Cognitive - Moray

Question 1

experiment 1 aim

Answer 1

to test Cherry’s findings in more detail

Question 2

experiment 1 apparatus

Answer 2

modified tape recorder
headphones
male speaker

Question 3

experiment 1 sample

Answer 3

undergraduate students
Oxford uni
male and female
no sample size

Question 4

experiment 1 procedure

Answer 4

.participants had shadowed a message (the attended message)
.the other ear had a list of words playing (the rejected message)
.after the messages, participant completed a recognition task of 21 words
.these were split into 3 categories (7 from attended, rejected and neither)

Question 5

experiment 1 results

Answer 5

mean recognised words (shadowed): 4.9
mean recognised words (rejected): 1.9
mean recognised words (neither): 2.6

Question 6

experiment 1 conclusions

Answer 6

.Participants much more able to listen to words from the shadowed passage
.rejected passage cant break ‘barrier’ much

Question 7

experiment 2 aim

Answer 7

to see if someones name will be strong enough to grab someones attention

Question 8

experiment 2 sample

Answer 8

12 students

Oxford uni

Question 9

experiment 2 procedure

Answer 9

.Two passages of light fiction were heard - one in each ear
.Some passages contained an instruction at the beginning and then another later
.Both passages were read in a steady tone at around 130 words per minute by a single male voice
.The participant had to shadow one of the passages
.They were told the aim was to make as few errors as possible

Question 10

experiment 2 IV

Answer 10

.was preceded by participants name (effective)

.was not preceded by participants name (non effective)

Question 11

experiment 2 DV

Answer 11

Are participants more likely to hear instructions they aren’t paying attention to if it’s preceeded by their name

operationalised by if they reported hearing the instruction or if they followed the instruction

Question 12

experiment 2 results

Answer 12

instruction presented in rejected x affective instruction = 39
times instruction in rejected message heard x affective instruction = 20
20/39
instruction presented in rejected x non affective instruction = 36
times instruction in rejected message heard x non affective instruction = 4
4/36

Question 13

experiment 2 conclusions

Answer 13

.participants name did get heard (broke through rejected)

.Person will hear instructions when presented with their own name

Question 14

experiment 3 sample

Answer 14

2 groups of 14 students

Oxford Uni

Question 15

experiment 3 design

Answer 15

independent measures

Question 16

experiment 3 procedure

Answer 16

.2 groups of 14 were asked to shadow 1 of 2 simulataneous dichotic messgaes
.In some, digits were added towards the end
.Sometimes in both, sometimes shadowed, sometimes rejected
.Control passage had none
.One group told they’d answer Q on shadowed
.One group told remember as many digits as possible

Question 17

experiment 3 results

Answer 17

no difference in mean number of digits recalled between the 2 conditions

Question 18

experiment 3 conclusion

Answer 18

numbers (unlike own name in ex 2) are not important enough to break trough the ‘block’ of the rejected message

Question 19

Overall conclusions (4)

Answer 19

.Almost impossible to for rejected message to break through when listening to someone in each ear

.A short list of simple words (in rejected) shows no trace of being remembered even when repeated

.Subjectively important messages (e.g name) can penetrate ‘block’ even as rejected message

.Very difficult to make neutral material important enough to break through ‘block’ set up in dichotic shadowing

Question 20

Ethics kept

Answer 20

Withdrawal
Protection from harm
Confidentiality
Consent

Question 21

Ethics Broken

Answer 21

Informed consent
Deception
Debriefing

Question 22

Ethics Broken

Answer 22

Informed consent
Deception
Debriefing

Question 23

internally reliable

Answer 23

yes- highly controlled lab experiment

Question 24

externally reliable

Answer 24

no- small samples (ex1= ?, ex2= 12, ex3= 28)

Question 25

Population validity

Answer 25

yes- cognitive study - most likely represents species as a whole
no- culture could have an effect, study is ethnocentric
yes- both genders used

Question 26

ecological validity

Answer 26

no- all other noise blocked out
no- shadowed passage not true to life
yes- often in situations when having a conversation with someone and someone else wants your attention