Moray Flashcards
Cocktail Party effect
mentioning your name in a cocktail party would draw your attention
Dichotic listening
headphones that present 2 different auditory stimuli in different ears
Affective instructions
Instructions preceded by name
Non-affective instructions
instructions not preceded by name
Cherry’s findings
ppts who shadowed one task could recall nothing of the content of the rejected task, even the language the it was spoken in
Apparatus used in Moray
- Brenell Mark IV Stereophonic Tape Recorder = modified with 2 amplifiers to give 2 independent outputs
- Headphones
Moray Experiment 1 - sample
Oxford Uni students of both genders
Moray Experiment 1 - procedure
- list of words spoken 35 times as rejected + attended message
- At end of shadowing task ppts had to recall all they could remember of rejected message
- Given recognition test of 21 words
- 7 shadowed words / 7 rejected words / 7 words from neither
Moray Experiment 1 - results
- mean no. words recognised from shadowed passage = 4.9
- mean no. of words recognised from rejected message = 1.9
Moray Experiment 1 - conclusion
- despite fact that short list of words repeated many times, ppts still couldn’t recall words from unattended message
- none of the words from rejected message was able to break the inattentional barrier
Moray Experiment 2 - sample
12 undergraduates from Oxford Uni of both genders
Moray Experiment 2 - procedure
- 2 passages of light fiction read at once in each ear
- affective cue was the ppts own name
- within instructions they either contained : affective instruction / non-affective instructions / no instructions
- required to do a shadowing task
- Moray wanted to find out whether ppts were more likely to hear the instruction within the rejected message if it was preceded with their name
Moray Experiment 2 - results
- no. times affective instruction heard (name) = 20
- no. times non-affective instruction heard (no name) = 4
Moray Experiment 2 - conclusion
- use of ppts name broke inattentional barrier
Moray Experiment 3 - sample
2 groups of 14 undergraduates (28 overall)
Moray Experiment 3 - experimental conditions
- One group told they would be asked questions about the shadowed message
- Other group told they were to remember as many digits as possible
- independent measures design
Moray Experiment 3 - procedure
- digits presented at end of message
- sometimes presented in shadowed passage, sometimes presented in rejected message
Moray Experiment 3 - results
- no sign. difference in mean scores of digits recalled between 2 conditions
Moray Experiment 3 - conclusion
numbers (digits) are not able to break inattentional barrier
Moray - research method
- lab experiment
- controls = experiment 2 - read 2 passage of light fiction in a steady monotone pace p 150 words per min to all ppts
- aware they were in a study so give answers they thought they were meant to give
- low ecological validity
Moray - type of data collected
quantitative data
Moray - ethics
conducted ethically as tasks were clearly explained and the procedure did not put ppts under stress
Moray - Internal Validity
internal validity = highly controlled lab experiment, procedure + apparatus were standardised
= ppts knew they were part of a study, so could have tried to affect the outcome
= may have thought they they weren’t supposed to remember anything from unattended message
Moray - ecological validity
highly controlled lab experiment = block out background noise, info fed to each ear though headphones + had to shadow attended message… so lacks ecological validity
