Cognitive Area Flashcards
1
Q
What is the background to Loftus and palmer
A
- Research suggests we reconstruct our memories using a schema to fill in any gaps.
- a schema is stored units of knowledge that influence how we remember events
- Loftus and palmer wanted to find out if language would effect reconstruction of memory.
2
Q
What is the method used in Loftus and palmer
A
- lab experiment
- independent measures design
- IV = wording of the critical question
- DV = estimate of speed
3
Q
What was the sample in Loftus and palmer first experiment
A
- 45 American students
- divided into 5 groups of 9
- placed in 1 of 5 conditions
4
Q
What was the materials in Loftus and palmer
A
- All shown the same 7 film clips of traffic accidents created for a driver safety film
5
Q
What was the procedure in Loftus and palmers first experiment
A
- after they watched each clip, they were given a questionnaire
- all questions were the same apart from the critical question that was different for each condition
- the critical question was ‘how fast were the cars going when they HIT/SMASHED INTO/CONTACTED WITH/COLLIDED WITH/BUMPED INTO each other going’
Different words imply different speeds, so there schemas may be different
6
Q
What was the finding in Loftus and palmers first experiment
A
- shows mean estimates of speed
Smashed = 40.5
Collided = 39.3
Bumped = 38.1
Hit = 34
Contacted = 31.8
7
Q
What was the conclusion from Loftus and palmers first experiment
A
- wording of the question does lead to a distortion in memory
8
Q
What was the sample in Loftus and palmers second experiment
A
- 150 participants
- divided into 3 groups of 50
9
Q
What was the procedure in Loftus and palmers second experiment
A
- each watched a 1 minute film with a 4 second car crash
- completed a questionnaire
- in one condition there was no question about speed
- the other 2 were given hit or smashed
- one week later participants asked to complete another questionnaire about accident, containing a critical question. ‘Did you see and broken glass’
10
Q
What was the findings in Loftus and palmers second experiment
A
- they found 16 of the smashed group said they has seen broken glass
- 7 said yes in the hit group
- 6 in the control group
11
Q
What was the conclusion in Loftus and palmer overall
A
- the wording of the question brings about a lasting distortion in memory
- a complex occurrence occurs when we make memories, info from the actual event (when watching film clip) and post event ( wording of question about speed), which distort memory
12
Q
What is the background in grants study
A
- context we are in when encoding memories affects what we later recall
- if we learn and recall in the same environment, we recall more
- context dependant memory
13
Q
What was the method in grants study
A
- laboratory experiment
- independent measures design
- IV = whether p’s read the 2 page article in silent or noisy conditions, and whether they were tested in the same environment
- DV = p’s performance on a short answer recall test and multiple choice
14
Q
What was the sample in grants study
A
- 39 participants
- aged 17-56
- 17 females, 23 males
- 8 students acted as experimenters and recruited 5 participants they knew
- opportunity sample
15
Q
What was the materials in grants study
A
- each supplied there own music player and headphones
- background noise was recorded in a university cafeteria
- 2 page article on psychoimmunology
-16 multiple choice, 10 short answers
16
Q
What was the procedure in grants study
A
- asked to read the article, told they would be tested later
- all p’s wore headphones, one group no noise, one group noise
- recorded how long it took them to read article
- then given the tests
- all p’s wore headphones during testing, with or without background noise
- same or mismatched environment
17
Q
What was the findings in grants study
A
- recall was better for participants who learned and recalled in same environment
- shows mean score on each test
- silent/silent and noisy/noisy = 14.3
Both mismatched = 12.7
18
Q
What was the conclusions in grants study
A
- learning and recalling in the same environment could enhance performance on a test
- context dependency occur
- students should revise in quiet conditions, because they will be asked to recall in quiet exams
19
Q
What was the background to morays study
A
- argued we can’t attend to everything going on around us
- aimed to test the work of cherry which suggested we can only attend to one message at a time and we switch our attention if something because more important to us
- cocktail party effect
20
Q
What was the method in morays first experiment
A
- laboratory experiment
- repeated measures design
- IV = whether the message is in the attended or unattended ear
- DV = number of words recognised correctly in the rejected message
21
Q
What was the sample in morays first experiment
A
- undergraduates and research workers of both sexes
- number of participants isn’t known
22
Q
What was the procedure in morays first experiment
A
- participants completed a dichotic listening task, hearing 2 messages, one message in each ear
- participants had to shadow a message that they heard in one ear
- 7 words was faded into the other ear until both volumes were the same
- this was presented 35 times
- they were asked to recall as many as the words as they could then they were given a recognition task which contained 21 words ( 7 from the shadowed message, 7 from the word list and 7 controls)
23
Q
What was the findings in morays first experiment
A
- p’s recognised 4.9 from the shadowed message
- 1.9 from rejected message
- 2.6 from neither
- shows that’s p’s didn’t recognise as many words from the unattended message
Participants mistakenly recognised more words from neither message then the rejected message showing the rejected message was not attended to
24
Q
What was the conclusions to morays first experiment
A
- we can only attend to one message at a time
- almost all of the rejected message is blocked
- blocking occurs even when the message is repeated 35 times
25
What was the aim of morays second experiment
- to find out whether anything could break through the block
Could and affective cue penetrate the block ?
26
What was the method in morays second experiment
- laboratory experiment
- repeated measures design
- IV = whether the instructions were prefixed by participants own name or not
- DV = the number of instructions recognised
27
What was the sample in morays second experiment
- undergraduates and research workers
- 12 participants
28
What was the procedure in morays second experiment
- shadowed 10 passages of light fiction in one ear, and 10 short passages in the other ear
- told there shadowing would be recorded and to make as few mistakes as possible
Instructions were given at the start telling them to listen to there right ear
- also instructions in the other ear
- some of these instructions started with the participants name (affective) and some didn’t (unaffective)
29
What was the results of morays second experiment
- participants recalled hearing 20/39 affective instructions
- recalled 4/36 unaffective instructions
More affective instructions were heard
30
What was the conclusions in morays second experiment
- messages that are important to us will penetrate the block
- all messages are processes at an unconscious level, but only important messages are passed onto conscious processing
31
What was the aim in morays third experiment
- aim was to see if more neutral material, like numbers, could penetrate the attentional block. If participants were pre warned about what they were listening for
32
What was the method in morays third experiment
- laboratory experiment
- independent measures design
- IV = whether p’s were told they would be asked questions about the shadowed message or told they would be asked to recall as many digits as possible, and whether digits were inserted into both messages or one
- DV = number of digits recalled
33
What was the sample in morays third experiment
- undergraduates and research workers
- 14 participants
34
What was the procedure of morays third experiment
- participants shadowed one of 2 messages in a dichotic listening task
- digits were inserted towards the end of messages
- some had digits in both messages, others only in one
- some participants were told that they would be asked questions about the content of the shadowed message and some were told to remember as many digits as possible
35
What was the results of morays third experiment
- there was no significant differences found between number of digits recalled for p’s who had been prewarned to recall digits and those who were told they would be asked questions about the content
36
What was the conclusion to morays third experiment
- neutral material doesn’t break through the attentional block even if they had been pre warned
- suggests that only information that is important to us will penetrate the block
37
What was the background of Simon and chabris study
- we can’t attend to everything that goes on around us
- attentional blindness is when we fail to notice an unexpected object even if it appears in a point we are fixated on
- wanted to investigate whether the difficulty of a task affected attentional blindness
38
What was the method of Simon and chabris experiment
- laboratory experiment
- independent measures
- IV = whether p’s saw transparent or opaque, and whether they saw a women with an umbrella or a gorilla
- DV = the number of p’s who noticed the unexpected event
39
What was the sample in Simon and chabris experiment
- 228 undergraduate students
- Data was used from 192
40
What was the materials in Simon and chabris study
- 4 videotapes, 75 seconds long
- after 44-48 seconds the unexpected event occurred
- transparent or opaque video
41
What was the procedure for Simon and chabris study
- all tested alone by one of 21 experimenters
- Followed standardised procedures
- told to pay attention to either the white team or black team
- told to count the total number of passes made by a team or keep a separate count of the number of Aerial passes and the number of bounce passes
- 16 conditions, 12 people in each
- after they were asked to write the counts on paper and if they noticed anything unusual
- if they already knew about the phenomenon there data was discarded
42
What were the findings for Simon and chabris study
- across all conditions 54% noticed the unexpected event
- more noticed in the opaque 67% compared to transparent 42%
- more noticed in the easy task 64% compared to hard task 45%
- umbrella women was noticed more 65% than gorilla 44%
43
What was the conclusions from Simon and chabris study
- people fail to notice unexpected events if they are engaged in a primary motoring task
- level of inattentional blindness depends on difficulty of primary motoring task
- more likely to notice unexpected events is theses events are similar to the events we are paying attention to
- objects can pass through attentional focus and still not be ‘seen’
44
What is the cognitive explanation
- behaviour is a consequence of our thoughts and our thoughts effect how we feel and how we behave
- we are like a computer in how we process information through input, throughput, output
45
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the cognitive area
+ has scientific status as most research is carried out in the lab conditions so there is control over extraneous variables allowing a cause and effect to be established
+ practical applications, If we know how thought processes effect behaviour we can generate cognitive behavioural therapy’s
- some argue we are very different to computers because we are more emotional and use instinct
- research can lack ecological validity
