Lectre 5d: components and mechanisms of thinking Flashcards
what makes a catagory of thought?
parts of the catagory dont have to have everything in common,but they all usually have one thing in common
what are the levels of concepts of thought
super-ordinate level: pretty general (animal, furniture)
basic level: not too general and not too specific (dog, chair)
subordinate level: pretty specific (cocker spaniel, bean bag chair)
what is the prototype theory?
since we know that the members of a catagory do not have all the same features, people often have something that they can compare a new object to that is a representation of the catagory’s average: this is called the PROTOTYPE. therefore, if the object is similar to the prototype, then if it probs a member of that catagory
propositions
knowledge about how things relate can be represented in a proposition
e.g., birds eat worms
Cognitive schemas
when propositions are linked to form more complex sets of knowledge
e.g., things that happen in restaurants. or . what psych profs are like
what is a mental image
an experience through a visual, auditory, etc. images that doesnt require sensory input
subconcious process
can be brought into awareness easily, but can also happen without concious awareness
e.g., things like driving or walking
nonconcious process
mental process that cannot be acessed by conciousnes
e.g., identifying familiar objects, insight-problem solving, personal preferences)
what are the 2 methods of formal reasoning?
- )algorithm: a series of steps that lead to an accurate solution (area of a circle= )
- ) logical rules: include deductive and inductive reasoning
- logical rules: deductive reasoning
it is when you make a conclusion based on a series of premises, and therefore, if logical rules are followed, a conclusion drawn from this must be true if the premises are true
e. g., premise1: all parrots talk
p2: harriet is a parrot
conc: harriet talks
- logical rules: inductive reasoning
drawing tentative conclusions from some premises, therefore, if the premises are true, the conclusion is probably true, but not definitely
e. g.,
p1: betty likes chocolate
p2: nick gave betty some rolos
conc: betty will probs like it
informal reasoning
this is necessary when conclusions must be drawn based on incomplete info
e.g.,
does saddam hussein possess weapins of mass destruction?
knowledge prior to invasion of iraq: inspectors cant find any. saddam’s a ruthless dictator
informal reasoning: heuristics
these are simple things that people use to draw conclusions when they have an incomlpete knowledge of the facts so the
e.g., when in doubt pick “c”
as for the example with saddam, there are 2 heuristics that would probs be used. the lying dictator one (hes hiding the weapons). or the innocent till proven guilt one (cant find any, there may not be any).
informal reasoning:dialectical reasoning
comparing both sides to get the best conclusion, when this is used objectively and unemotionally, it is a great option
pre-reflective stage of reasoning
this is the assumption that there is a right and wrong answer and thats it. this can come from personal experience, or an “expert” opinion
quasi-reflective stage of reasoning
knowing that there may not be a clear answer, but this can be taken too far, and people can think that since opinions are personal they are automatically valid. (i know that there is evidence that smoking causes cancer, but i believe that it doesnt, and i have a right to that opinion)
reflective stage of reasoning
knowing that sometimes there isnt a clear answer, but that some answers are better than others: if they are more logical and more supported by evidence
clouding rational thinking: confirmation bias
people will find stuff that supports what they already thingk, and ignore the stuff that contradicts it.
clouding rational thinking :the availability heuristic
people think that an event is likely to occur if many examples are easy to bring to mind, so therefore, if a rare event is easy to bring to mind, people will think that it is easier to get than it is (e.g., ebola, sars, mad cow)
clouding rational thinking: loss aversion
people are motivated by avoiding loss rather than treating losses and gains equally.
e.g., people like the idea that there is a 1% chance of winning big, but dont like the idea that there is a 99% chance of losing
clouding rational thinking: mental set
solving a new problem using the same method that worked for the last problem, this is good if the old solution is good for this too, but bad if you nee ot come up with a new one
clouding rational thinking: hindsight bias
when people know about the result of an event they overestimate how much they thought that the event would occur
e.g.,
oh you guys broke up? well i knew it would happen eventually, you two werent meant for each other
clouding rational thinking: cognitive dissonance
people really want to get rid of inconsistencies b\w their beliefs and their behaviour. or two different beleifs.
-people do this by: modifying a belief, or rejecting its validity, or changing behaviour, or rationalizing (coming up with an excuse to explain the difference.)
