in subjects who failed to shadow relevant channel and recalled info from irrelevant channel

40
Q

Replicating electric shock conditioning study suggests

A

There might be slippage of attentional resources and some participants do attend the irrelevant channel

41
Q

Lachter et al hypothesis

A

If we can exclude slippage there will be no identification without attention

42
Q

How did Lachter et al. exclude slippage in the repetition priming experiment

A

Used visual stimuli and present relevant and irrelevant stimuli in different locations, and presented the stimuli in irrelevant locations very briefly

43
Q

How did the methods Lachter et al. used exclude slippage

A

Shifts of attention need time and it’s not possible to shift attention to an irrelevant location in 55 ms

44
Q

How does repetition priming work

A

Seeing the prime activates the concept in memory, it then becomes easier to indicate that the target CAT is a word

45
Q

When repetition priming is presented different locations

A

The reactions were slower

46
Q

Lachter et al. Results for same location

A

Where the prime was in the same location then reaction times were faster and slower when in different locations

47
Q

Relation to the prime and target

A

Faster when the prime and target are the same, slower when the prime and target were different

48
Q

Lachter et al possible results for different location possible outcome 1

A

The same prime in different locations doesn’t affect reaction times and reaction times are the same

49
Q

Lachter et al possible results for different locations possible outcome 2

A

Same prime in different location does affect reaction times and there is a speeded response

50
Q

Lachter et al interpretation of possible results possible outcome 1

A

Broadbent is correct and there is no identification without attention. Therefore, the same prime in different location doesn’t affect reaction times

51
Q

Kouider et al study

A

Training with auditory stimuli left hand response if word is an animal right hand response if word is man made object, and during sleep presented with new untrained words

52
Q

Kouider et al study result

A

Participants prepared response in their sleep shown through electroencephalography

53
Q

Kouider et al implications

A

They must have understood the meaning of the words and there is identification without attention in auditory domain

54
Q

Lavie argued that perceptual processing is ___ which is an assumption from late selection theory but that perceptual processing is ___ which is an assumption from early selection theory

A

Automatic; capacity limited

55
Q

Lavie assumption

A

Identification of irrelevant stimuli only if processing of relevant stimuli doesn’t exhaust available sources, and if processing of relevant stimuli consumed all available resources then there is no identification of irrelevant stimuli

56
Q

Lavie & Cox experiment

A

Subjects were asked to identify a target letter while an irrelevant letter was presented, and the trials differed where the target and flanker were either identical or different

57
Q

Lavie and Cox hypothesis

A

Compatibility effect for low perceptual load trials, but not high perceptual load trials

58
Q

Compatibility effect

A

Difference in reaction times between incompatible trials and compatible trials

59
Q

Lavie and Cox result

A

In low perceptual load there was a large compatibility effect and this suggests that the letter in the irrelevant channel was processed

60
Q

Lavie and Cox conclusion

A

With high perceptual load, info in irrelevant channel is not identified, with low perceptual load, info in relevant channel is identified

61
Q

Difference between Lachter and Lavie

A

Lachter believed results explained by slippage to irrelevant channel, which Lavie believed results explained by spillover of attentional resources from relevant to irrelevant channel

cog psych (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions