Cognitive studies Flashcards
what are the two studies in the cognitive area
Loftus and palmer (1974)
Grant et al (1998)
What did Bartlett say before the Loftus and Palmer study took place
Bartlett (1932) - Developed a theory called ‘reconstructive memory’
- he said our memory is not like cameras-we actually only remember parts of events that happen to us
- our mind fills in the blanks with information that makes sense or we expect to be there
- we get this information from our SCHEMA - these are organised packages of information about stimuli (e.g. events, objects, people, places) stored in our brain.
- If a certain schema is activated this may even change our minds
What is the key theme in the Loftus and Palmer study
memory = external influences on memory
eyewitness testimony
what were the aims of the Loftus and Palmer study
- To investigate factors that influence the accuracy of eyewitness testimony
- To investigate if post-event information could alter our memory
- To investigate if leading questions can alter the way we remember events
What was the Loftus and Palmer study: Field/Laboratory Quantitative/qualitative primary/secondary independent/repeated measures
Field/Laboratory —>Laboratory
Quantitative/qualitative —>Quantitative
primary/secondary —>Primary
independent/repeated measures —>Independent
what was the Independent variable for the Loftus and Palmer study and how was it operationalized
Experiment 1
Experiment 2
the language used in the question
experiment 1 = the verb used in the question: hit, smashed, collided, bumped, contacted
experiment 2 = only smashed or hit (or no speed question)
what was the dependent variable for Loftus and Palmer study and how was it operationalized
experiment 1
experiment 2
experiment 1 = Speed estimated of cars (mph)
experiment 2 = Whether or not participants reported seeing broken glass (closed question: yes or no)
How was the Loftus and Palmer study controlled
- All participants watched the same 7 videos
- Same questions asked (only the verb that changed)
In the Loftus and Palmer study what was the sample for experiment 1 and what was the sampling method
experiment 1 = 45 students from a university
in groups of various sizes
opportunity sampling
In the Loftus and Palmer study what was the sample for experiment 2 and what was the sampling method
experiment 2 = 150 students from a university
divided into 3 groups of 50
opportunity sampling
briefly describe the Loftus and Palmer experiment 1
1) All groups were shown 7 films of traffic accidents in a random order
2) After each film, the participants were given a questionnaire
- Firstly they had to give an account of the accident
- Secondly they had to answer 10 questions
3) One question was a critical question:
- About how fast the cars were going when they (hit, smashed, bumped, collided, contacted) each other
4) this lead to the five experimental groups
briefly describe the Loftus and Palmer experiment 2
3 equal groups of 50
1) shown 7 films of traffic accidents in a random order
2) After each film, the participants were given a questionnaire:
-Firstly they had to give an account of the accident
-Secondly they had to answer 10 questions
3)One question was a critical question:
-How fast were the cars when they smashed/hit ( 1 group of 50 participants did not get asked the question)
-(one week later)
did you see any broken glass? (there was no broken glass)
in the Loftus and Palmer, experiment 1 what order (quickest to slowest) did the participants mean estimate each verb
Smashed - 40.5mph Collided - 39.3mph Bumped - 38.1pmh Hit - 34.0mph Contacted - 31.8mph
In the Loftus and Palmer, experiment 2 how many participants said:
smashed group = yes and no
hit group = yes and no
control group = yes and no
smashed group:
yes = 16
no = 34
hit group:
yes = 7
no = 43
control group:
yes = 6
no = 44
what did Loftus and Palmer’s study rely on
eye witness testimony
what was the overall conclusion from the Loftus and Palmer study
Post-event information can severely affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony - we should not rely on eyewitness testimony too heavily and should be very careful what we say to witnesses
In the Loftus and Palmer study what were the conclusions for experiment 1
-The word used in a question can distort our memory of an event we have witnessed
-This could happen through:
=memory change (the word actually changes the way we remember an event)
=Response bias (the words make us interpret what we remember in a different way - this is when we are unsure of what we witnessed)
In the Loftus and Palmer study what were the conclusions for experiment 2
- Leading questions can distort our memory of events even to the extent of making us believe we saw something we didn’t (creating a false memory)
- We use our schema to fill in information we don’t remember - this supports Bartlett’s theory of reconstructive memory
Loftus and Palmer - internal validity
-It’s unlikely that participants guessed the aim, as they were each only asked the speed question once (and they didn’t even know that was the critical question)
Loftus and Palmer - external validity
ecological
ecological - Watching a car crash on film is probably very different to seeing it in real life. you don’t have the same distractions emotional reaction etc. that might affect your memory
Loftus and Palmer - internal reliability
The participants saw the films in different orders so this could have affected their focus on the critical film. However all participants were asked exactly the same questions with only the critical verb changed
Loftus and Palmer - external reliability
It’s reasonable to believe the study would get the same results if repeated - the cognitive process used e.g. schema would work in the same way regardless of time or day
How can the Loftus and Palmer study be applied to everyday life
anywhere where they need to be aware of inaccurate eyewitness testimonies e.g. court, police interviews
How does the Loftus and Palmer study relate to the ethical guidelines
There were no major ethical issues in this study due to the researcher getting consent, participants had the right to withdraw and no personal details were released.
experimenter was qualified, participants were debriefed and only watched videos so there was no harm
the only issue was a small amount of passive deception as they were not told that they were all given different questions but this was to avoid demand characteristics
How does the Loftus and Palmer study relate to: situational/individual nature/nurture determinism/free-will reductionism/holism
situational - Better at remembering a certain way or in a particular environment
individual - People’s perception of the word used in the question may be different
nurture - If you were taught to remember things in a certain way/technique
determinism - Word made memory better not the person
Reductionism - The word is the soul reason behind the memory of the participant
What is context dependent memory
When an individual is tested in the same condition/context in which they leant the tested material
In terms of the background of the Grant et al study, what did Godden and Badderly (1975,1980) say
They noticed that deep sea divers would forget things when underwater but when surfacing, they would soon recall it
What is the key theme of the Grant study
memory/ Context dependent memory
Which of these was Grant's study: field/lab independent/repeated/matched pairs quantitative/qualitative primary/secondary nominal/ordinal/interval/ratio
field/lab —> Laboratory experiment
independent/repeated/matched pairs —> Independent
quantitative/qualitative —> Quantitative
primary/secondary —> Primary
nominal/ordinal/interval/ratio —> Nominal
what were the independent variables operationalized for the Grant study
Reading condition (silent or noisy) Testing condition (silent or noisy)
what were the dependent variables operationalized for the Grant study
Reading time (seconds) Performance on a multiple choice test Performance on a short answer test
what were some of the controls in the Grant study
- Everyone wore headphones (silent and noisy conditions)
- participants reading times were recorded
- 2 minute break between end of study phase and beginning of test phase
How many participants were there in the Grant study:
gender
age
39 participants (40 took part but 1 was excluded) 17 females and 23 males 17-56 years old (mean=23.4 years)
In the Grant study what sampling method was used to recruit the participants
Snowball sampling - Participants were recruited by eight experimenters, each experimenter recruited 5 participants
Briefly describe the Grant study procedure
(lasted about 30 minutes)
- Each of the eight experimenters took one participant through one of the four conditions (participants only took part on one condition) and an additional participant for one of the conditions as assigned by the instructor. Experimenters randomly assigned their participants to their five conditions.
- Participants were read aloud the instructions of the study and were told the participation in the study was voluntary.
- Participants were told to read the psychoimmunology article as if they were reading for a class project and told their comprehension would be tested with a multiple choice and short answer test.
- All participants wore headphones as a controlled condition, silent would cancel out noise around them and noisy condition would hear moderately loud background noise.
- Reading time was recorded
- Approximately a 2 minute break between the end of study phase and start of test phase to minimise recall from short term memory
- Short answer test, then the multiple choice test (noisy or silent)
- Participants were debriefed concerning the purpose of the experiment
In the Grant study what were some of the findings: mean average results what were the tests out of (Reading first, test second) S=silent N=noisy
people did a lot better in the same test and study conditions e.g. short answer /10 = SS=6.7 NN=6.2 SN=4.6 NS=5.4
multiple choice /16 = SS=14.3 NN=14.3 SN=12.7 NS=12.7
What were some of Grant’s conclusions on his study
- Studying and testing in the same environment leads to enhanced performance
- Regardless of whether a short-answer test or multiple choice test is used to assess learning, there are context dependency effects
- Students are likely to perform better in exams if they study with a minimum amount of background noise
Grant study - Internal validity
This is a good test of context, the variables were operationalized and controlled well with participants wearing headphones so that extraneous noise wouldn’t interfere with the condition
Grant study - External validity
The participants were all psychology students or their friends were - they may have been naturally more interested in learning and memory processes than other people
Grant study - Internal reliability
Participants performed better in recognition than recall questions (people usually do) However, context had the same effect in both pairs of the test - Participants always remembered more when the study and test conditions matched
Grant study - External reliability
The study might get different results if it was repeated at different times of day - research suggests we do study and learn more/less effectively depending on whether its memory, afternoon, just after lunch etc.
How can the Grant study relate to everyday life
Useful for teachers and students to learn the best revision techniques
How did the Grant study relate to the ethics guidelines
There were no major ethical issues in this study due to the researcher getting consent and participants had the right to withdraw.
experimenter was qualified, participants were debriefed and no harm came to the participants.
Only a small amount of passive deception happened because they weren’t involved in a class project but no major deception.
How does the Grant study relate to any of the debates:
Nature/Nurture
Reductionism/Holism
Situational/Individual
Nature = Naturally remember in certain environment to help us survive Nurture = Teaching techniques in different environments
Reductionism = Just the environment affects memory
Situational = Environment affects memory
what are the main assumptions of the cognitive area
- This is an information processing approach - see the mind as working like a computer. Our brain inputs, processes and retrieves information (and the way it does these, can effect our behaviour)
- Focuses on internal mental processes such as memory thinking, reasoning, problem solving and language - believes the way we think is the chief cause of all our behaviour
what are the most common research methods in the cognitive area
self-report methods
Lab experiments
what are the strengths for the whole cognitive area
- This is the scientific approach - it doesn’t focus on feelings and emotions, so it’s able to take a more objective approach and create theories that can be tested, falsified and modified
- Has many practical applications - If we learn how the brain processes information, then we can learn how to input or retrieve it in a more useful way (education, eyewitness testimony)
what are the weaknesses for the whole cognitive area
- Relies heavily on self-report methods as there are no DIRECT ways to study peoples thought and memories etc. This creates problems of accuracy and honesty etc.
- A lot of cognitive research takes place in labs, so results tend to be low in ecological validity. We may just be finding out how people respond to an experimental procedure rather than how they would respond in everyday situations
