Cognitive Area

Question 1

What are the principles of the cognitive area?

Answer 1

Suggests that the mind works like a computer processor- inputting, storing and retrieving information.

Investigates the way that internal mental processes (perception, attention, language, memory, etc.) can influence our behaviour.

Question 2

What are the key concepts of the cognitive area?

Answer 2

Attention -Auditory attention, Visual inattention

Memory- Eyewitness testimony, Context dependant memory

Question 3

What are the core studies within the cognitive area?

Answer 3

-Loftus and Palmer
-Grant
-Moray
-Simon & Chabris

Question 4

What are the strengths of the cognitive area?

Answer 4

Often uses highly controlled lab experiments – more scientific (replicable) and valid (extraneous variables are controlled for.

Less ethnocentric as cognitive processes are unlikely to be affected by social factors (e.g. upbringing)

The area has useful applications –for understanding how attention and memory work (e.g. when questioning witnesses)

Question 5

What are the weaknesses of the cognitive area?

Answer 5

It is impossible to measure cognitive processes directly so have to rely on making inferences from observing behaviour or rely on self-report.

Self-reports can lead to demand characteristics.

Highly controlled experiments also may lack ecological validity.

Question 6

How useful is the research of the cognitive area?

Answer 6

Useful for police because the concept of reconstructive memory helps police understand that they should avoid using leading questions so that they don’t influence the witness’ memory of the crime.

Question 7

What is the background of Loftus and Palmer ?

Answer 7

Loftus was interested in the fragility of memory - how easily we can forget information

She was also heavily interested in the validity of eyewitness testimony. She believed stress could influence the memory of the event they had witnessed as well as the way the interview was carried out.

Question 8

What are the aims of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 8

To investigate the effect of language on memory.

Question 9

What is the sample of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 9

Experiment 1- 45 students from Washington State University

Experiment 2- 150 students from Washington State University

Question 10

What is the procedure of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 10

Experiment 1:
Students were shown 7 clips from Evergreen Safety Council of the Seattle Police Department. The staged clips lasted between 5 and 30 seconds. 4/7 clips contained staged crashes of which the speed when they crashed was known. The clips were shown in a different order for each participant.

After each clip they were given a questionnaire of 2 parts

Firstly they were asked to give an account of the accident.

Then they would answer questions on the accident.
The critical question changed from hit, collided, smashed, contacted and bumped.

Experiment 2:
Participants watched a clip lasting 1 min of a multiple car crash (the crash lasted 4 seconds of the clip). They then answered the first questionnaire which included the critical question which was changed for each group

About what speed were the cars going when they hit each other?

About what speed were the cars going when they smashed into each other?

Control condition - not asked about speed

A week later participants returned to answer ten more questions including the critical “did you see any broken glass?”

Question 11

What are the results of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 11

Experiment 1:
Speed estimates varied for each verb (contacted= 31.8 mph and smashed= 40.8mph)

Experiment 2:
16 people reported seeing broken glass for the smashed condition (7 for hit and 6 for control group)

Question 12

What are the conclusions of Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 12

The questions asked subsequent to an event can cause a reconstruction in one’s memory of that event. The verb used in a question can affect the speed a witness estimates a vehicle to have been travelling at and also whether they recall having seen any broken glass.

Question 13

What was the research method in Loftus and Palmer?

Answer 13

The research method was a lab experiment as the IV (verb used in the critical question) was manipulated by the researcher and the study took place in a controlled setting

Question 14

How does Loftus and Palmer relate to the cognitive area?

Answer 14

Loftus and Palmer’s study falls within the cognitive area because it is investigating the cognitive process of memory. Specifically, it aimed to investigate the reconstructive nature of memory, showing that information introduced after an event in the form of leading questions would have an effect on eye witnesses’ memory of the event.

Question 15

How does Loftus and Palmer relate to the key theme?

Answer 15

In relation to the key theme of memory , Loftus and Palmer’s study provides empirical evidence into the effects of information received after the event on a person’s memory of an event. It is an experimental demonstration of the effects of leading questions on eyewitness testimony and shows how memory is reconstructive in nature.

Question 16

How is Loftus and Palmer valid?

Answer 16

As a highly controlled laboratory experiment, this study has high design validity. The procedure – including film clips, tasks and questions asked – was standardised.

However, as the participants knew they were in a study, they may have tried to affect the outcome of the study. For example, they may have thought they were ‘supposed’ to remember broken glass and so reported that they did when in fact they did not, so this may not be a valid demonstration of how leading questions affect memory

As the study was carried out in the controlled conditions of the laboratory, it may be low in ecological validity. In the study, the participants were asked to watch the film clips and were prepared to recall what they had seen. Accidents happen spontaneously in the real world, and our memories of such events will obviously be different without the luxury of prior warning. We also have to question whether watching film clips of staged accidents leads to memories being laid down or recalled in the same way as they might be under the stressful and distressing circumstances of being a witness to a real car crash involving real people..

Question 17

How is Loftus and Palmer reliable?

Answer 17

Loftus and Palmer’s study uses highly controlled laboratory experiments. As such, it meets the important criteria for scientific research that it should be replicable in order for the reliability of its findings to be investigated. This study could be replicated and the findings of the original and subsequent study correlated to see if test– retest reliability could be established.

Question 18

Is Loftus and Palmer ethnocentric?

Answer 18

On the one hand, since cognitive processes, such as reconstructive memory, depend upon the physiognomy of our brain, we could argue that studies such as Loftus and Palmers’ are not ethnocentric, since they are investigating a species-specific behaviour.

On the other hand, it is possible that the findings only reflect how university educated people’s cognitive processes work, since only students were studied. Student samples have ethnocentric biases, for example, most students come from the upper and middle social classes. Other groups may perform differently on these tests.

Question 19

Which side of the nature/nurture debate does Loftus and Palmer support?

Answer 19

It could be more nurture because it suggests that our upbringing or experiences influence our behaviour, in this case the experience of witnessing car crashes influenced their behaviour in terms of their ability in memory.

Question 20

Which side of the free will/determinism debate does Loftus and Palmer support?

Answer 20

It is more deterministic as it suggests that the verb used in a question can affect the speed a witness estimates a vehicle to have been travelling at and also whether they recall having seen any broken glass. This shows that the verb and language used can influence their behaviour.

Question 21

Which side of the reductionism/holism debate does Loftus and Palmer support?

Answer 21

More reductionist as it focuses on the single factor of language and the effect it has on memory.

holistic- says there is more to memory that we believed that it is what we perceive from the original event but also the external information supplied after the event and over time these two sources become Interpreted in such a way that we are unable to tell which source any particular piece of information came from, all we have is one memory - shown in second experiment when two pieces of info combine to form a memory of an accident that appears quite sever and the grow generates certain expectations such as broken glass

Question 22

Which side of the individual/situational debate does Loftus and Palmer support?

Answer 22

Individual
- each person understanding of miles per hour - students less experienced drivers - more easily swayed - more impressionable

Situational -
consistent results creating a pattern that everyone who saw the verb smashed estimated higher than those who saw hit, suggesting word effected memory not that there was a variation in people’s understanding of speed and what it looks like

Question 23

How useful is the research of Loftus and Palmer ?

Answer 23

Loftus and Palmer’s study is one in a series of studies which showed that it is possible to distort the memories of eye witnesses to events. This has considerable repercussions for the police. Such studies have led to a great deal of research being carried out into the best way for police officers to question witnesses, suggesting that this study has real-life applications

Question 24

How have the ethical considerations been kept/broken in Loftus and Palmer ?

Answer 24

Given the findings of the study, we could describe it as ethically worthy, since it contributes to the debate about how witnesses to events should or should not be questioned in order to get a true picture of what happened.

Question 25

How socially sensitive is the research of Loftus and Palmer ?

Answer 25

Studies that have potential to have a negative impact on specific groups of people or society in general, in this case lawyers can use language to influence the memory of the witnesses to benefit their argument.

Question 26

How scientific is the research of Loftus and Palmer ?

Answer 26

Loftus and Palmer carried out controlled laboratory experiments and these fulfil the scientific criteria of theory, control, evidence and replication. As with many cognitive area studies, this supports the claim that psychology is a scientific discipline.

Question 27

What is the background of Grant?

Answer 27

Godden and Baddeley (1975) studied the effects of context-dependent memory using deep sea divers. Some of the divers learned the words underwater and others learned the list of words on land. Then half of each group were tested on land and the other half under water. When the environment matched, the divers recalled more words than when they did not match.

Question 28

What are the aims of Grant??

Answer 28

Grant et al aimed to investigate context-dependent memory effects on both recall and recognition for meaningful information (as opposed to just lists of words)

Question 29

What is the sample of Grant??

Answer 29

8 Psychology students recruited 5 acquaintances as ppts. Data from 39 was recorded.

Question 30

What is the procedure of Grant??

Answer 30

Participants were asked to read once through a two-page academic article on the subject of psychoimmunology while wearing a pair of headphones. Half of the participants did this while listening to background noise taken from the university cafeteria and the other half completed the task in silence.

They then completed 10 recall questions and 16 multiple choice questions on what they had read. They again did this while wearing headphones with half the participants in each study group doing the tests in silence and the other half while listening to background noise.

Question 31

What are the results of Grant??

Answer 31

In the recall task:
Silent test, Silent study: 6.7
Silent test, Noisy study: 5.4
Noisy test, Silent Study: 4.6
Noisy test, Noisy Study: 6.2

In the recognition task:
Silent test, Silent study: 14.3
Silent test, Noisy study: 12.7
Noisy test, Silent Study: 12.7
Noisy test, Noisy Study: 14.3

Question 32

What are the conclusions of Grant??

Answer 32

Supports the idea that context-dependent memory is found for meaningful information (rather than just when learning unrelated lists of words).

Both recall and recognition of information is better when the context matches – participants recalled significantly more information about the article when the study and test conditions matched (silent-silent or noisy-noisy) than when they did not match (silent-noisy or noisy-silent)

Question 33

How does Grant relate to the cognitive area?

Answer 33

The study is investigating the cognitive process of memory and how this works.

Question 34

How does Grant relate to the key theme?

Answer 34

Suggests that memory is affected by the environment in which we learn the information – memory is better when we try to recall information in the same context/environment

Question 35

How is Grant valid?

Answer 35

As a highly controlled laboratory experiment, this study has high design validity. The procedure and apparatus were standardised and participants were tested individually. A number of experimental controls were used to ensure that the study was not confounded by extraneous variables

The task in this study – reading an article for meaning and answering questions on it – was a more ecologically valid task, at least in terms of learning material in the classroom. However, that the task was conducted as part of a study not part of a lesson, and that participants wore headphones and some heard artificial background noise while reading the article, reduces the ecological validity of the task somewhat.

Question 36

How is Grant reliable?

Answer 36

This study is a highly controlled laboratory experiment. As such, it meets the important criteria for scientific research that it should be replicable in order for the reliability of its findings to be investigated. This study could be replicated and the findings of the original and subsequent study correlated to see if test– retest reliability could be established

Question 37

Is Grant ethnocentric?

Answer 37

On the one hand, since cognitive processes such as reconstructive memory depend upon the physiognomy of our brain, we could argue that studies such as Grant et al .’s are not ethnocentric, since they are investigating a species-specific behaviour. On the other hand, this study was conducted in America and it may be that without cross-cultural research to confirm that this is a universal finding, the findings may be different if conducted on people who have not had a Western education.

Question 38

Which side of the nature/nurture debate does Grant support?

Answer 38

It can be more nurture because it looks at how the environment, in this case the place in which you study and take the tasks affects your behaviour (memory).

Question 39

Which side of the free will/determinism debate does Grant support?

Answer 39

More deterministic as it looks at how if you are in the same environment as when you studied then your memory will be a lot better regardless.

Question 40

Which side of the reductionism/holism debate does Grant support?

Answer 40

It is more holistic as it looks at the factors of environment and the type of task completed affects your memory. For example, Noisy test, Silent Study: 4.6 and Noisy test, Noisy Study: 6.2. on the recall task.

Question 41

Which side of the individual/situational debate does Grant support?

Answer 41

This study suggests that the performance of students in exams may be affected by situational factors (e.g. the circumstances under which they revise) as opposed to just individual factors (e.g. a student’s innate ability).

Question 42

How useful is the research of Grant?

Answer 42

On the basis of their findings, Grant et al . suggest that students are likely to perform better in exams if they study for them with a minimum of background noise in order to benefit from the context dependency effect for newly learned material.

Question 43

How have the ethical considerations been kept/broken in Grant?

Answer 43

This study was conducted entirely within the ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained and participants were briefed about the task they were to undertake and were told that involvement was voluntary. After they had taken part in the tasks, they were fully debriefed by the experimenters as to the true purpose of the study.

Question 44

How socially sensitive is the research of Grant?

Answer 44

It can be socially sensitive as it suggests that your memory is affected by the environment you gained that information. This can be socially sensitive for witnesses who may not be able to remember the crime.

Question 45

How scientific is the research of Grant?

Answer 45

Grant et al . carried out controlled laboratory experiments and these fulfil the scientific criteria of theory, control, evidence and replication. As with many cognitive area studies, this supports the claim that psychology is a scientific discipline.

Question 46

How does Grant change our understanding of the key theme?

Answer 46

In terms of the extent to which Grant et al .’s study changes our understanding of the key theme of ‘memory’, it can be seen as adding to our understanding of how memory works by investigating a different aspect of memory – namely, context dependent memory, as opposed to reconstructive memory.

Question 47

How does Grant change our understanding of cultural,social and individual diversity?

Answer 47

As Loftus and Palmer had before them, Grant et al . studied the memory of a sample of students, and conducted their research from universities in America. As a result, Grant et al . do not change our understanding of social or cultural diversity, since they were studying students from a similar background and the same culture as the classic study by Loftus and Palmer

Question 48

What is the background of Moray?

Answer 48

Cherry (1953) was interested in how people put up an inattentional barrier at a party with multiple conversations going on.

The cocktail party effect is when this barrier can be broken only by the sound of your name.

Question 49

What are the aims of Moray?

Answer 49

exp 1: To test Cherry’s findings on the inattentional barrier more thoroughly.

exp 2: This experiment wanted to find out if an affective cue (their name) would break the inattentional barrier.

exp 3: This experiment wanted to find out if pre-warning would help neutral material break the inattentional barrier.

Question 50

What is the sample of Moray?

Answer 50

Experiment 1: ?
Experiment 2: 12 from Oxford University males and females
Experiment 3: 28 - 2 groups of 14 from Oxford University males and females

Question 51

What is the procedure of Moray?

Answer 51

Exp 1:
Participants had to shadow a piece of prose that they could hear in one ear (the attended message).

In the other ear a list of simple words was repeated 35 times (the rejected passage)

At the end of the task, participants completed a recognition task. Participants had to indicate what they recognised from a list of 21 words (7 from the shadowed passage, 7 from the rejected passage and 7 similar words that were in neither passage).

Exp 2:
Participants heard 10 passages of light fiction including both affective and non-affective instructions (repeated measures)

Participants were told to either change ear or to stop. They were told to make as few errors as possible.

The instructions were at the start and/or the end of the passage

Passages were ready at a steady monotone with a pace or 130 words per minute by a single male voice

Exp 3:
Participants were asked to shadow one message
The messages sometimes contained digits towards the end

The digits were sometimes only in the shadowed passage, sometimes only in the rejected passage, sometimes in both and sometimes there were no digits (control)

Question 52

What are the results of Moray?

Answer 52

exp 1:
Participants recognised on average 4.9/7 words from the shadowed passage

Participants recognised on average 1.9/7 words from the rejected passage

Participants recognised on average 2.6/7 words that were in neither passage

exp 2:
Participants heard/followed the instructions preceded by their name 20/39 times

Participants heard/followed the instructions not preceded by their name 20/36 times

exp 3:
There was no significant difference between the groups in how many digits they were able to recall from the rejected passage.

Question 52

What are the conclusions of Moray?

Answer 52

exp 1:
Participants are much more able to recognise words from the shadowed passage. Almost none of the words from the rejected message are able to break the ‘inattentional barrier’.

exp 2:
Affective messages (such as names) are able to break the ‘inattentional barrier’. This backs up the previous work by Cherry.

exp 3:
Warnings do not help neutral information break the inattentional barrier. The information must be meaningful in order to do this.

Question 53

How does Moray relate to the cognitive area?

Answer 53

Moray’s study falls within the cognitive area because it is investigating the cognitive process of attention. Specifically it aimed to investigate selective attention by trying to find out whether (and what types of) ‘unattended’ material could break through the attentional barrier that is set up when a person focuses their listening on a specific task.

Question 54

How does Moray relate to the key theme?

Answer 54

In relation to the key theme of attention, Moray’s study provides robust empirical evidence into auditory selective attention. For example, Moray’s study confirms Cherry’s ‘cocktail party’ effect whereby auditory information important to the individual, such as their name being said, can break through the attentional barrier or block that is put up when focusing our attention. The study also provided evidence that information that is either neutral or not important does not penetrate the block and that we have little or no memory of this information when our attention has been focused on a different auditory task.

Question 55

How is Moray valid?

Answer 55

As a highly controlled laboratory experiment, this study has high design validity. The procedure and apparatus were standardised. However, as the participants knew they were in a study, they may have tried to affect the outcome of the study. For example, they may have thought they were ‘supposed’ not to remember anything from the unattended message and so reported they did not when in fact they did.

As the study was highly controlled with information being fed to each ear through headphones, blocking out all background noise, and participants were ‘shadowing’ the message they were instructed to attend to, this means the study may lack ecological validity as participants would not experience these conditions in everyday life.

Question 56

How is Moray reliable?

Answer 56

Moray’s study uses highly controlled laboratory experiments. As such, it meets the important criteria for scientific research that it should be replicable in order for the reliability of its findings to be investigated. This study could be replicated and the findings of the original and subsequent study correlated to see if test– retest reliability could be established

Question 57

Is Moray ethnocentric?

Answer 57

On one hand, since cognitive processes such as selective attention depend upon the physiognomy of our brain, we could argue that studies such as Moray’s are not ethnocentric since they are investigating a species-specific behaviour. On the other hand, it is possible that the findings of the study only reflect how English-speaking westerners’ attentional processes work and it may be that people whose brains have been shaped by a different language or culture might perform differently on the tests.

Question 58

Which side of the nature/nurture debate does Moray support?

Answer 58

Could be nature because it suggest that our inability to listen to multiple things is something that is innate to us.

Question 59

Which side of the free will/determinism debate does Moray support?

Answer 59

More deterministic because it suggests that information must be meaningful in order to do break the inattentional barrier. Showing that it would not be broken otherwise.

Question 60

Which side of the reductionism/holism debate does Moray support?

Answer 60

Could be more holistic as it looks at the factors like pre-warnings, affective cues, etc and how they interact with the level of attention the participants could provide

Question 61

Which side of the individual/situational debate does Moray support?

Answer 61

Can be situational because the circumstances of affective cues and meaningful information and how they influence attention

Question 62

How useful is the research of Moray ?

Answer 62

Moray’s study contributes to psychology as an academic discipline as it provided rigorous, empirical evidence for Cherry’s cocktail party phenomenon and contributed to our understanding of auditory selective attention.

Question 63

How have the ethical considerations been kept/broken in Moray?

Answer 63

This study was conducted ethically as tasks were clearly explained to participants before the study and the procedure did not put the participants under undue stress or discomfort.

Question 64

How socially sensitive is the research of Moray?

Answer 64

–

Question 65

How scientific is the research of Moray?

Answer 65

Moray carried out controlled laboratory experiments and these fulfil the scientific criteria of theory, control, evidence and replication. As with many cognitive area studies, this supports the claim that psychology is a scientific discipline.

Question 66

How does Moray change our understanding of the key theme?

Answer 66

Moray’s study contributes to psychology as an academic discipline as it provided rigorous, empirical evidence for Cherry’s cocktail party phenomenon and contributed to our understanding of auditory selective attention.

Question 67

What is the background of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 67

Mack and Rock 1998 used computer based dynamic research to measure attention. Participants had to look crosses and judge whether the horizontal or vertical line of the cross was longer.

Neisser et al used video based dynamic research to measure attention. Using Neisser’s video based dynamic research as a model Simons and Chabris wanted to confirm that sustained inattentional blindness would occur in a video recording or a realistic, complex event.

Question 68

What are the aims of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 68

To investigate if the inattentional blindness would be more likely if the unexpected event was similar to the attended event.

To find out if particularly unusual events would be more likely to be seen.

To investigate whether participants would have trouble noticing the unexpected event when the task they were given was more difficult.

To investigate the effect of the ‘transparent’ video and compare if the same level of blindness would occur in a more realistic video.

Question 69

What is the sample of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 69

228 undergraduate students from Harvard University were studied.

Question 70

What is the procedure of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 70

Participants were always tested individually.

Participants were informed that the task would involve watching a clip of basketball players and that they should pay attention to either the white team or the black team and count the number of passes of the ball between the players of the team on which they were to focus.

The task given was varied to give two types of task: ‘easy’ , and ‘hard’

This procedure enabled the manipulation of the following variables:
The type of video: transparent or opaque
The type of event: umbrella woman or gorilla
The difficulty of the focused task: easy or hard.

This gave 16 test conditions in total, and each participant was tested in only one of these conditions after giving their informed consent to take part.

After viewing the tape, ppts were asked to immediately record the number of passes on paper and were then asked a number of surprise questions like Did you see a gorilla [woman carrying an umbrella] walk across the screen? If they said ‘yes’, they were asked to provide details. If they mentioned the unexpected event at any point, the rest of the questions were not asked.

At the end of the procedure, the observer participants were fully debriefed, which included a repeat showing of the video if necessary.

Question 71

What are the results of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 71

46% ppts across all conditions failed to see the unexpected event (much less likely to see it in the hard condition compared to easy condition, especially with the transparent video.

Question 72

What are the conclusions of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 72

Inattentional blindness occurs in dynamic events that are sustained, lasting more than 5 seconds.

Attentional bias cannot be accounted for as simply a response to the transparent video.

The study showed that objects can pass through our central field of vision and still not be seen if they are not specifically attended to.

Question 73

How does Simon & Chabris show sampling bias?

Answer 73

While self-selected samples of this type are convenient for the researcher, especially as the study was to be done on students in a university, and make the study both cost and time-effective, there is always the concern that volunteer bias may limit the generalisability of the findings. In other words, the participants may fail to represent the general population because they are especially interested in research, or may be biased towards responding to demand characteristics to make the study ‘work’ for the researcher.

Question 74

How does Simon & Chabris relate to the cognitive area?

Answer 74

Investigated attention which is a cognitive (mental) process. It explains why we may not recall information that we see, but do not pay attention to.

Question 75

How does Simon & Chabris relate to the key theme?

Answer 75

Showed that our attention to unexpected stimuli can be quite poor, especially when we are carrying out a cognitively demanding task. We don’t always perceive things that pass through our visual field if we are attending to other visual information.

Question 76

How is Simon & Chabris valid?

Answer 76

As a highly controlled laboratory experiment, this study has high design validity. The procedure and apparatus were standardised. However, as the participants knew they were in a study, they may have tried to affect the outcome of the study. For example, if they had seen a video like the one shown in the study before but failed to report this to the experimenter when asked because they hoped to ‘look clever’ in spotting the gorilla, or hoped to give the message ‘you can’t fool me’, this might mean that that inattentional blindness was not accurately measured in the study.

The findings of this study are concurrently valid with both the computer-based studies and Neisser’s earlier umbrella-woman video, and this suggests that it is valid to conclude that participants can entirely miss an unexpected event in a dynamic scene when focusing their attention elsewhere.

In this study, Simons and Chabris were aiming to increase the ecological validity of a method for testing for inattentional blindness, for example the design of the ‘opaque’ version of the basketball video was more realistic, and since both the umbrella-woman and gorilla versions of this gave rise to significant levels of inattentional blindness, Simons and Chabris concluded that these more realistic, and more ecologically valid, tasks suggested that findings from the earlier studies could in fact generalise beyond the laboratory to real-life experience.

On the other hand, it could be argued that responding to a filmed task is not entirely the same as focusing attention in a real setting, so even the more realistic ‘opaque’ video is not wholly ecologically valid.

Question 77

How is Simon & Chabris reliable?

Answer 77

This study is a highly controlled laboratory experiment. As such, it meets the important criteria for scientific research that it should be replicable in order for the reliability of its findings to be investigated. This study could be replicated and the findings of the original and subsequent study correlated to see if test– retest reliability could be established. The fact that the computer-based studies, Neisser’s umbrella-woman study and Simons and Chabris’ investigation all show evidence of information in plain sight being missed by many participants suggests that inattentional blindness is a reliable phenomenon supported by a range of evidence.

Question 78

Is Simon & Chabris ethnocentric?

Answer 78

On the one hand, since cognitive processes such as inattentional bias depend upon the physiognomy of our brain, we could argue that studies such as Simons and Chabris’ are not ethnocentric, since they are investigating a species-specific behaviour. On the other hand, it is possible that the findings only reflect how university educated people’s cognitive processes work, since only students were studied. Student samples have ethnocentric biases, for example, most students come from the upper and middle social classes, and other groups may perform differently on these tests.

Question 79

Which side of the nature/nurture debate does Simon & Chabris support?

Answer 79

It can be more nature as it suggests that inattentional blindness is something innate to us and how it affects our behaviour

Question 80

Which side of the free will/determinism debate does Simon & Chabris support?

Answer 80

We make the assumption that we act according to our own free will on the evidence of our own eyes, yet this study demonstrates that our attentional processes can influence us such that we fail to see an object that was in our centre of vision for 5 seconds. Our cognitive processes clearly have an influence on our behaviour and are an influence over which we have no conscious control, suggesting that this is not freely chosen behaviour.

Question 81

Which side of the reductionism/holism debate does Simon & Chabris support?

Answer 81

More holistic as it looks at the factors of type of video: transparent or opaque, type of event: umbrella woman or gorilla and the difficulty of the focused task: easy or hard and how they interacted with inattentional blindness

Question 82

Which side of the individual/situational debate does Simon & Chabris support?

Answer 82

The overall level of inattentional blindness recorded in Simons and Chabris’ study was 46 per cent. This means that more than half of participants actually saw the unexpected event and did not experience inattentional blindness in this study. This perhaps suggests that there are individual differences in attention. The study showed that the situation could affect inattentional blindness. Colour, in the case of the black gorilla in the black team condition, created similarity between the unexpected event and the attended event and this seemed to have made the gorilla more noticeable. This suggests that context has an impact on attentional processes.

Question 83

How useful is the research of Simon & Chabris ?

Answer 83

It’s useful in understanding inattentional blindness and how it can affect witness testimony and evidence collection by authorities. For example, if there is CCTV footage that has a lot of activity, it is good to understand inattentional blindness to not miss the critical event (the crime).

Question 84

How have the ethical considerations been kept/broken in Simon & Chabris?

Answer 84

This study was conducted entirely within the ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained and participants were briefed about the task they were to undertake. After they had taken part in the study, they were debriefed and, where necessary and sometimes to their amazement, shown the video again to confirm there was indeed a gorilla-suited person or a woman with an umbrella in the scene.

Question 85

How socially sensitive is the research of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 85

Can be socially sensitive as people who have inattentional blindness can be subject to discrimination for not being able to spot things like ‘normal’ people

Question 86

How scientific is the research of Simon & Chabris?

Answer 86

Simons and Chabris carried out controlled laboratory experiments and these fulfil the scientific criteria of theory, control, evidence and replication. As with many cognitive area studies, this supports the claim that psychology is a scientific discipline.

Question 87

How does Simon & Chabris change our understanding of the key theme?

Answer 87

In terms of the extent to which Simons and Chabris’ study changes our understanding of the key theme of ‘attention’, in many ways the main thing it does is extend the broad principle that we can miss events that we are not paying attention to from the realm of hearing (‘inattentional deafness’) to sight (‘inattentional blindness’).

Question 88

How does Simon & Chabris change our understanding of individual, cultural and social diversity?

Answer 88

Simons and Chabris studied visual inattention. In terms of individual diversity, their work showed that some individuals are more likely than others to be affected by the phenomenon of inattentional bias, even when the unattended event happens over time in the centre of their visual field. For example, 46 per cent of the participants overall failed to see the unattended event, whereas 54 per cent noticed it, showing a clear individual difference in susceptibility.

Question 89

How is Loftus and Palmer similar to Grant?

Answer 89

Both highly controlled lab experiments. For example, in Loftus and Palmer, all ppts watched the same video clips of the crashes. Similarly, in Grant, ppts all had to answer the same questions on the recall task and the recognition task

A similarity is the sample. In Loftus and Palmer, the sample was entirely made up of students from Washington State university. Similarly, Grant’s sample was made up of psychology students.

Question 90

How is Loftus and Palmer different to Grant?

Answer 90

One difference is generalisability of results. Loftus and Palmer could not easily generalise their findings to the intended target population because of student bias in the sample. However, this was not such a problem for Grant as their intended target population was students, so an all-student sample was entirely appropriate in their research.

Another difference is what they were investigating. Loftus and Palmer were investigating reconstructive memory in eyewitness testimony. Whereas Grant was investigating context-dependent memory.

Question 91

How is Moray similar to Simon & Chabris?

Answer 91

Both involved using university students as participants (lack population validity)
One similarity is that they lack population validity. For example, in Moray the sample was university students from Oxford university. Similarly, Simon & Chabris had 228 students from Harvard University.

Both collected quantitative data only. For example Moray found that in exp 1, Participants recognised on average 1.9/7 words from the rejected passage. Similarly, Simon & Chabris found that 46% of people across all conditions didn’t see the unexpected event.

Question 92

How is Moray different to Simon & Chabris?

Answer 92

Another difference is what they were investigating. Moray investigated auditory attention, while Simons and Chabris focused on visual attention

Another difference is sample size. Simon and Chabris had a very large sample of 228 participants. Whereas Moray had a smaller sample size of 40 participants in exp 2 and 3.