Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Investigating Psychology > Chapter 4 > Flashcards

Chapter 4 Flashcards

1
Q

What is interesting about, for example, white-handed gibbons? How is it simple compared to humans thoug?

A

They have sophisticated calls for social relations and to warn of predators. Humans have a huge vocabulary and a grammar.

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

According to Aitchison, how many fathers of language are there?

A

Eleven.

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

What are some of Aitchison’s features of language?

A

Vocal-auditory channel, arbitrary (different languages have different symbols), semanticity (able to generalize to all members of a group), spontaneous usage, turn-taking, duality(sounds only have meaning in combination), cultural transmission (only learn if brought up with language), displacement (refer to things not in the here and now). Unique to humans: structure-dependence, creativity, ability to mind-read.

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

What is structure dependence?

A

We don’t just put words in any order but there is an underlying structure.

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

What can we say about the creativity of sentences?

A

Many sentences in human language are completely novel…colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

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

To what extent can non-human animals mind-read?

A

Chimpanzees show some ability e.g. To help get an out-of-reach object.

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

While chimpanzees demonstrate individual intentionality, what are they not good at?

A

Shared intentionality or joint goals. Unlike human infants, chimps take no pleasure in non-instrumental, social activities (we-intentionality).

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

For Tomasello, what is the basis of human communication?

A

Intention-sharing, co-operative motives, shared understandings, we-intentionality.

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

What are concepts?

A

Mental categories.

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

What can we say about the relation of properties to concepts?

A

Certain properties define a concept.

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

What is the classical view of concepts and properties?

A

That if something has all the properties of a concept then it must be an equally good exemplar.

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

Which theory challenged the classical view of concepts?

A

Prototype theory.

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

To test prototype theory, what did Eleanor Rosch ask participants to do?

A

Asked participants to rate how good of an example different fruits were e.g. Olive versus an apple. Some members of a category were judged to be better examples than others.

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

What was a problem with the design of the original Rosch experiment? How did she overcome this?

A

How ‘good’ an example…‘good’ can mean different things. She overcame this by doing the experiment again and asking how good and how typical and found there was no correlation between the two. Therefore original results not because they interpreted good as enjoyable.

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

How was frequency a problem in the original Rosch experiment?

A

E.g. Apple is more typical than olive because it is more common. This potentially confounding variable was ruled out by Mervis.

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

How are confounding variables ruled out in psycholinguistic experiments these days?

A

Match word length and frequency.

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

Observing typicality effects in experiments without confounding variables suggests what?

A

That typicality effects are real.

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

How do children learn learn words for category members?

A

In order of typicality, suggesting that typicality is a genuine and real psychological phenomenon.

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

What did Rosch and Mervis show about by certain members of a category are more typical and other members?

A

Share more properties with other members of the category and fewer properties with other members.

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

What is a prototype?

A

The best example of a category. All the properties of its category and none of another category.

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

Why is using artificial stimuli (strings) to test typicality effects useful?

A

Provides more evidence and rules out confounding variables such as word frequency.

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

What is another factor which has a correlation with typicality effects?

A

The extent to which an object fulfills its main function.

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

Kurbat et al used shapes rather than words to test typicality effects. What did they find? What does this show?

A

How typical shapes are determines typicality. This shows that it is not just words but concepts too.

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

What have studies into individual differences in typicality effects shown?

A

E.g Brits versus Americans have different ideas about what a prototypical boot is.

People often change their minds about whether or not a borderline case (e.g. Olive) belongs to a category.

A lot of variation in properties PPS listed.

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

Prototype theory suggests fixed what?

A

Concepts and properties.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What did Barsalou show with his knowledge approach?

A

PPS made typicality ratings in the same way for ad how categories as for common categories. Not just retrieval but complex reasoning using knowledge of the world.

27
Q

In one study into the knowledge approach, PPS had to read sentences in a computer, then see a picture and then say if it matched. What were the results?

A

Reaction times (RTs) were quicker when matched suggesting that PPS had visually simulated the nail (e.g.) and the nail is not just a fixed concept but also has novel properties (e.g. Oriented vertically)

28
Q

Reaction time studies have shown what when a member of a category is highly typical?

A

Faster

29
Q

What is conceptual combination and to what extent do they support the knowledge approach?

A

Concepts can be combined to make complex concepts (e.g. Arctic bicycle) and support knowledge view.

30
Q

Using conceptual combination, what did Hampton show with feature cancellation? What does this suggest? Why are these results a problem for prototype theory?

A

PPS did not attribute properties to a phrase even if could be attributed to individual words. Suggests that people draw on general knowledge/understanding. Problem for prototype theory which suggests that conceptual combination should combine all the properties.

31
Q

What did Johnson and Keil show when they asked PPS to list properties of two word phrases made from conceptual combination? How did this support the knowledge approach?

A

A third had emergent properties. Explanations used causal reasoning of knowledge of the world and not just retrieving properties as in prototype theory.

32
Q

What was Rips’ study on typicality effects? What were the results?

A

All members of a species of bird infected with a highly contagious disease and PPS asked to estimate the percentage of a second species of bird was likely to contract the disease. Higher percentage if second species judged as highly typical.

33
Q

How did Proffitt et al build on Rips’ study?

A

Tree experts were asked to use knowledge to explain why a certain tree is more likely to pass on a disease versus novices who revert to typicality effects because no knowledge.

34
Q

Can knowledge categories, like prototypes, be categorized quickly?

A

Yes.

35
Q

What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity?

A

Language constrains (but doesn’t determine) how we think about the world.

36
Q

What question regarding linguistic relativity have researchers looked at?

A

Is color category perception innate/hard-wired or do linguistic categories influence perception?

37
Q

The Himba language doesn’t distinguish between which two colors? What question did researchers investigate?

A

Blue and green. Researchers investigated whether Himba people were actually worse at distinguishing blue and green than distinguishing between two colors where they do have a distinction.

38
Q

How did they test the Himba people and English speakers?

A

2 alternative forced choice test (2AFC). Need to say if the same category or a different category (e.g. blues and greens)

39
Q

What were the the results on the 2AFC for the Himba people study? What doe this show?

A

Initially all children made similar errors but later cross-category discrimination was better for English speakers. Shows that language has influenced cognition.

40
Q

What does the Russian language distinguish between linguistically?

A

Light and dark blue.

41
Q

What did PPS have to do in the Winawer Russian study? What were the results? What does this suggest?

A

Which of the two lower squares matches the upper square. Russians were better at making cross-category distinctions than English speakers. Suggests that linguistic categories can affect perceptual color discrimination.

42
Q

What is the Whorfian question as interpreted by Winawer?

A

To what extent do linguistic processes/representations affect non-linguistic tasks? ‘Linguistic meddling’

43
Q

Who dismisses the findings of e.g Winawer as unimportant?

A

Pinker.

44
Q

Which other language shows a category advantage for blue?

A

Greek

45
Q

What did Thierry et al investigate with Greek? What were the results?

A

What stage does linguistic influence occur. The results were that electrical discharges from neurons took place (as seen through ERPs) - showing language-specific distinctions - before conscious categorization.

46
Q

What did the Thierry et al study ultimately show?

A

That differences in language can affect performance on non-linguistic tasks.

47
Q

What question did Boroditsky et al investigate?

A

Does the way people talk about time (in terms of space) effect the way they think about time?

48
Q

How do Mandarin speakers talk about time?

A

Use horizontal terms but also vertical (English only horizontal).

49
Q

What was the task in the Boroditsky et al study?

A

PPS needed to judge if the second photo happened before or after the first photo and had to hit one of two buttons. Some were horizontal and some were vertical.

50
Q

What were the results of the Boroditsky study?

A

Mandarin had canonicality effect for both horizontal and vertical whereas English had a canonicality effect for just horizontal (faster RTs for canonical than non-canonical).

51
Q

What are some tentative conclusions of the Boroditsky study? What are some problems with these conclusions?

A

Language influences how people think about time but maybe the differences are already there in the way we/they think about time and language just reflects them.

52
Q

What are some conclusions as to whether language influences thought or thought influences language?

A

Not conclusive and in early stages but meddling suggests language affects cognition.

53
Q

What do some researchers believe about language, perceptual experience and cognition?

A

Language comes from perceptual experience and it is this direct perceptual experience which influences thought. Cognition is therefore embodied and thoughts are based on bodily experiences of the world.

54
Q

What is Fodor’s disembodied view?

A

Cognitive representations are symbolic/abstract and distinct from sensorimotor experience.

We store representations in memory and don’t need sensory info for recall.

55
Q

What are the three different kinds of system in Fodor’s modularity of the mind?

A

Transducers (sensory information), input systems (auditory, visual etc.), amodal central system (stored knowledge).

56
Q

What is the embodied view?

A

Cognition and sensorimotor processing happen together.

57
Q

What is Barsalou’s perceptual symbol systems account?

A

Cognition is inherently perceptual because the same representational system is responsible for both perception and cognition. There is no transduction going from modal to amodal.

58
Q

According to Barsalou, are concepts fixed?

A

Not fixed but need general knowledge which comes from perceptual experience.

59
Q

Saying that thought and language are grounded in perceptual experience/sensorimotor simulation is the same as saying what?

A

There are context-specific effects on language and thought.

60
Q

What was Glenberg and Kaschak’s study on the action sentence compatibility effect?

A

E.g movement away in a (sensible) sentence but need to move response key towards them (because sensible) but reaction times were longer because conflict.

61
Q

From the Glenberg and Kaschak study, thinking whether a sentence makes sense needs what?

A

Activation of sensorimotor processes.

62
Q

What was Borghi et al’s research in a perspective effect?

A

PPS were told to read sentences describing selves inside or outside and there were longer RTs to say if a following probe word (either inside or outside the object/location) described part of the object/location if conflicted with the position of the PP.

63
Q

What did Bergen and Wheeler show with hand shapes in their embodied account of language processing? What does this suggest?

A

If the hand shapes to be made are compatible with the one implied in the sentence, it is quicker. Suggests that language understanding is grounded on perceptual experience and language is sensitive to contextual effects.

64
Q

What was a study which conflicted with the hand shape study? What are the implications of these results?

A

The action sentence compatibility effects were reversed when looking at one versus two-handed actions for Koreans/Japanese. They were quicker when didn’t match.

The implications are not great for the theory but a possible explanation could relate to the verb coming at the end of the sentence in Korean and Japanese.

Investigating Psychology (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions