Moray: auditory attention Flashcards
Sample
2 groups of people?
Which university?
Undergrads and research workers from Oxford
Procedure- experiment 1
How many experiments were there? What did they all involve?
What did participants have to do?
What was the attended message?
What was the rejected message? (How many times was it repeated?)
What did participants have to do after listening?
What did it involve? (how many words, categories, what was each category)
There were 3 experiments in which all of them were dichotic listening
Experiment 1
Participants had to shadow a piece of prose = attended message
The rejected message was a list of words repeated 35 times
After the recordings the participants had to complete a recognition task
List of 21 words divided into 3 categories: 7 words from the shadowed message, 7 words from the rejected message, 7 words from neither of the messages but were similar
Procedure
Equipment what could the headphones do?
How many messages did the participant have to pay attention to?
What is this called?
What did the participant have to do while listening to the attended message?
Controls for the audio? (2)
Equipment = Modified tape recorder which allowed for a pair of headphones to play different audios in each ear
Partcipants had to pay attention to one of the messages
This is called dichotic listening
Attended message: Particpant had to shaow (repeat) the message
All of the messages had the same voice from a male speaker
Findings- experiment 1
Mean number of words identified from the attended message?
Mean number of words identified wrongly from the rejected message?
Finding (what are participants more likely to recognise?)
mean number of words identified
Attended message = 4.9
Rejected message = 1.9
Almost non of the words from the rejected message could break the intentional barrier.
Participants are more likely to recognise words from the shadowed message
Aim- experiment 2
What kind of cues?
Break what barrier?
To see if affective cues such as the participants name is strong enough to break the intentional barrier
Sample- experiment 2
How many students?
other group?
What university?
12 Students and research workers from Oxford university
Procedure- experiment 2
How many dicohotic listening tasks?
What side was the message the participants had to shadow on?
What did the rejected message on the left side include sometimes? (2)
Was this the affective cue? Why?
10 dichotic listening tasks
Partcipants had to shadow the message from the riht ear
The left play the rejected which sometimes included instuctions such as ‘Alright you may stop now’ or ‘ Change to your other ear’
(NOT THE AFFECTIVE CUE AS THE PARTICIPANTS NAME WAS NOT USED)
The 10 dichotic listening messages
How many pairs of the messages had instructions within them? How many included affective instructions? How many included non effective instructions?
What did all of the 10 messages start with?
What type of genre was the shadowed message?
What type of genre was the rejected message?
6 out of the 10 pairs of messages included instructions
3 = non effective cues
3 = affective cues e.g. name
All of the 10 messages started with instructions
The shadowed message = light fiction
Rejected message = fiction
Procedure- experiment 2
IV/DV
IV- whether the instruction was affective or non effective
DV- if the participant heard or followed the instruction within the rejected message
Results- experiment 2
Total of affective instructions heard? out of?
Total of non effective instructions heard? out of?
Conclusion? (what type of instructions are participants more likely to hear?
Heard: Affective instructions = 20/39
Heard: Non affective instructions = 4/36
Participants are more likely to hear affective instructions.
Experiment 3
Investigated? (listen, barrier)
Can being told to listen for certain information break the inattentional barrier?
Procedure- Experiment 3 Task? What did participants have to do? What did one of the messages include? When? Why was this form of data used? (2) How was importance placed on this data?
Dichotic listening task
Shadow one message
One message included numbers at the end
Digits were used as they are neutral and non affective
To place importance to these digits some of the participants were specifically told to listen out for them
Procedure- experiment 3
How many groups were participants spilt into?
What was each group told?
What was the DV?
Results?
Conclusions? What can not be made important enough? (what kind of information) example? to break what barrier?
Participants were split into 2 groups
Group one were told they would receive questions about the shadowed message
Group 2 were told they could remember as many digits as they could
DV: How many numbers participants could remember
Results: There was no significant difference between the number of digits recalled between group 1 ( receive questions on shadowed message) and group 2 (told specifically to remember as many digits as possible)
Neutral, non affective information such as numbers can not be made important enough to break the inattentional barrier
How can Morays study be seen as ethnocentric?
FOR? how may people be better? at?
AGAINST? (what does the function does the study focus on? so where can it be applied? what functions are simlar? what do we all have?)
FOR: people from other cultures or mulilingual could be better at attending to more than one vioce at a time - not included
AGAINST: The study focuses on how the brain filters out information and so the results could be applied to all cultures (brain functions similar) we all have a limit
Reliability
internal?
External?
Internal
Highly standardised - same tape recorder
Clear methods for each of the three experiments- rplicable
External
Experiment 1 sample is unknown but for experiment 1 and 2 there were small samples (12)
Although all 12 participants responded to the use of their names - consistent
