Exam #2 Flashcards
reasonings relationship to memory?
categorical thinking - exemplar, heuristics, bias
problem solving - creativity, insight
episodic knowledge?
categories
- abtraction
- template: exemplars
- perceptual tuning
- prototype: weighted thinking
- holistic integration of features
perceptual tuning?
sensitivity to select features
semantic knowledge
a mental representation
- idea or meaning
- feature comparison model
- defining features: necessary for the meaning of the item
- characteristic features: descriptive but not essential
- a typicality effect: changes in discrimination time based on likelihood of features
semantic networks?
hierarchial model
- association between:
semantic networks?
hierarchial model
- association between:
- concepts: integration
- properties: traits
= dependent on context
reasoning: heuristics and algorithms
heuristics
- develop solution
- quick; error-prone
- superficial (perceptual)
algorithms
- apply rules
- slow; accurate
- logical (cognitive)
reasoning: availability, probability, representativeness
availability
- easily remembered is more probable
probability
- reliant on knowledge of parameters/ likelihood
representativeness
- similarity with other instances
problem solving: creatvity
the ability to transfer knowldge, the abilityt to produce new ideas
- insight: a sudden realization of a problem’s solution
- mental sets vs. flat hierarchies
- remote assocaitions (categories)
- expertise
- accumulated knowledfe (info & chunking)
problem finding
the ability to discover new problems,
their methods and solutions
How is Thinking related to Language?
Expressive Language
- Pictorial thinking
Receptive Language
- Inferential thinking
language and communication?
Disorders
Acquisition
language? (mental representation)
arbitrary: symbolically transformed
dynamic: include/create concepts
communicative: convey to anotehr entity
structured: systematic rules
generative: combination is malleable/ creative
universal grammer? (symbolic representation)
deep structure: semantics, meaning
surface strcuture: how its communicated, syntax
grammar: rules that allow us to communciate
linguistics
how we communicate thoughts/ideas
limitation: are these two actually related?
linguistic determinism?
“Language determines the way we think”
- sensation
- Conceptualization: organization of incoming stimuli
- attention
- perception
- Categorical thinking: Similarity/differences
- naming
how does language emerge from semantic networks?
Relies on learning & memory
Related to creativity/insight (problem
expressive language?
production
- Communication of affect
- Expressive (states)
- Communication of ideas
- Referential (abstract)
what does expressive language depend on?
referential skills and fine motor, motivation, pragmatics
receptive language?
comprehension
- developed before production
what is comprehension reliant on?
Attention/Memory
Non verbal symbols
body language
- (Gestures, facial
expression)
Reciprocity
developmental perspectives: poverty of the stimulus, and linguistic nativism
the poverty of the stimulus: the number of exemplars
provided do not allow for the construction of rules
linguistic nativism: predisposition for the acquisition
of language
debate on the poverty of the stimulus?
1)Underlying structure is similar; exemplars can be
categorized
2) Errors in grammar are present and are corrected
3) Dev. trajectory is step wise and gradually becomes more complex
brocas aphasia
expressive
- inability to produce communicative output
- production deficit, comprehension intact
- left frontal lobe
Wernicke’s aphasia
receptive fluent
- grammatical, meaningless output
- comprehension deficit, irregular production
- temporoparietal junction
personality?
Individual’s unique constellation of consistent
behavioural traits
issues with personality: differentiating between…
Short vs. long-term responses
Situational vs. magnitude descriptions
Cultural (social) vs. individual influence
also doesn’t show the values when looking at cognition (how one thinks) and the affects (tone of behaviour)
nature?
psychodynamic: Unconscious parts of self
traits: enduring patterns of behavior
- Biological: Body (and substrates) shape our experience and interpretation
nurture?
humanistic: motivation/ wants (self-actualization)
social-cognitive influences
- learning
interpersonal?
self-esteem: self-serving bias
- nature vs nurture
operationalizations: psychodynamic approaches
Change as a function of conflict
- across development/ lifespan
- discrepancy between needs/ wants and environment
Inner forces are Dynamic : changing and interacting
- Conscious (engaging) and Unconscious (engrained)
- Personality emerges from the negotiation of needs - internalized behaviours shape future interactions
psychoanalysis: levels of consciousness
Conscious : focus attention and remember clearly
Preconscious: “dynamic unconscious” vague, sometimes realized sometimes not
– Parapraxes (“slip of the tongue”)
– Sublimation (repress)
Unconscious : Drives behaviour based on pleasure principle
– Eros/Thanatos, Biological/Moral
dialetic tensions?
Id : impulses to maintain and reproduce
– Pleasure principle: derive pleasure, avoid pain
Ego : mediator between demands of ID and Super Ego
– Reality principle: maximize rewards while avoiding censure
Super Ego : Internalization of social norm
–Morality principle: Ego ideal, conscience and guilt
defense mechanisms: repression
regression
reaction formation
projection
rationalization
displacement
denial
regression
retreat to an earlier (more infantile)
psychosexual stage
reaction formation
unconsciously switch unacceptable impulses to opposite, acceptable impulses
projection
disguise their own threatening impulses
by attributing them to others
rationalization
self justification in place of real,
threatening, unconscious reasons
displacement
shifts impulses toward acceptable, less
threatening object/person
denial
refusal to believe or perceive of painful
realities
psychoanalysis: methodological problems
1)Lack of scientific testability
–Operationalization of concepts too vague
–Operationalization impossible for ”principles”
2)Lack of empirical evidence
–Based on small groups of female patients & self analysis
- Generalizability, validity
–Non objective data collection (analyst’s interpretation)
3)Not a unifying principle
–Emphasis of male prototype
–No replication across cultures
conflict theories
generally accepted:
- Personality comprised of Id, Ego, Super Ego
- Importance of Unconscious and childhood experiences in forming personality
- Role of defense mechanisms in reducing anxiety
differentiated
- Emphasis on conscious mind’s influence on interpreting
experience and coping
- Doubted sex & aggression as only/all consuming motives
- The effect of social (not sexual) tensions
projective tests
ambiguous stimuli designed to trigger
projections (sub conscious)
types of projective tests
Rorschach Test (inkblots)
Thematic Appreciation Test (situations and concepts)
Washington University Sentence Completion Test (associations)
strengths and limitations of projective tests
strength:
- Provide rich data
- Generates discussion (discourse)
limitation:
- Complicated coding systems (prone to error)
- Long to administer
- Low reliability (trained raters come with different interpretations)
- Low validity (misdiagnosis of healthy individuals)
analytical psychology: dialectic (balance of opposites)
Self as a union of opposites:
- Thinking vs Feeling, Sensation vs Intuition
persona
the “mask” (role) you are in (social)
anima/ us
your potential to become
shadow
aspects that were denied (moral)
ego
thoughts, feelings, memories (experience)
collective unconscious
Collective Unconscious: Common psychic background
of humanity
- concepts/ archetypes emerge from culture
person situation debate? how does personality, behaviour, and situation interact?
Personality predicts likelihood of response
Situations constrain behaviour
- personalities determine their environment
traits: functions/ productions of the CNS - reactivity to stimulation
Extraversion/Introversion : reflect behaviours
Stability/Neuroticism : reflect emotions
- the lemon test
- introverts produce more saliva (sensitive to stimulating drugs), extroverts less saliva (sensitive o depressive drugs)
traits: functions/ productions of the CNS - sociability
psychoticism/ normality: reflect adherence to social norm
- testosterone
factor models
Mathematical algorithms that attempt to extract
commonality from items
- Reduce variability in clusters, increase variability across Factors
- done to be more parsimonious
the big 5
OCEAN
openness: imagination, feelings, actions, ideas
conscientiousness: competence, self-discipline, goal-driven
extroversion: sociability, assertiveness, emotional expression
agreeableness: cooperative, trustworthy, good-natured
neuroticism: tendency toward unstable emotions
low/ high score Openness
low - uncreative, incurious, practical
high - curious, wide range of interests, independent
low/ high score conscientiousness
low - impuslive,careless, disorganizaed
high- hardworking, depenable,organized
low/ high extroversion
low- quiet, reserved, withdrawn
high - outgoing, warm, seeks adventure
low/ high agreeableness
low - critical, uncooperative, sus
high - hepful, trusting, empathetic
low/ high neuroticism
low- calm, even-tempered, secure
high- anxious, unhappy, prone to negative emotions
social cognitive perspective
Personality is an illusion, environments shape
behavior
situationism
circumstances are more determinant of our
behaviour
reciprocal determinism
bi-directional influence
- no primary cause for our behaviour
personality is determined by the interaction of the external environment, internal mental events, and behaviour. For example, receiving good grades and praise for schoolwork as a child may help you believe that you are a good student and this high level of self-efficacy may further lead to behaviours (studying and doing homework) that produce further desired reinforcement—more good grades and praise.
self-efficacy
personal beliefs about one’s ability to perform
at a certain level
- how we think about ourselves and our social situations
measuring intelligence?
psychometric approach
How do we define intelligence?
operationalization
histology
kinds of psychometrics we use?
“g”
Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory
WAIS
limitations of psychometrics?
nature and nurture
defining intelligence?
“ability to learn (from experience )”, “think
abstractly ” “carry out a plan” “creative solutions to
novel situations
limitations - intelligence?
Most rely on situational descriptions , or abstract concepts
Testing paradigms generally do not match conceptual
definition
- Predetermined responses, pattern recognition, memory
Treated as a stable trait, but tests are constantly altered
- Paradox: Intelligence is stable, but people are getting smarter?
hereditary genius: “innate” tendencies in talented families
No relationship to environment
physiological measurements of discrimination
Eugenics, origin of genetic approach
survival of the fittest
“fit” referred to physiology (NOT relationship to environment)
- reinforced racist/ sexist concepts of intelligence
learning potential: create an assessment of school success
Valid measure
–Mental Age : operationalization of reasoning, comprehension,and judgment
First standardized approach
–Comparison to achievement group
Functional measures
–Aptitude Test : probability of achievement given a specific operationalized goal; competency.
- Predictive
- Achievement Test : measuring success of learning on a specific task; ability.
- Assessment
- tests of knowledge about particular school subjects
stanford-binet
revised Binet’s test to measure “inherited intelligence”
*extended to adults
- Repurposing a test for a different goal (see validity)
intelligence quotient (IQ)
mathematically standardized descriptor
- allow for comparison across groups
standardization
Uniform procedure of giving and scoring tests
- Assumption
- the only difference remaining is that of ability
- traits are normally distributed in the population
- norming thus allows for comparison in sub-populations
reliability
The extent with which a test gives consistent results
- Split half tests, test retest
- Issues: item selection, learning
validity
The extent to which a test measures what it’s
supposed to:
content validity: refers to criterion (the construct you are
interested in)
- Achievement tests
predictive validity: refers to future behaviour (success)
- Aptitude Tests
cautions of validity
Correlation is not causation
restricted ranges
assumes stability
subjective operationalizations
general intelligence (g): connectionist
connectionist (one factor)
- high inter correlation across abilities
- Problem: ecological validity
- human abilities too diverse to collapse to one score
confounds to general intelligence
Socioeconomic Status (SES) was the best predictor
operationalization of cognitive abilities
verbal, mathematical, memory, spatial, sensory)
general intelligence (g): modular
modular (several factors)
- several separate clusters
- Problem: mathematical validity
- clusters gravitated around a single factor
general intelligence (g): multiple intelligences
multiple intelligences (several factors)
- includes abilities beyond academics
- Problem:
- Ecological validity (focus on
- Not validated/verified by research ( learning is standard)
- Fluid or crystalized?
Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory
- Analytic : mental components used in solving a
problem- well-defined problems with one conclusive answer
- Academic settings, logic (mathematic deductions)
- Creative: the ability to transfer knowledge
- Manipulate information in unique/novel situations
- Practical : ability to make use of contextual
information
- Everyday tasks that have multiple solutions- environment, experience, common sense
tacit knowledge
Tacit Knowledge: inferred strategies for “success”
– interpersonal strategies to work with others
- Limitation: related to school-related cognitive functions such as reading, writing, test taking, homework completion
Wechsler adult intelligence scale (WAIS)
Targets cognitive processes, assesses based on quality of answer (not specified answer!)
Reasoning abstraction
Vocabulary naming & defining
Spatial ability block design/replication
Pattern recognition letter/number sequence
What does WAIS do?
1.Clinical tool used for diagnostics
–Measure of impairment
“intelligence” means “cognitive” not “
2.Point scale
–Sensitive to individual differences in task performance
compiling sub tasks allow for more accurate representation
More informative than “pass/fail”
3.Non verbal performance
–Overcome cultural, linguistic, and education biases
Tapped into higher order cognitive abilities such as attention,problem solving, etc
nature (genetic): longitudinal, twin, adoption
longitudinal studies:
- Stability: neural speed, orienting to novel stimuli, SAT/GRE
- Difference: “personality” (B5), fluid intelligence
twin studies:
- Identical reared apart (0.76) vs. Siblings reared apart
- Problem: Environmental similarity never accounted for
adoption:
- Intelligence: more variability than adoptive parents in
adulthood, but higher then biological parents
- cohort effect
limitations of heritability
Proportion of genetic variability responsible for trait
variance
1) Descriptive (not causal)
2) Refers to groups (populations) not individuals
- Averages not individual differences
3) relates to environment
- Problem: error in how environment is factored in!
- research treats the environment as a confound and controls for it (removes it) → Phenotype has been constrained
4) Assumes traits are static/stable
- Misconception of what is a “trait”
nurture limitations: flynn, impoverished, testing procedures, cultural
The Flynn effect : IQ rates increase, related to
industrial “development”
Impoverished family
- Each SES factor decreased IQ by 4 points, additively.
testing procedures
- motivation, timing
cultural
- Growth Mindset : Failure is not a permanent condition
- Grit : Maintaining effort despite plateaus or failures
genetic: age, culture, measures
age: Increases in “drift”:
modification that occurs as a
result of methylation
(“turning off”)
culture: Homogenous, post
industrialized society
(western)
measures: phenotype
measured
behaviourally
environmental: age, culture, measures
age: control increases with age
culture: “one
size fits all” fallacy,
The Flynn Effect
measures: factors are determined by
culture
concepts are…
representational
categories are determined by
experience with exemplars
Which of the following represents the super-ordinate level category?
grizzley
mammal
brown
bear
mammal
Thor overestimates the proportion of family chores which he takes responsibility for because it’s easier for him to recall what he has done than to recall what Loki has done. This best illustrates the impact of…
the availability heuristic