Cognitive Psychology Lecture 7-10 Flashcards

Question

What is a classic example of sensitization?

Answer 1

Learned food aversion

Answer 2

Pavlov, Dog, UCS, UCR, CS, CR classical conditioning produces a series of molecular changes at the pre and post synaptic gap of the motor neurons AP more likely to be produced because of change in cell membrane permeability

Answer 3

Latent inhibition is the pre-amptive introduction to the conditioned stimulus before classical conditioning commences Pre-amptive introduction does not transfer over contexts slows down learning of conditioned response

Answer 4

specific Latent inhibition and habituation is evidence of context specificity Roediger & Kaepicke (2006): matching context between self test and final test predicted better scores Lewandowsky & Kirsner (2000): Firefighters partioning in fires and backburns ~ 2/3 of people knowledge partition dependent on attention to cus or components of cues.

Answer 5

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

Answer 6

if you have a hypothesis, you look for evidence to back it up. otherwise, you rule it out and repeat the cycle this reasoning is aided by existing knowledge The Blicket detector experiment is an example of adductive reasoning.

Answer 7

Bayes rule is Prior belief X Liklihood of observed event | how much one should update their hypothesis after observing some event

Answer 8

simple hypothesis

Answer 9

Occam's Razor = people prefer explanations that explain more data with minimal assumptions the simplest hypothesis that fits the date is probably correct explanation

Answer 10

showed that people thought they knew more than they did people worse at explanatory knowledge than declarative knowledge people were good at ad hoc explanation people are good at knowing where to look for information rather than actually knowing information

Answer 11

tail shock when gill stroke series of 4-5 shock produced sensitization for days tail shock leads to greater influx of calcium receptor that is normally blocked becomes unblocked b/c of increased calcium. Therefore there are more receptors for the neurotransmitter.

Answer 12

by presenting 2 stimuli simultaneously | strong stimulation of 1 input makes response to other input stronger

Answer 13

Blocking: During early training, attention shifted to A (Red light) as a important predictor of X (food on left). So there is no attention for B (Bell) when A.B are Paired. So cue D (Blue light) drives Final response in B.D However, if B.D was paired, then there was a 50:50 chance on either side SHOWED: if attention had been drawn to one previously, new stimuli would not affect it. BUT: if 2 previously shown stimuli had been paired, then a 50:50 chance occurs

Answer 14

Highlighting: A & B already paired, Attention shifted to D in A.D because D (Blue light) is new and alone predicts Y (Food on right). So cue D drives final response SHOWED: If one stimulus is repeated with a different pair with response, pairing with new response will not predict the old response. The new cue alone will drive the new response.

Answer 15

Rescorla-Wagner Model

Answer 16

Kruschke (1993) given box and line in it, and asked to guess which category it fit in, then given feedback. Split into 2 conditions (stimuli same in both conditions): filtration condition (upper/lower or left/right filtered into different categories, therefore ignore irrelevant dimensions) & Condensation condition (no filtration- all stimulus in one category) Filtration category performed better than condensation category not cf with Rescola-wagner model which predicts the 2 should be learnt at the same speed.

Answer 17

it is the brain's ability to self-regulate input from the environment

Answer 18

Sustained attention (alertness): Psychological arousal, vigilance performance declines over a long watch Selective attention: limited amount of stimuli we can process, attend to some at expense of missing others. People have limited capacity and don't treat stimuli equally

Answer 19

Cherry (1953): how are we able to listen to one conversation among many? because translation is selective Use experiment on dichotic listening and shadowing to mimic cocktail party.

Answer 20

* No memory for unattended message * Switch from English to German: not noticed (because acoustically similar to English) * Switch from male to female: noticed * Reversed speech: ‘something queer’ * Switch from voice to 400cps pure tone: noticed ``` ONLY SUPERFICIAL (PHYSICAL) FEATURES WERE NOTICED SEMANTIC CONTENT NOT NOTICED ``` Neisser (1967) said that this was because this was preattentive and did not require focal attention. Also said it was possible we are aware of unattended stimuli but only superficially.

Answer 21

Cherry Binaural presentation: same voice, different content need 10-20 presentations before they could shadow message 1 SHOWED: Source localization in space is important cue

Answer 22

Even though he was interested to see what was perceieved, he was actually measuring what they remembered. Sounds may be perceived and then forgotten

Answer 23

- Filter after short term store, before limited capacity - Prevent brain from being overwhelmed by all stimuli in world - Meaning extracted in limited capacity store - Decay quickly in STS if not quickly selected & stored

Answer 24

Dichotic digit stream: - Temporal recall (recall in certain order)- 3-4 correct - Ear-by-Ear recall (Preferred recall order different for different people) all 6 correct WHY? Because 5 Switches need to be made in Temporal recall and only 1 switch to be made in Ear-By-Ear recall Therefore, Switching takes time & STS decays, so remember less

Answer 25

1 . Gray & Wedderburn (1960): 'Dear Aunt Jane' - goes against what Broadbent said - people preferred recall order was to follow semantic content: "Dear Aunt Jane" & " 6,3,5" - SHOWS: meaning extracted before filter switches 2. Moray (1959): Dichotic listening task - people could detect own name on unattended channel THESE PEOPLE STARTED EARLY VS LATE SELECTION DEBATE

Answer 26

Debate on where the filter is, before or after limited capacity channel where semantic content is analyzed Treisman: Early selection supports Broadbent in placement of filter but not what it filters. Treisman supports sensory analysis before filter, semantic content after filter Late selection against Broadbent in everything. Everything to semantic analysis but filter before going into awareness.

Answer 27

Differs on where Semantic content is analyzed and differs on the amount of content that is analyzed

Answer 28

Everything, regardless of attention, gets into LTC system and content is semantically analyzed. Bottom-up = stimulus driven Top-down = Selection by "petinence" (our own attention to it because we thought of looking at it b/c it is distracting/caught your eye)

Answer 29

Broadbent's filter completely blocks unattended stimuli Treisman's passes partially and strength get reduced, so only part semantic activation occurs -- Semantic activation was biased by context would get through the filter and shift attention • Highly salient stimuli (name) • Semantically related material (dear aunt jane)

Answer 30

Treisman & Geffen (1967) - target word 'tap' % detection higher in shadowed channel but not 0 on unattended channel - cf. with Treisman's attenuation theory rather than Broadbent' Filter theory Treisman & Geffen (1969) - target word 'tap' detection was equal % on both because acoustically different and preattentive (Different voice). Meaning not needed.

Answer 31

Complexity of filter: need to distinguish related from unrelated stimuli to respond to highly salient or obvious semantic content Late selection tries to rectify this by moving filter everything semantically analyzed but not sufficient for awareness - ES theory: activation = awareness - LS theory: need to pass filter for awareness

Answer 32

Treisman & Geffen (1967): Poor in same voice | Treisman & Riley (1969): Good in different voice

Answer 33

McKay (1973); VonWright, Anderson & Stenman (1975): Semantic activation on unattended channel (but shown by indirect means)

Answer 34

Some phenomena not predicted by either theory

Answer 35

Moray (1970): Cost of diving attention Auditory signal detection task used pure tone rather than word or something else 54% - Exclusive OR (XOR)- monitor both, respond to one 52% - Inclusive OR (IOR) non-simultaneous- monitor both, respond to both 31% - Inclusive AND - simultanous- monitor both, respond to both, target on both came up simultaneously

Answer 36

Moderate cost of divided attention large cost for simultaneous detection ES & LS could account for one condition but not both ``` ES Predicts (OR < SEL): attentuation with divided attention but not (AND < OR): attentuation should not depend on identitiy of stimulus (because it should be preattentive- tone stimulus) (Simultaneous detection) ``` ``` LS Predicts (AND < OR): (Simultaneous detection) because selected by pertinence & Compete to get through filter But not (OR < SEL): (divided attention) only 1 target so no competition so should be close to 100% but we only get 52% ```

Answer 37

Structural bottleneck theories: - ES & LS are structural bottleneck theories. - Performance limitation due to competition to pass through bottleneck Capacity resource theories: - people have limited capacity to activate brain structure - can't activate all at once - therefore can't process everything - Measured by pupil dilation (More dialated-> more capacity required)

Answer 38

Kahneman, 1973 - Some tasks require more capacity that others - We can flexibly allocate capacity to simultaneous tasks - Allocation may be concious or unconcious) - Easy task = little capacity - Hard tasks = large capacity This suggest a Attention Operatic characteristic (AOC) way of studying attention

Answer 39

``` Detection = say 'yes' or 'no' Discrimination = say 'increment' or 'decrement' ``` Bonnel & Hafter (1998) - Visual and auditory task for discrimination and detection - Measure under signal detection theory to say there is something and they detected it- measuring sensitivity - tradeoff for driscrimination (limited capacity) - no tradeoff for detection (unlimited capacity) - cf with Cherry- preattentive - extraction of meaning needed focal attention/further capacity

Answer 40

Pro: - suggested new way of looking at attention - emphasized divided attention - showed flexibility of attention Con: - Vague, people could always come up with ad hoc explanation- always falsifiable

Answer 41

interested at looking at attention prior to eye movement. hard to do back then, but now we have equipment for it known at attentional orienting (1980)

Answer 42

Posner - Attract attention to A, present stimulus at A or B, then compare if A (in spotlight) is faster than B (out of spotlight) - SOA (stimulus onset asynchrony) for eye movement = ~ 200ms - benefit to cuing at valid location (80% of time - ~250ms) rather than invalid location (20% of time - ~300+ ms). cuing at neutral location (50:50 effect - ~270ms) Reasons why this finding occured: - Shifts of spotlight: time taken to shift/less time needed because there is no need to shift - Capacity theory: Capacity allocated dependent on type of trial (neutral-50:50, invalid/valid- focus on 1 location) - BUT: Hard to test between the 2 theories

Answer 43

When we have our spotlight on an item, we process it more accurately than when your 'spotlight' is not on it. Move spotlight when we want to, to where we want to

Answer 44

Top down and bottom up orienting systems are Attentional Orienting mechanisms Bottom up orienting: something in environment calls attention to it. (out of corner of our eye) Top down orienting: we want to look at it so we look to it

Answer 45

- need both to function properly - seperate systems - there are people who show failure to focus and failure to disengage attention

Answer 46

Endogenous = Voluntary (interpretation required - cognitive/symbolic/central) Exogenous = Reflexive (interpretation not required - direct/spatial/peripheral) Engage by different types of cues

Answer 47

1. Cuing effect - peripheral (reflexive) peaks rapidly but transient (~100-150ms) - central (cogntive) peaks slowly but stable (~300ms) 2. Jonides (1981): Different effect on loads - cues are different (2 seperate systems) because one is affected by cognitive load (voluntary) and the other is not (reflexive). 3. Peripheral cuing effect- "inhibition of return" - reflexive cues for miscued location improves for long SOA (over 300ms) and slower for cued locations. - Said to be ecological/evolutionary - don't need to search things twice