Cognitive Approaches to Human Behaviour Flashcards
Describe one model of memory.
Outline one study related to one model of memory.
Models of Memory:
- Multistore memory model- Attkinson and Shiffrin
- Working Memory Model- Baddely and Hitch
Studies to use:
- Glanzer and Cunitz
- Landry and Bartling
Explain the Multi-store Memory Model
Attkinson and Shiffrin:
Sensory Store:
- 1-5 seconds (visual-auditory stimuli)
- unlimited capacity
ATTENTION
Short Term Memory Store:
- 30 seconds
- 7+- 2 chunks of information
REHERSAL/RETRIEVAL
Long Term Memory Store:
- no duration limit,
- no capacity limit
Explain the Working Memory Model
Baddley and Hitch:
Central Executive- responsible for the allocation of resources between the different processing stores
Phonological Loop: “the inner ear” Phonological store (‘inner ear’), which holds auditory speech information and the order in which it was heard (or any visually-presented language converted by the articulatory process)
Visuospatial Sketchpad: “the inner eye”:
An articulatory rehearsal process (‘inner voice’) of language, including any language, presented visually to convert to a phonological state, for storage in the:
Episodic Buffer: links the phonological loop to the visuospacial sketchpad.
Explain the study conducted by Glanzer and Cunitz.
Outline the multi-store model of memory.
AIM: Glanzer and Cunitz tested the hypothesis that short term memory and long term memory are two separate stores in a free recall experiment. Investigate the position effect with and without the interference of a filler task.
PARTCIPANTS:
- 46 army enlisted men
PROCEDURE:
- series of 15 word lists x 15, 5 for each condition
- word list was read out to the participants
- Condition 1) a free recall experiment
- Condition 2) a filler activity: 10 seconds (conting down from a random number)
- Condition 3) a filler activity: 30 seconds (conting down from a random number)
RESULTS:
- without the filler task, both the primacy and recency effect could be seen.
- with a filler task, the recency effect decreased, shifting the serial effect curve.
CONCLUSION:
- STM and LTM are seperate memory stores
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- high internal validity
Weaknessess:
- low construct validity
- low population validity (nonetheless, higher participant number due to the repeated measures design)
- low ecological validity
Explain the study conducted by Landry and Bartling.
Describe the working memory model.
Explain how one study supports the working memory model.
(CHANGE TO BADDLEY, articulatory suppression)
AIM: Investigate the effects of “multi-tasking” when both tasks utilize the same working memory system - in this case, the phonological loop
PARTCIPANTS:
- 34 undergraduate psychology students
PROCEDURE:
- Participants were randomly divided into two groups - the “multi-tasking” group and the “single task” group
- All participants were shown 10 letter strings.
- each letter string consisted of 7 randomly arranged letters (F, K, L, M, R, X and Q)
- These letters were chosen because they don’t sound similar.
- Participants had to memorize each string of letters, then write their answer down on an answer sheet
- The participants in the “multi-tasking” group were also told to repeatedly say the numbers “1” and “2” at a rate of two numbers per second, while they were trying to memorize the string of random letters
- Before the experiment started, each participant viewed one practice list in order to become acquainted with the procedure.
CONTROL GROUP:
- participants have seen the printed list for five seconds,
- five seconds pause,
- nstructed to write the correct order of the letters on the answer sheet as accurately as possible.
- This was repeated ten times.
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP:
- participants received instructions to repeatedly say the numbers ‘1’ and ‘2’ at a rate of two numbers per second.
- task started from the time of presentation of the list until the time they filled the answer sheet.
- This was repeated ten times.
COMPARING RESULTS:
- Each trial was scored for the accuracy of recall.
- The trial was scored as correct if the letters were in the correct position.
- The experimenter then calculated the average per cent correct recall for both groups.
RESULTS:
The participants in the “multi-tasking” group performed significantly worse, recalling the letters with 45% accuracy compared with 76% in the “single task” group
CONCLUSION:
- Repeating the numbers “1” and “2” made it more difficult to mentally rehearse the string of letters, resulting in diminished memory.
- This study suggests that multi-tasking leads to impaired working memory, especially when both tasks utilize the same working memory system (in this case, the phonological loop).
LINK TO THE WORKING MEMORY MODEL:
- articulatory suppression is preventing rehearsal in the phonological loop because of overload.
–> difficulty in memorizing the letter strings for participants in the experimental conditions.
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- high internal validity (highly controlled+standardized procedures)
- high construct validity: (clear causal relationship between the independent variable (single vs. multi-tasking) and the dependent variable (recall of letters))
- Supports the predictions of the working memory model, in particular the idea that each memory system has limited capacity
Weaknessess:
- low ecological validity (experiment involved memorizing random strings of letters, a task not normally important for everyday life) (nonetheless, this study may help understand the risks of multi-tasking in the real world)
- low population validity
Explain schema theory.
Describe how one study relates to schema theory.
Scheemas: mental representations that help organize knowledge, beliefs and expectations into categories, making them easier to access.
Studies to use:
- Brandsford and Johnson (encoding)
- Anderson and Pichert (retrieval)
Explain the study conducted by Brandsford and Johnson.
Explain one study related to cognitive schema.
AIM: Investigate the role of scheemas (effect of context) on encoding (comprehention and memory of text passages).
PARTCIPANTS:
- 50 highschool participants
- independent measures design, experiment
PROCEDURE:
Participants heard a tape-recorded passage and were required to recall it as accurately as they could, writing down as many ideas as possible.
5 CONDITIONS:
1) No context (1): participants heard the passage once
2) No context (2): participants heard the passage twice
3) Context before: prior to hearing the passage participants were given a context picture
4) Context after: the context picture was given after participants already heard the passage
5) Partial Context: participants were given a context picture prior to hearing the passage, but the picture only contained the elements mentioned in the passage without showing how they operate together.
RESULTS:
The passage contained 14 idea concepts in total. The average recall in the five groups was:
No Context (1): 3.6
No Context (2): 3.8
Context Before: 8.0
Context After: 3.6
Partial Context: 4.0
CONCLUSION:
- This can be explained by schema theory: the full context picture creates a mental representation which then influences the way information is encoded in memory.
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- Independent measures (reduce demand characteristics)
- High ecological validity (occurs many times that individuals must memorize something, and pictures accompany it (i.e. in advertisements)
Weaknessess:
- Participant Variability
(Tight control of experiment; lack of mundane realism)
- Low construct validity: a cause and effect relationship cannot be determined.
- Low population validity: only 50 participants
- Low internal validity: experimental, not repeated
Explain the study conducted by Anderson and Pichert.
Explain one study related to cognitive schema.
AIM: to investigate the influence of scheemas on the recall of information (retrieval).
PARTCIPANTS:
- psychology students needed to pass the course.
PROCEDURE:
- participants were either assigned a burglar or homebuyer perspective.
- participants read a passage (73 key ideas)
- 12 minute filler task
- recall story in the given perspective
- 5 minute filler task
- asked to reproduce the study again, either with the same perspective or different.
RESULTS:
- if perspective was unchanged: -2.9% information
- if persepctive changed: +7.1% information
CONCLUSION:
- perspective is a type of scheema which allows the bettweing of retrieval.
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
-Variable control (establish a cause and effect relationship)
-No ethical concerns.
-The study could be replicated for reliability.
- high internal validity
Weaknessess:
-Highly controlled laboratory experiment (lack of ecological validity)
-Some things were not controlled for (such as prior personal connection the points had to the participants, which could influence how easily they were able to recall them)
-Story only mentioned the male gender.
Explain one theory or study related to thinking and decision-making.
Describe one theory of thinking and decision making.
Thinking and Decision Making:
1) Normative models
2) Descriptive models
3) Theory of reasoned action:
Attitutes: feeling fo person towards the intention.
Subjective Norms: feelings of others on the behavoiur of an individual.
4) Theory of planned behaviour:
Percieved Behavioural Control: whether one thinks they are capable of doing the given action.
** Studies to use: **
Albarracin et al.
Describe the study conducted by Albarracin et al.
AIM: Investigate to what extent the theroy of reasoned action and the theroy of planned behaviour are good predictors of condom use.
PARTCIPANTS:
- metaanalysis of 42 articles
PROCEDURE:
- all data sets from published research were combined in a single large data matrix, which was then used to analyze the fit of the TPB and TRA.
RESULTS:
TPB turned out to be a successful predictor of condom use.
The correlation between intention and behavior in this model was 0.51.
CONCLUSION:
- there were significant correlations between behavioral intentions + norms, attitudes, and perceived control.
- it was concluded that people are more likely to use condoms when they have formed an intention to do so.
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- high population validity,
Weaknessess:
- low ecological validity,
Outline one study on the reliability of one cognitive process.
Explain one theory or study relevant to reconstructive memory.
Describe how one study demonstrates reconstructive memory.
Unreliability Of Memory: scheemas influence what is encoded and what is retrieved. As memories can be distorted, retrieval is dependent on scheemas.
Theory of Reconstructive Memory:
memory is an active process that involves reconstruction of information rather than being the passive retrieval of information.
Studies to mention:
Loftus and Palmer (1&2)
Explain study 1 done by Loftus and Palmer.
AIM: To investigate the effect of leading questions on memory recall.
PARTCIPANTS:
- 45 participants
- American background
- similar age, university students
PROCEDURE:
- The participants sat in a lecture theatre and watched a clip of a car crash.
- The participants were split into 5 groups
(there were 9 participants in each group.)
- Participants then answered a series of questions about the car crash
(Some were filler questions)
- One question was the critical question. The critical question was
“About how fast were the cars going when they…into each other?”
1) smashed,
2) hit,
3) collided,
4) bumped,
5) contacted.
Participants only experienced one of the verbs in the question.
RESULTS:
Smashed - 40.8 mph
Collided - 39.3mph
Bumped - 38.1 mph
Hit - 34.0 mph
Contacted - 31.8 mph
The speed estimation does not matter in number, what does is the differences in numbers between the 5 groups.
CONCLUSION:
Leading questions do effect memory recall. In this case changing the verb in the question to smashed gave a higher estimation of speed by the participants. (due to demand characteristics)
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- high internal validity (police quite often question, shows implication is bias (demand characteristics))
- high construct validity (nothing was changed but a single word= high cause and effect relationship.) (nonetheless, people have different driving experience ect, specific for age= lower validity)
Weaknessess:
- low population validity
- low ecological validity
Describe Loftus and Palmer’s second study.
AIM: To investigate wether post event information affects memory recall.
PARTCIPANTS:
- 150 American university students.
- Similar age, similar background.
PROCEDURE:
- The participants sat in a lecture theatre and watched a clip of a car crash.
- The participants were split into 3 different groups. (50 participants in each group)
- The participants then answered a series of questions about the car crash.
(There were two experimental groups and one control group.)
The experimental groups were asked “About how fast were the cars going when they (smashed/hit) into each other?”
The control group were asked no questions about speed.
Participants came back a week later and they were all asked the critical question which was “Did you see any broken glass?”
RESULTS:
Smashed: yes- 16
Hit: yes- 7
Control: yes- 6
CONCLUSION:
Post event information does affect memory recall. Loftus and Palmer believed 2 types of information enter our memory.
1) Information at the time
2) Post event information
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- consent was given
- participants could withdraw
- confidentiality (we don’t know who the participants were)
- no deception
- large population validity (high participant number)
Weaknessess:
- informed consent (no informed consent)
- protection from harm (emotionally harmed if past traumatic experiences involving a car crash)
Explain one bias in thinking and decision making.
Explain how one bias in thinking and/or decision making can be shown in one study.
The Three Types of Biases:
1) Confirmation bias: the tendency to seek out information which confirms pre-existing beliefs.
2) Congruence bias: the tendency to seek out positive information rather than useful information.
3) Cognitive dessonance: the tendancy to change thoughts or actions (behaviour and beliefs) due to stress.
Studies to use:
Daniel Kahnman and Amos Tversky,
Wasons 4 Card Problem
Discuss the study conducted by Daniel Kahnman and Amos Tversky.
AIM: To test the influence of the anchoring bias on decision-making (An anchor is the first piece of information offered to someone who is asked to solve a problem or make a decision).
Investigate the influence of the way a decision problem is framed (gains or losses).
PARTCIPANTS:
- 350 high school students
PROCEDURE:
- problem introducing that there has been an “asian disease outbreak, and there are 2 ways it can end”:
- group 1: 200 people will be saved or 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved and 2/3 probability that no people will be saved.
- group 2: 400 people will die or 1/3 probability that no one will die and 2/3 probability that 600 will die.
RESULTS:
group 1: 72% chose first option
group 2: 22% chose first option
(more prone to taking risks with losses than gains.)
CONCLUSION:
Even though the outcomes of the two groups were the same, the answers differed significantly. (supports the FRAMING EFFECT)
EVALUATION:
Srengths:
- high internal validity (very controlled)
- it is easily replicable (findings are reliable)
Weaknessess:
- low ecological validity: (low mundane realism. The situation is completely hypothetical and in reality, it would affect people more significantly)
- low population validity (sample consists of Western university students)
