Moray

Question 1

Cocktail Party effect

Answer 1

mentioning your name in a cocktail party would draw your attention

Question 2

Dichotic listening

Answer 2

headphones that present 2 different auditory stimuli in different ears

Question 3

Affective instructions

Answer 3

Instructions preceded by name

Question 4

Non-affective instructions

Answer 4

instructions not preceded by name

Question 5

Cherry’s findings

Answer 5

ppts who shadowed one task could recall nothing of the content of the rejected task, even the language the it was spoken in

Question 6

Apparatus used in Moray

Answer 6

• Brenell Mark IV Stereophonic Tape Recorder = modified with 2 amplifiers to give 2 independent outputs
• Headphones

Question 7

Moray Experiment 1 - sample

Answer 7

Oxford Uni students of both genders

Question 8

Moray Experiment 1 - procedure

Answer 8

• 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

Question 9

Moray Experiment 1 - results

Answer 9

• mean no. words recognised from shadowed passage = 4.9

- mean no. of words recognised from rejected message = 1.9

Question 10

Moray Experiment 1 - conclusion

Answer 10

• 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

Question 11

Moray Experiment 2 - sample

Answer 11

12 undergraduates from Oxford Uni of both genders

Question 12

Moray Experiment 2 - procedure

Answer 12

• 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

Question 13

Moray Experiment 2 - results

Answer 13

• no. times affective instruction heard (name) = 20

- no. times non-affective instruction heard (no name) = 4

Question 14

Moray Experiment 2 - conclusion

Answer 14

• use of ppts name broke inattentional barrier

Question 15

Moray Experiment 3 - sample

Answer 15

2 groups of 14 undergraduates (28 overall)

Question 16

Moray Experiment 3 - experimental conditions

Answer 16

1. One group told they would be asked questions about the shadowed message
2. Other group told they were to remember as many digits as possible
   - independent measures design

Question 17

Moray Experiment 3 - procedure

Answer 17

• digits presented at end of message

- sometimes presented in shadowed passage, sometimes presented in rejected message

Question 18

Moray Experiment 3 - results

Answer 18

• no sign. difference in mean scores of digits recalled between 2 conditions

Question 19

Moray Experiment 3 - conclusion

Answer 19

numbers (digits) are not able to break inattentional barrier

Question 20

Moray - research method

Answer 20

• 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

Question 21

Moray - type of data collected

Answer 21

quantitative data

Question 22

Moray - ethics

Answer 22

conducted ethically as tasks were clearly explained and the procedure did not put ppts under stress

Question 23

Moray - Internal Validity

Answer 23

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

Question 24

Moray - ecological validity

Answer 24

highly controlled lab experiment = block out background noise, info fed to each ear though headphones + had to shadow attended message… so lacks ecological validity