Final Flashcards
Event boundaries in memory and cognition
Physical boundaries (doorways) and scenarios (before/after an exam) define separate events in episodic memory. We forget items immediately after crossing an event boundary.
Doorway effect
When we forget what we were thinking about upon entering a different room - explained by event boundaries.
Prediction: Gambler’s fallacy
The false belief that a predicted outcome of an independent event depends on past outcomes - we assume outcomes are linked when they are random. Thinking one is due for a ‘win’ have a run of ‘losses’/
Gambler’s fallacy in the real world
People continue to invest after several losses on the stock market. U.S. judges in refugee asylum cases are more likely to deny (grant) asylum after granting (denying) asylum to the previous applicant. Loan officers are more likely to deny a loan application after approving the previous application.
The hot-hand belief
Thinking that a person who experiences success will keep having success - ‘a winning streak’. Eg. 91% of basketball fans thought that a player is more likely to make a shot after making 2 shots than after missing a shot. Just because something feels true, doesn’t mean it is true.
Heuristics and biases
Heuristic processing is central for making intuitive and rapid judgments - predictive purpose of cognition. Over-application can lead to serious errors on our judgments and reasoning - stereotyping, gambling addictions.
Post-mortem technique
Learning from your failures. Helps to minimize the over-reliance on heuristics.
Pre-mortem technique
To anticipate and prevent our mistakes before they result in catastrophe. You are on the verge of making a decision, look ahead at challenges that could cause failure, create plan to navigate those challenges.
Inductive reasoning
Concrete form of reasoning. Making general conclusions from specific observations. The conclusions can be false, this is is a “probably but not definitely true” - type of reasoning. When we are unaware of inductive reasoning, it can become a heuristic. Basis of much of human learning from experience. Eg., language learning.
Deductive reasoning
Abstract form of reasoning. Using general theories to reason about specific observations.
Deductive vs inductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning: concrete
Specific observations –> Generalizations –> Theories
Deductive reasoning: abstract
Experiments <– Predictions <– Theories
Different development and brain networks for deductive vs inductive reasoning
Induction: develops age 7 to 11. Deduction: develops in teenage years. Different brain recruitment: notable in frontal cortex, different types of information organization. Different cognitive skills linked to two systems of reasoning: System 1: automatically, and with little effort (inductive). System 2: slower and requires more effort (deductive).
Logic and Syllogisms
Deductive reasoning: formal systems for generating statements that will be true if rules of the system are followed. Syllogisms: Premises are presumed to be true. Determine if the premise statements support the conclusion based on the logical structure not content: Major premise (general), Minor premise (specific), Conclusion (test).
Validity of syllogisms
Validity: Is the conclusion true given the premises’ logical form? Valid = logical rules. Truth = world knowledge / content. A valid structure (All A are B: All B are C: Therefore, all A are C).
Types of syllogisms
All statements: All A are B
Negative Statements: No A is a B. Also means no B is A. Some statements: Some A are B - at least one, possibly all.
Atmosphere effect
People rate a conclusion as valid when the qualifying word (e.g, ‘all’, ‘some’) in the premise match those in the conclusion.
Mental model theory
People construct mental stimulations of the world based on statements (e.g., syllogisms) to judge logic and validity. A negative statement.
Omission bias
People tend to have more trouble reasoning with negative information. Biased thought that “withholding is not as bad as doing” - inaction is harder to classify as wrong than action.
The trolley problem
A trolley is coming down a track and there are five people on the track. If you. do not intervene, the trolley will hit and kill five people. There is a lever close to you that you can switch the direction of the trolley onto another set of tracks that one man is on. 3 scenarios:
a) Do nothing and kill 5 people
b) Switch train to another track and kill one man.
c) Stop the trolley and save five people by pushing a large man to his death in front of trolley.
Which decision is more “immoral”. Although C is a utilitarian response, many do not choose C due to adverse emotion.
Ventromedial prefrontal lesions
Less emotional response leads to more utilitarian response.
High-functioning autism
Differences in emotion processing leads to more utilitarian response.
Positive emotion induction
Healthy individuals with heightened positive mood (shown positive film prior to problem) more likely to say they would push the man (utilitarian response) than control group in prior example.
The belief bias seen in syllogisms
People have problems reasoning with syllogisms in which logical validity conflicts with truth. The content of a syllogism can lead to errors due to a belief bias. The tendency to think a syllogism is valid if the conclusions are believable.
Conditional Reasoning
“If P then Q” statements where P is the antecedent and Q is the consequence. How to test if the condition statement “if it is raining, I will get wet” is valid?
Wason’s task: Conditional reasoning
If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side, which card should you flip? Conditional statement: If ‘vowel’ then ‘even’. Many do not test this statement correctly. Confirmation bias: tendency to seek confirmatory evidence for a hypothesis.
Conditional reasoning and falsification
The falsification principle: You need to look for situations that would falsify a rule.
Familiarity effects
If a person is drinking a beer (P), then the person is over 21 years old (Q). Cards have have on one side and beverage on the other side. Which card(s) do you need to flip to verify this statement?
Familiarity affects judgements
It even affects our judgment of time. The return trip effect: Time judged returning on a route (now familiar) is rated as shorter than initial route.
Problem Solving - 3 aspects
Going from a problem to goal state. Problem solving is a multi-step cognitive process that involves three aspects:
1. Recognizing and representing problem - focus on relevant information.
2. Analyzing and solving it - problem solving cycle.
3. Assessing the solution’s effectiveness - and store it in an appropriate form.
The problem solving cycle
- Define the problem.
- Brainstorm Solutions.
- Pick a solution
- Implement the solution
- Review the results
Recursive: Repeat this cycle as many times as necessary to find solution.
Applicable: Apply successful cycles (solution to new problems - must be able to generalize)
Ensure a solution’s effectiveness - Generalization
Generalization is important for adaptive behaviour. For problem solving, it involves storing specific solutions without detail to apply. to new scenarios. Memory for solutions should include ‘essence’ and not specific details for generalization to occur.
Well defined problems
Requirements are unambiguous. All information needed to solve the problem is present. Goal directness: defined goal state, task constraints (clear steps), single/expected outcome. Applying algorithms, puzzles.
Ill defined problems
How to overcome problem / the goal is ambiguous. Requires added information. Situational. Have few limitations (rules) for how to solve the problem. Multiple solutions or expected outcomes. Social problem solving. Laptop is broken.
Ill-defined problems carry a load
No constraints. Greater activity in the right lateral prefrontal cortex for ill-defined anagrams. Solving ill-defined problems carries a greater ‘cognitive load’. Cognitive load: the amount of information held in mind at one time.
Moravec’s paradox
Artificial intelligence (AI) can solve well-defined problems well, but not ill-defined problems and simple skills. “Everything that’s easy is hard, and everything that’s hard is easy”. AI defined by the use of algorithms, deep neural networks, that work well with certainty but not with uncertainty.
A problem space is a representation that includes:
Initial and goals states. Intermediate paths and operators - actions to change between states. Task constraints.
The Tower of Hanoi
Move 3 discs from peg A to C so they are in the same initial order. Task constraints : No disc can lie on top of a smaller one, only one disc can be moved at a time (i.e., the top disc of a pile).
The Tower of Hanoi problem space
- Initial and goals states
- Intermediate states and operators
- Task constraints
Navigating problem space: Brute force
Systematic algorithm that represents all the possible steps from the problem to goal state. Guaranteed to find a solution, but inefficient. Combinatorial explosion: computing too many alternatives.
Navigating problem space: Heuristics
Strategies to select moves in a problem space to avoid combinatorial explosion. Trial and error, hill climbing strategy, means end analysis.
Trail and Error
Considered “lower-level thinking”. Try out a number of solutions, rule out what doesn’t work. Good for limited outcome problems - what colour of my shirt matches these pants? Not good for multi-outcome problems - solving a Rubik Cube.
Hill climbing strategy
Select the operation that brings you closer to the goal without examining the whole problem space. This strategy can lead to a false outcome, a ‘local maxima’ (subgoal) is mistaken as the final goal. Does not always work because some problems require you to move away from the goal in order to solve it.
Means ends strategy
More flexible approach than hill-climbing. What “means” do I have to make the current state look like the goal state I want to be in? Identifying sub-problems to complete the goal. Includes forward and backward movements and constantly evaluation the difference between current and goal states. Envisioning end or ultimate goal. Determining the best strategy for attaining the goal given current situation. Highlights the importance of recursion (sub-goals and step by step approach to getting to solution).
How do we solve ill-defined problems?
Cannot use algorithms or scripts like well-defined problems. Often begins with uncertainty and must find other strategies. 2 strategies based on episodic memory are to:
1. Remember individual past experiences related to a problem
2. Recombined related memories on the fly to form imagined hypothetical solutions.
Remembering past experiences
Analogical problem solving. Making comparisons between two situations and applying the solution from one of the situations to the other situation.
Analogical problem solving - target/source problems
Target problem: the problem the person is trying to solve - what to cook for a dinner party?
Source problem: the problem that shares similarity with the target problem - how was this resolved in past similar scenarios?
Analogical problem solving steps
Notice a relationship: there is an analogous relationship between source problem (familiar) and target problem (unfamiliar). Mapping the correspondence: what is similar between the target and source problems - requires inferences and generalization. Apply the mapping: generating a parallel solution for the target problem.
Analogical problem solving - surface similarity
People don’t naturally engage in analogical transfer without a hint and when there is a surface between problems. Surface details: Content of scenarios - it is easier to use a school-related problem to solve a current school-related problem than a related current relationship-related problem. Structural similarity is more important: Generalized underlying relationship between problem and solution.
How do analogies make unfamiliar problems become familiar (analogical problem solving)
Superficial similarity influences mapping between a source and target problem and can confine this form of problem solving. Structural similarity is more important for drawing analogical inferences, particularly creative ones - basis of creativity, linked to insight.
Memory to imagine hypothetical outcomes
Mental stimulation of novel events. Useful to solve a problem; plan for the future; be creative. Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) patients with hippocampal damage and select episodic memory loss and healthy controls. Test of ill-defined social problem solving (imagine and describe hypothetical solutions). TLE patients described solutions less effectively. and with less detail than controls, suggesting a link between imagining solutions and episodic memory.
Familiarity leads to Einstellung Effect
The bias to use familiar methods to solve a problem. An inability to seek out a better method. to solve a given problem - a cognitive trap. Rigid thinking and blocks in problem solving - functional and mental fixedness.
Functional fixedness
The inability to see beyond the most common use of a particular object. “Fixed “ on the known function of an object.
Classic test of functional fixedness.
Maier’s (1931) two-string problem. Only 39% of people can find the solution within 10 minutes. Hints help - prior to tasks, swinging arms in a solution-relevant manner led to the solution.
The development of functional fixedness
Children of different ages solved the ‘candle’ problem (attach a candle to the wall using certain tools). Pre-utilization: experience with the objects. No fixedness in children without pre-utilization. Too much experience leads to fixedness and the Einstellung effect.
Mental fixedness: Overusing mental sets
Responding with previously learned rule sequences even when they are inappropriate or less productive. The tendency. to respond inflexibly to a particular type of problem and not alter your response.
Insight problem solving
A productive thinking process of forming new patterns or ways to view a problem: restructuring a problem in a new way leads to a sudden solution, the Aha moment or insight. Gestalt switches: the experience of having a sudden switch in how you see something.
Insight results from impasse
Mental impasse: stuck in a solution path. Insight: overcomes impasse by restructuring the problem.
Four features of insight
Suddenness: The solution pops into mind with surprise. Ease: The solution comes quickly and fluently. Positive: A pleasant experience, even before assessing if the solution is effective. Confidence: The solution is believed to be the right one.
Insight and subjective experience.
Participants solved ten problems: five verbal insight problems, five non-insight algebra problems. Made ‘warmth ratings’ every 15 seconds: a person’s feeling that they are approaching a solution. Warmth ratings predicted performance on algebra by not insight problems.
Insight defined by experience
Non-insight problem solving comes with awareness: step by step algorithms help predict performance. Insight problem solving feels like it happens suddenly: people cannot accurately predict performance (finding solution), this could be due to focus on problem restructuring and definition.
Expertise and problem solving
Experts are more familiar with certain information and so they represent a problem differently than non-experts. Non-experts spend more time trying to develop a solution; Experts to define the problem appropriately.
The expert brain: Functional differences
There are no anatomical brain differences between experts and non-experts. There are functional brain differences between experts and non-experts: experts recruit more brain areas that process info related to their expertise. Experts are better able use domain-relevant knowledge to perform a task.
Chess player study
Expert and novel chess players reconstruct a previously seen chess board displaying chess moves from memory - Experts could remember more of the board. In a control task, the players reconstructed a shown chess board with pieces in a random layout - Experts were no different than novices. Experts chunk information on prior knowledge.
Intelligence
Intelligence relates to efficient and appropriate reasoning: learning from experience, adapting to the environment, acting purposefully. Intelligence varies across individuals: IQ tests have been designed to measure general intelligence differences, other factors underlie differences on these tests aside from “intelligence”.
Measuring intelligence
Psychometrics: the study of psychological assessment. Standardization: test scores are compared to pre-tested ‘standardization’ or ‘norm’ groups. Normal distribution or curve: a symmetrical bell-shaped curve that describes test score distribution.
IQ test scores
Average score of 100; SD of 15. 95% of people within 2 SD (between 70 and 13).
Validity and Reliability of IQ test scores
Reliability: consistency across instances of testing. IQ scores have high test-retest reliability. Evidence: score at age 6 correlates with scores at age 18. Validity: The test is measuring what it is intended to measure. IQ scores should have predictive validity: predict performance on something requiring intelligence.
The start of intelligence testing - Francis Galton (1822 to 1911)
Developed tests, but purpose was questionable. Founded the eugenics movement. Racially-motivated view of how to “improve” society. A dark start to intelligence testing.
Alfred Binet
Developed a test in response to a request from the. French government: identify children that needed special education in school. Binet viewed intelligence as important for: practical life, adapting to. circumstances judging and reasoning well. Thought his test measured academic output and not intelligence.
The Simon-Binet Test
30 questions of increasing difficulty (easy –> hard). Easy itmens: follow a light beam. Difficult: describe abstract words. Some questionable items. Standardization: A child’s mental age was calculated by comparing the score out of 30 to the score of a group of children the same chronological age.
The Stanford-Binet Test
Based on the. Simon-Binet test. Item for a 4 year old: repeat the following numbers: 3 6 7”. Item for an adult: “Describe the difference between misery and poverty”. IQ Ration Scores: (Mental age / Chronological age) * 100. If MA > CA, ability is above average of peers (gifted). If MA <. CA, ability is below average of peers (delayed).
Wechsler Tests: Verbal IQ vs Performance IQ
VIQ: Similarities: explain what two words have in common. Vocabulary: Define words.
PIQ: Picture completion: Determine what is missing from a picture. Picture arrangement: Organize pictures in a logical order.
Wechsler Tests
The global capacity of a person to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment. Separate intelligence scales for children and adults AND separate scales to measure different types of intelligence.
Raven’s progressive matrices
Shown patterns with a missing section. Asked to determine the missing piece from a set of options. Non-verbal assessment. Relatively free from linguistic influences and thus free from cultural biases.
What are the different intelligence tests measuring?
Working memory capacity shares at least half its statistical variance with “general intelligence”. Working memory can predict intelligent behaviours, including reasoning and adaptability.
Genetics and IQ scores
Studies with fraternal or identical twins raised in the same or different environment. Shared genetics is a better predictor of IQ correlations among twins than the environment.
Important points on IQ scores
Helpful to identify children who need help but can be used to exclude marginalized communities. Factors affecting performance: socioeconomics, gender differences in self-estimated intelligence, culture: familiarity with task and stimuli can affect performance.
The Flynn effect: Explaining IQ variations.
American’s IQ scores increased 3 points per decade over 100 years. Over time, more focus on abstract thinking and critical thinking, especially in wealthier countries. There is a greater focus on health, which improves brain function and enhances IQ test scores.
Spearman’s two factor theory
Found that tests of cognitive abilities correlated with one another. Suggested that higher correlations are driven by a common reliance on a single factor. This is general intelligence. General intelligence (g factor)varies across people but is stable within a person. Genetic basis. Specific abilities (s factors) are performance on tasks, are affected by education and environment, and vary within a person.
Cattell and Horn Theory (Fluid and Crystallized intelligence)
Fluid intelligence (similar to g): The capacity to acquire new knowledge and engage in flexible thinking. Tests of reasoning. Genetic basis. Crystallized intelligence (similar to s): Knowledge and learning that has been acquired throughout the lifetime. Vocabulary, math. Affected by personality, education, culture. Motivated learning.
Savant Syndrome
A person who is otherwise limited in mental ability has an exceptional specific ability. Can be congenital or acquired (new skills after brain injury). Suggests there are different forms of intelligence, supported by different cognitive processes.
Acquired savants
People who acquire specific skills from brain injury. To compensate for damage, other areas of the brain will be ‘rewired’: induces savant-like capabilities.
Sternberg’s theory of intelligence
A process view that states that intelligence is not a system or structure. Intelligence is the capacity to automatize information processes and use them in appropriate settings - this can vary.
Sternberg’s intellectual components
- Meta-component: Higher order processes for planning and decision making. Making decisions about how to solve a problem.
- Performance component: Processes for executing a task.
- Knowledge acquisition component: Processes to learn and store new information.
Analytic intelligence
Mental steps or “components” used to solve problems.
Triarchic theory: Types of intelligence
(1) Components interact with certain materials/tasks (2) that are relevant to a given situation (3).
Analytic intelligence, creative intelligence, practical intelligence.
Creative intelligence
Use of experience in ways that foster insight. Ability to think in new ways and apply info flexibly. Emphasizes experiential info.
Practical intelligence
Ability to read and adapt to the contexts of everyday life and ambiguous situations. Emphasizes contextual info.
Positive/negative moods impact on broad/specific thinking.
A positive mood promotes a general “assimilative thinking” style - leads to greater susceptibility to misinformation. Happier moods lead to global processing. A negative mood promotes specific “focused thinking” style - lowers susceptibility to misinformation.
