Moray

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

This a study of auditory attention
Dichotic listening was first investigated by Cherry (1953) when researching the cocktail party phenomenon.
Cherry found that those who ‘shadowed’ a message in one ear, were unaware of the content of the message in the other ear.

Question 2

Apparatus and Controls

Answer 2

• A tape recorder (Brenell Mark IV) was used in this lab experiment, which was modified with two amplifiers to allow two outputs, one to each ear through a set of headphones.
• The messages were of equal loudness, judged by each participant. (60 decibels above normal hearing)
• Before each experiment the participants were given four passages of prose to shadow for practice.
• All passages throughout the study were recorded by one male speaker and spoken in a monotone voice at 130-150 words per minute

Question 3

Aims

Answer 3

1. To investigate the amount of information P’s could recognise from a rejected message
2. To investigate the effect of hearing one’s own name in the rejected message
3. To investigate the effects of instructions to identify a specific target in the rejected message

Question 4

Method/Design

Answer 4

Lab experiments
Experiment 1 = repeated measures
Experiment 2 = repeated measures
Experiment 3 = independent measures

Question 5

Sample

Answer 5

All participants were undergraduates from or research workers and were male and female. (the study was carried out in Oxford, England)
It is not known how many were in Experiment 1.
Experiment 2 = 12 people
Experiment 3 = two groups of 14 participants

Question 6

Experiment 1 = Aim to replicate Cherry - Information, IV,DV,what msgs

Answer 6

IVs were the shadowed or rejected message
Shadowed message was prose (a story)
Rejected message was a list of words repeated 35 times
DV was the number of words recognised correctly in the rejected message.

As both were presented at the same time this is…….
Repeated measures design

Question 7

Procedure - Experiment 1

Answer 7

In experiment 1 a short list of simple words was repeatedly presented to one of the participant’s ears whilst they shadowed a prose message presented to the other ear (the list faded in and out);

The list was repeated 35 times. The participant was then asked to recall the content of the rejected message. About 30 seconds later they were given a recognition test using similar material, present in neither the list nor the passage, as a control.

There were 21 words –
7 from the shadowed passage
7 from the rejected passage
7 from neither passage

Question 8

Results - Experiment 1

Answer 8

Despite words repeated 35 times during unattended message, Ps struggled to recall them.

Ps on av. recognised more words for the shadowed message compared to both the rejected message & control.

Question 9

Experiment 2 - Affective/ non affective instructions - Information, IV, affective,DV

Answer 9

IV was whether or not instructions were prefixed by the participant’s own name
Affective – instructions prefixed with name
Non-Affective – just an instruction
DV was the number of instructions recalled

Question 10

Procedure - Experiment 2

Answer 10

Moray wanted to test whether an affective cue - a cue that has a strong meaning for the participant - would penetrate the ‘block’ and be attended to.

The affective cue was the participants own name.

Participants shadowed ten short passages of light fiction. They were told that their responses would be recorded and they should try to and make as few mistakes as possible.

Rejected messages were played in the other ear which were not attended to, Moray wanted to find out of these messages would be heard if it included their name.

Question 11

Experiment 2 - Results

Answer 11

Experiment 2 - Most participants ignored the instructions that were presented in the passages they were shadowing and thought this was an attempt to distract them.
The results were highly significant.

Question 12

Experiment 3 - Neutral information numbers - Information, IV, Conditions, DV

Answer 12

IV was the instructions given.
Condition 1 – told to listen carefully as they would be asked questions about the prose passage.
Condition 2 – Told to remember all the numbers they could.
DV was How many digits they recalled hearing.

Question 13

Expeiment 3 - Procedure

Answer 13

Participants were required to shadow one of two simultaneous dichotic messages.
In some of the messages digits were added towards the end of the message either in both messages, or in one.
The position of the numbers in the message and whether they were relative to each other in the two messages varied; controls with no numbers were also randomly inserted.
One group was told they’d be asked questions about the content of the shadowed message at the end. The other group had to remember as many numbers as they could.

Question 14

Experiment 3 - Results

Answer 14

After statistical analysis, it was found that there were no significant results between the two groups.

Question 15

Conclusion

Answer 15

Moray believes when we focus our attention on one message we create an attentional block on the rejected message.
When we direct our attention to a message from one ear and reject a message from the other ear, almost none of the verbal content of the rejected message is able to get through this block.
However, ‘important’ messages, such as our own name can penetrate this block, which may be part of the rejected message.
It can be concluded that it is almost impossible to make ‘neutral’ material important enough to break through the block which occurs in dichotic shadowing.

Question 16

Who?

Answer 16

All participants were undergraduates from the uni or research workers and were male and female.

Question 17

What?

Answer 17

Moray aimed to look at selective auditory attention, whether the blockage created can be broken by affective and non affective cues and with instruction to listen.

Question 18

How?

Answer 18

Participants took part in a dichotic listening activity where different audio was played to each ear and they were asked to shadow (repeat) content played to one ear. Participants were then asked questions in regard to what they had heard.

Question 19

Findings linked to theme:

Answer 19

In experiment 1, a mean average 4.9 out of 7 words played to the shadowed ear were recognised and only 1.9 out of 7 words played to the rejected ear. This shows the importance of paying attention to audio in order to be able to process its contents.
or
In experiment 2, 20 out of 39 instructions with affective cues (participants name) were recalled and 4 out of 36 instructions with none affective cues. This shows that affective cues can penetrate an attentional block and this content is then processed.

Question 20

Linking to area

Answer 20

Cognitive area

Question 21

Principle/ assumption:

Answer 21

The cognitive area is interested in mental processing and looks at the importance of input, process, output to investigate this.

Question 22

Findings linked to area:

Answer 22

In experiment 1, a mean average 4.9 out of 7 words played to the shadowed ear were recognised and only 1.9 out of 7 words played to the rejected ear. This shows the importance of paying attention to audio (to ensure input) in order to be able to process its content and be able to recall it (output).

Question 23

Aims

Answer 23

• to test Cherry’s dichotic listening findings in relation to
  1. the amount of information recognised in the rejected message
  2. the effect of hearing one’s own name in the unattended message,
  3. the effect of instructions to identify a specific target in the rejected message.

Question 24

Results EXP 1

Answer 24

There was no trace of material from the rejected message being recognised.

The difference between the new material and that from the shadowed message was significant at the 1 per cent level

The 30-second delay was unlikely to have caused the rejected material to be lost because words from early in the shadowed message were recognised.

These findings support those found by Cherry (1953).

Question 25

Conclusions

Answer 25

In a situation where a participant directs his attention to the reception of a message from one ear, and rejects a message from the other ear, almost none of the verbal content of the rejected message is able to penetrate the block set up.

A short list of simple words presented as the rejected message shows no trace of being remembered even when presented many times.

Subjectively important messages, such as a person’s own name, can penetrate the block: thus a person will hear instructions if they are presented with their own name as part of the rejected message.

While perhaps not impossible, it is very difficult to make ‘neutral’ material important enough to break through the block set up in dichotic shadowing.

Question 26

Method evaluation strength

Answer 26

The experimental conditions and the procedures that Moray created were highly controlled in a laboratory, therefore showing high internal validity. Lots of controls were used such as loudness of message matched to participant’s needs, messages recorded, spoken at a constant speed without expression in a male voice to ensure high internal validity.

Question 27

Data strength

Answer 27

Quantitative data was gathered in this study to allow comparisons between variables to be made for example the results showed that digits cannot be noticed even when they are expected.

Question 28

Ethics strength

Answer 28

Few ethical issues raised-practice sessions given to reduce potential stress caused by task given

Question 29

Reliability strength

Answer 29

High use of controls and the procedures of the study, including instructions given to participants, are highly standardised which allows the study to be easily replicated and to check for the reliability of the findings.

Question 30

Validity

Answer 30

s- high controls allowing cause and effect and no effect of volume, represents day to day of following one source of information while ignoring distractions, using own name increased validity
w- not realistic rarely continuously listen to repeat a message

Question 31

Sampling Bias strength

Answer 31

As with many psychology studies, University students took part (as well as research workers). This sample is easily accessible, so saves time and money on obtaining participants.

Question 32

Ethnocentrism

Answer 32

There could be differences in abilities to do dichotic listening tasks based on language capabilities and number of languages spoken, for example, people who are bilingual may be more competent at this sort of task with learnt skills in multiple languages.

Question 33

Results EXP 2

Answer 33

Most participants ignored the instructions that were presented in the passages they were shadowing and said they thought this was merely an attempt to distract them.

The mean number of instructions heard when presented in the rejected message was calculated, and the difference between the names and no names was significant: t=3.05 (significant at greater than the 1 per cent. level, where t=2.81.

On only 4 out of the 20 occasions in which the ‘names’ instructions were heard did the participants actually make a change to the other message.

Question 34

Results EXP 3

Answer 34

The difference between the mean number of digits reported under the two conditions of set were analysed and submitted to a t test. In none of the cases, whether the score was the mean number of digits spoken during shadowing, nor in the number reported, nor the sum of these two was the difference significant even at the 5% level of confidence.

Question 35

Method evaluation weakness

Answer 35

However, due to the nature of the study and the sample, responses may have been a result of demand characteristics. Furthermore, listening to sounds through headphones and being asked to block out or shadow the noises is extremely artificial and not true to real life; therefore, the study lacks ecological validity. However the use of everyday materials and the individuals own name made the task a little realistic.

Question 36

Data weakness

Answer 36

Therefore it can be criticized for lacking qualitative data – Moray could have asked the P’s why they think they didn’t hear the message to check if it was demand characteristics that were causing the results

Question 37

Ethics weakness

Answer 37

Potential deception as P’s were told that they were being monitored in experiment 2 on their performance

Question 38

Reliability weakness

Answer 38

However some differences in the participants experiences did arise, for example only some heard and responded to the instruction to change ears, so the passage intended to be the shadowed passage then became the rejected message.

Question 39

Sampling Bias weakness

Answer 39

However, the sample is not representative of everyone, as students and research workers are likely to have higher cognitive abilities and may perform better on attention tasks. Therefore the study lacks population validity.