Moray (1959)

Question 1

(Moray) Describe the background behind the purpose of the study.

Answer 1

If you’re having a conversation with one person then you probably won’t hear what other people around you are saying (an inattentional barrier has been put up to allow you to focus).

Question 2

(Moray) What was the aim of Moray’s study?

Answer 2

To test Cherry’s findings on attention “more rigorously”.

Question 3

(Moray) Describe the sample for Experiment 1 of Moray’s study.

Answer 3

Undergraduate students and research workers of both genders at Oxford University.

Question 4

(Moray) Describe the term ‘cocktail party effect’.

Answer 4

Even if you’re not paying attention, the use of your name will always grab your attention.

Question 5

(Moray) Describe the term ‘dichotic listening’.

Answer 5

To listen to two different audios, playing in opposing ears, at the same time.

Question 6

(Moray) Describe the term ‘shadowing’.

Answer 6

To verbally repeat what you hear.

Question 7

(Moray) Describe the term ‘affective instructions’.

Answer 7

When a person is given an instruction which is preceded by their name being said.

Question 8

(Moray) Describe the term ‘non-affective instructions’.

Answer 8

When a person is given an instruction but their name is not used.

Question 9

(Moray) List the apparatus used in all experiments.

Answer 9

Brenell mark IV stereophonic tape recorder, modified with twin amplifiers to give two independent outputs through attenuators, one output going to each of the ear pieces.

Question 10

(Moray) Describe the procedure for Experiment 1.

Answer 10

• Participants had to shadow a piece of prose that they could hear in one ear. This is the attended message because participants were focusing on it.
• In the other ear (the message that they were NOT paying attention to) a list of simple words was repeated 35 times. This is the rejected message.
• At the end of the task, participants completed a recognition task.

Question 11

(Moray) Describe the recognition task used in Experiment 1.

Answer 11

Participants were shown a list of 21 words, unknown to them the words were spilt into 3 categories.
- 7 were from the passage they had shadowed.
- 7 were from the rejected message.
- 7 were words that appeared in either passage but were similar.
Participants were instructed to choose which words they recognised.

Question 12

(Moray) Experiment 1 Results: What was the mean number of recognised words from the word list taken from the shadowed passage?

Answer 12

4.9

Question 13

(Moray) Experiment 1 Results: What was the mean number of recognised words from the word list taken from the ‘rejected’ message?

Answer 13

1.9

Question 14

(Moray) Experiment 1 Results: What was the mean number of recognised words from the word list taken from neither message?

Answer 14

2.6

Question 15

(Moray) What was the conclusion of Experiment 1?

Answer 15

Participants are much more able to recognise words from the shadowed passage. Almost none of the words from the rejected message can break the ‘inattentional barrier’.

Question 16

(Moray) What was the aim of Experiment 2?

Answer 16

To see if affective instructions (i.e. using names) can break the ‘inattentional barrier’.

Question 17

(Moray) Describe the sample for Experiment 2 of Moray’s study.

Answer 17

12 students/research workers from the University of Oxford.

Question 18

(Moray) Describe the procedure for Experiment 2.

Answer 18

Each participant completed 10 dichotic listening tasks, where they had to shadow the passage of light fiction in their right ear.
The rejected passage of light fiction in their left ear could include instructions like:
1) “Alright you may stop now”
2) “Change to your other ear”

Question 19

(Moray) What was the independent variable for Experiment 2?

Answer 19

Whether the instructions were affective or non-affective (i.e. used the participants name or not).

Question 20

(Moray) What was the dependent variable for Experiment 2?

Answer 20

Whether the participants heard the instructions or not (or if they followed it).

Question 21

(Moray) What did Moray conclude from Experiment 2?

Answer 21

Affective cues are more likely to be heard than non-affective cues.

Question 22

(Moray) Experiment 2: How many passages had instructions at the start?

Answer 22

All 10 pairs.

Question 23

(Moray) Experiment 2: How many passages also had instructions within them?

Answer 23

6 out of 10 pairs.
(3/6 had non-affective cues and 3/6 had affective cues)

Question 24

(Moray) Experiment 2: Passage were recorded as having heard the passage if…

Answer 24

They reported hearing the instructions or if they followed the instructions.

Question 25

(Moray) Experiment 2: When affective instructions were used how many times were they heard?

Answer 25

20

Question 26

(Moray) Experiment 2: When non-affective instructions were used how many times were they heard?

Answer 26

4

Question 27

(Moray) Experiment 2: What conclusion can be drawn from the results?

Answer 27

Participants were more likely to hear instructions that were affective than non-affective.

Question 28

(Moray) Describe the procedure for Experiment 3.

Answer 28

• Participants were presented with a dichotic listening task and had to shadow one of the messages.
• Spoken numbers (digits) were said out loud towards the end of the message (digits were chosen as these would be fairly neutral and non-affective).
• To make these digits ‘important’ some participants were told to listen out for them.

Question 29

(Moray) Explain the difference between the instructions given to Group 1 and Group 2 in Experiment 3.

Answer 29

Group 1 were told they would be asked questions about the shadowed message.
Group 2 were told specifically to remember as many digits as possible.

Question 30

(Moray) What was the dependent variable for Experiment 3?

Answer 30

How many digits participants remembered.

Question 31

(Moray) Explain the results from Experiment 3.

Answer 31

There was no significant difference between the number of digits recalled between Group 1 and Group 2.

Question 32

(Moray) What did Moray conclude from Experiment 3?

Answer 32

Neutral, non-affective information, like digits, cannot be made important enough to break the ‘inattentional barrier’.

Question 33

(Moray) What are the four overall conclusions that Moray drew from his 3 experiments?

Answer 33

1) Almost none of the verbal content from a rejected message penetrates a block when attending to another message.
2) A short list of simple words cannot be remembered even when repeated several times.
3) ‘Important’ messages like names can penetrate the barrier.
4) It is difficult to make ‘neutral’ material (e.g. digits) important enough to break the ‘inattentional barrier’.

Question 34

(Moray) Which ethical guidelines did Moray uphold?

Answer 34

Consent, right to withdraw, protection from harm, confidentiality.

Question 35

(Moray) Which ethical guidelines did Moray break?

Answer 35

Deception and debriefing.

Question 36

(Moray) Is this study applicable only to the culture in which the research was carried out, or could the findings apply elsewhere?

Answer 36

Moray’s experiment isn’t ethnocentric as it studies species/species behaviour but does only reflect how English speaking westerners’ attentional processes work (different languages/cultures may influence).

Question 37

(Moray) Is the procedure standardised and replicable? (Internal reliability)

Answer 37

The experiment was highly controlled (laboratory experiment).
It meets the criteria for scientific research that it should be replicable.

Question 38

(Moray) Are the results showing a consistent effect? Is the sample large enough to show this? (External reliability)

Answer 38

The sample was small (12 undergraduate students/research workers). Quantitative data was collected - easily compared and allows the reliability of the study to be tested.

Question 39

(Moray) (Internal validity) Did the researchers control for extraneous variables?

Answer 39

Highly controlled laboratory experiment - high design validity.
Procedure and apparatus were standardised.
Participants knew they were in a study and may have tired to affect the overall outcome.

Question 40

(Moray) Is the sample diverse enough to be representative?

Answer 40

All are from similar backgrounds but the study is investigating species. Use of both sexes but all undergraduates and research workers, resulting in a high level of cognitive power.

Question 41

(Moray) How did/didn’t the experiments resemble real-life situations?

Answer 41

Lacks ecological validity as it was highly controls, blocked background noise, information being fed into each ear, and the act of shadowing.