Cognitive Area- Moray Flashcards
Background
Air traffic controllers couldn’t hear intermixed voices of many pilots over 1 speaker very well
Aim
Rigorously test Cheryl’s findings on attention
Investigate what types of message would penetrate an attentional block and be paid attention to by participants
Equipment
Brenne stereophonic tape recorder modified to provide 2 outputs
Passages to be read out
Headphones for partipcant with each ear hearing diff message
Pre testing
- 4 shadowing passages of prose for practice before study
- 60 db above hearing level
Experiment 1- procedure, sample, results an conclusions
Sample- both genders, Unknown no of participants, undergraduate students and research workers
Procedure- shadowed prose in one ear, focusing on attended message. List of words read in a slow male monotone voice in other ear. After they completed a recognition task with 21 words, 7 from rejected message,7 from attended message and 7 in neither
Results- mean no of words: shadowed- 4.9
Rejected- 1.9
In neither- 2.6
Conclusion- participants able to recognise words from shadowed message more than rejected one. E.g attention diverted to attended message
Experiment 2- aim, sample, procedure and results
Aim- find out what could break barrier, used name as an affective cue
Sample- 12 participants, undergraduate students and research workers of both sexes
Procedure- two passages heard, 1 in one ear and 1 in other ear. All passages contained an instruction at the start, then during the passage either no instruction was given, an instruction with no name or an instruction with a name.
Results- 11% of instructions heard with no name, 51% of instructions heard when name was used
If a warning was given at the start of the passage that they would receive an instruction later on, the instruction was more likely to be heard than when there was no pre warning
Experiment 3- sample, aim, procedure and results
Sample- 2 groups of 14 people, independent measures design
Aim- find out what difference given a pre warning makes in relation to hearing the rejected message
Procedure- in some passages digits were heard in both, sometimes only in rejected and sometimes only in shadowed. Also no digits as a control group. One group were told they would be asked questions about shadowed message, other group told to remember as many digits as possible
Results- no difference in no of digits recalled between groups
Conclusion- numbers not important enough to break block on rejected message
Overall conclusions
1) almost none of rejected message penetrates block when attending to another message
2) short list of numbers isn’t important enough to be remembered or break barrier
3) important messages like name can penetrate barrier
Ethics
All upheld
Ethnocentrism
Findings only reflect English speaking westerners
Culture may be an affecting factor
External reliability
Small sample used
Internal reliability
Controlled lab experiment- standard procedure and extraneous variables controlled
Demand characteristics
Ecological validity
Participants wouldn’t experience these situations in every day life
Population validity
Small highly intelligent sample, may have higher level of cognitive ability and outperform general population
Experiment 3- sample, aim, procedure and results
Sample- 2 groups of 14 people, independent measures design
Aim- find out what difference given a pre warning makes in relation to hearing the rejected message
Procedure- in some passages digits were heard in both, sometimes only in rejected and sometimes only in shadowed. Also no digits as a control group. One group were told they would be asked questions about shadowed message, other group told to remember as many digits as possible
Results- no difference in no of digits recalled between groups
Conclusion- numbers not important enough to break block on rejected message
