COGNITIVE

Question 1

What was the aim of experiment one for Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 1

To see if information supplied after an event, influences a witness’ memory of that event

Question 2

What was the sample for L+P experiment one?

Answer 2

45 students of the university of Washington, opportunity sampling
Each shown 7 film-clips of traffic accidents (5-30 seconds)

Question 3

What are examples of verbs used in the critical questions in L+P?

Answer 3

Smashed
Collided
Hit

Question 4

How was memory distortion shown in L+P?

Answer 4

The memory of how fast the cars were travelling could have been distorted by the verbal label

Question 5

What were the mean estimated speeds for smashed, collided and hit?

Answer 5

40. 8 mph
41. 3 mph
42. 0 mph

Question 6

How was response bias shown in L+P?

Answer 6

Participant may not be sure of the exact speed of the car, therefore adjusted their estimation to fit in with the expectations of the questionnaire (demand characteristics)

Question 7

What was the sample for L+P experiment two?

Answer 7

150 participants viewed a short one minute film, which contained a 4 second scene of multiple car accidents, and questioned on them

Question 8

What were the three independent variables for experiment two of L+P?

Answer 8

50- How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
50- How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
50- not asked anything at all

Question 9

Where was the L+P experiment conducted?

Answer 9

Lab

-lacks ecological validity

Question 10

What were the responses to the ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ in L+P second experiment?

Answer 10

Smashed:
Yes- 16 No- 34
Hit:
Yes- 7 No- 43

Question 11

What was the aim of Grant et al?

Answer 11

Aimed to show that environmental context can have a more positive effect on performance in a meaningful memory test when the test takes place in the same environment (matching condition) to when the test occurs in a different environment (mismatch condition)

Question 12

What was the method used by Grant et al and the independent variables?

Answer 12

Lab experiment with independent measures design
IV:
i) whether the participants read the two stages in silent or noisy condition
ii) whether he participants were tested under the mismatch or matched condition

Question 13

What was the sample for Grant et al?

Answer 13

8 psychology students were asked to select 5 acquaintances (opportunity)
Producing 39 participants
Mixture of male and females, aged between 17-56 years old

Question 14

What was Grant et al’s procedure?

Answer 14

Ps randomly assigned to conditions, all given cassette player and head phones
Noisy= played background noise of the university cafeteria at lunchtime with some distinct words/phrases being played
Quiet= wore the headphones but nothing was played

Each P was instructed to read a two page article on the study of psychoimmunology and study it, they were then given 2 minutes to make sure their answers weren’t short term memory processing
Following this ten short answer questions

Question 15

How were extraneous variables reduced in Grant’s study?

Answer 15

Every person in the noisy condition listened to the sound at the same volume

Question 16

Outline a conclusion from Grants study involving data from the results

Answer 16

P- memory decreased in the mismatched condition
E-short answer
>silent, silent= mean average of 6.7
>silent, noisy= 5.4
C- memory is affected by condition, environment is an example of a cue

Question 17

What is the aim of Moray?

Answer 17

The aim of the study was to test Cherry’s dichotic listening findings in relation to:

a) The amount of information recognised from the rejected message
b) Whether hearing one’s own name in the unattended message would cause them to pay attention to the rejected message
c) What the effect would be to identify a specific target in the rejected message

Question 18

What was the method for Moray?

Answer 18

• 3 lab experiments using dichotic listening tasks

- the messages were recorded onto tape in the same male voice at a similar speed

Question 19

What are the two controls in Moray’s study?

Answer 19

1. Rejected message was played at a similar volume

2. Two messages were always played through headphones directing the separate messages to each ear individually

Question 20

What was the method, sample, procedure (variables) and results for experiment one in Moray’s study?

Answer 20

• lab experiment, repeated measures
• no sample size, all from oxford, M&F
• one ear short list of 35 words repeated, other ear had shadowing story
• IV- story and list of words
• DV- asked to recall words from story
• Average= 4.9 story, 1.9 list of words, 2.6 made up words

Question 21

What was the method, sample, procedure and results from Moray’s study?

Answer 21

-Lab experiment, repeated measures
-12 Ps- students or research workers
-2 passages of light fiction, one in each ear at the same time
Non-effective instructions at the start to listen to right ear (shadow)
Instructions in middle with either affective, non-affective or no instruction
Have to follow second instruction
-Effective- 20/39 messages were heard
Non-effective- 4/36
No instruction- no results

Question 22

What was the method, sample, procedure and results from experiment 3?

Answer 22

-Lab experiment, independent measures design
-Two groups of 14 Ps
Undergraduate students, from Oxford
Male and female
-Group 1- told they’d be asked about shadowed message, at the end of each recording
Group 2- specifically asked to remember as many digits (numbers) from recording as possible
-No difference in mean scores of recalled numbers for both set conditions
Researchers believe this is because numbers no meaning to the participant- so switched their attention to the ‘rejected’ ear

Question 23

What are conclusions from Moray’s study?

Answer 23

1. When Ps direct their attention to the message in one ear, rejecting the message in the other, almost all the verbal content of the rejected ear is blocked.
   - This rejection is apparent when the message is repeated many times- there was hardly any trace of the list of words presented in the rejected message being recognised
2. Important messages such as one’s own name, can penetrate the attention barrier
3. It is very difficult to make neutral material important enough to penetrate the attention barrier

Question 24

What was the aim for Simon’s study?

Answer 24

Aim to confirm that inattention blindness does occur in more realistic, complex situations and that blindness is sustained

Question 25

What else did Simon want to test besides from the aim?

Answer 25

1. whether similarity of the unexpected event with the focussed event affected likelihood of noticing the unexpected event
2. whether level of difficulty of the focussed event (easy v hard) affected rate of inattention blindness
3. wherever a more realistic video recording would give similar or different findings to those of Neisser’s (transparent v opaque)

Question 26

What was the method for Simon’s study?

Answer 26

• lab experiment
• 4 tapes created with controlled elements= same video clip duration (75 seconds), same actors in same location
• two teams, 3 players each team, on win black t-shirts and other in white
• between 44-48 secs either woman and umbrella or gorilla crossed the screen

Question 27

What were the types of films for Simon’s study?

Answer 27

1. transparent (more realistic) video, woman umbrella
2. transparent, gorilla
3. Opaque, umbrella
4. opaque, gorilla

Question 28

What was Simon’s sample?

Answer 28

228 Ps funnelled dawn to 192 Ps
All undergraduates
Self selected

Question 29

What was the procedure for Simon’s?

Answer 29

• independent
• easy task= keep mental note of passes between chosen team (white or black)
• hard task= mental note of number of aerial and bounce passes between team
• after video Ps were immediately asked to recall number of passes and asked f they had seen anything unusual - if responded with yes they carried on questioning

Question 30

What were the independent variables from Simon’s?

Answer 30

a) type of video: transparent or opaque
b) type of unexpected event: umbrella or gorilla
c) task: easy or hard

Question 31

What are results from Simon’s study?

Answer 31

Overall level of inattentional blindness was 46%
Type of video had no effect, more in transparent (42% saw unexpected event) than opaque (65%)
-showing inattention blindness likely in realistic environments
As difficult of task increased so did inattention blindness (64& in easy, 45% in hard)

Question 32

What are conclusions from Simon’s?

Answer 32

• concluded inattention blindness occurs in more dynamic events that are sustained (lasting more than 5 secs)
• even in opaque, Ps missed unexpected event, suggesting happens in realistic environments (ecologically valid)