skills, habit and expertise

Question 1

what is expertise?

Answer 1

• very good at something
• could be the best at the skill
  –> at least very good
• requires practice

Question 2

practice

Answer 2

• can lead to expertise
• repeatedly doing a skill
• get better at something

Question 3

what is automaticity?

Answer 3

• refers to rather specific properties of performance
• tasks that can be performed quickly, effortlessly, and relatively autonomously are thought to be automatic
• automaticity refers to more specific properties of performance than skill
  –> but closely related to skill in that it is an important component of skill

Question 4

what is a skill?

Answer 4

• more general ability to complete a task

Question 5

types of tasks used to measure autonomic processing

Answer 5

conflict tasks:
- Stroop task
- Flanker task
–> respond to central arrow
- Simon task
–> push the named button
- Go/No-Go task

Question 6

real life conflict tasks

Answer 6

• Norman Doors:
  –> doors with handles
  –> but they are ‘push to open’ doors
  –> does against instinct to pull the doors
• signs:
  –> can say conflicting things
  –> colour of words different to the colour of the ink
• marketing
  –> using darker colour for ‘day’ and lighter colour for ‘night’
• hotel door keys
  –> need to put it down but a the image points up

Question 7

what do results of the Stroop task mean?

Answer 7

• interference is the difference between the RTs to congruent and incongruent conditions
• slower RTs to incongruent information than congruent information when naming the ink colour (but not when reading the word) suggests that automaticity of word reading interferes with the processing of the ink colour

Question 8

how can we manipulate the Stroop task to test the nature of automaticity?

Answer 8

• how do response factors affect automaticity?
• do automatic processes operate independent of attention?
• are automatic processes just faster?
• can anything become automatic?

Question 9

traditional Stroop task

Answer 9

• there is typically a verbal based response to the stimuli
  –> oral response or respond manually to visual written word
• this is regardless of whether the task is to name the colour of the ink (visual sensory task/stimuli ) or to read the word (visual verbal task)

Question 10

Durgin (2000) argument about traditional Stroop task

Answer 10

• argues that the match between the verbal stimuli of the written word and the verbal-based response when asked to read the word requires less processing than when asked to name the ink colour (mismatched S_R)
• when naming the ink colour the target information of ink colour must be translated into the appropriate verbal classification modality
  –> whereas the non target (distractor) information of the actual word is already in the verbal modality

Question 11

Translation account of the Stroop interference

Answer 11

• when reading the word
  –> target stimulus (red) is verbal
  –> response is verbal (say red)
  –> similarity in S and R
  –> no translation
• when asked to name ink colour
  –> target is sensory visual (red)
  –> response is verbal (say blue)
  –> mismatch between S and R
  –> translation is needed

Question 12

how did Durgin (2000) fix translation problem?

Answer 12

• changed the format of the response participants needed to respond to Stroop stimuli
• used a computer mouse to point to coloured patches

Question 13

tasks in Durgin (2000)

Answer 13

• to point to the ink patch that matched the meaning of the word (word reading)
• to point to the ink patch that matched the colour of the ink the word was written in
• there were only neutral conditions
  –> for the word task the colour word was in grey ink
  –> for the ink naming task furniture words were presented in coloured ink
• and incongruent conditions
• no congruent conditions

Question 14

results of Durgin (2000)

Answer 14

• colour interfered with word-naming/reading (longer RTs and more errors) when asked to point to the colour patch consistent with the word meaning than the neutral condition
• this was not observed on the point to the colour patch that matched the ink
  –> a “reverse Stroop effect”

Question 15

conclusions from Durgin (2000)

Answer 15

• findings were against automaticity theory as an explanation for interference on the Stroop task as pointing to the ink is not automatic
  –> but that is assuming that automaticity is based on the act of word reading as being the fundamental aspect of automatic process
• an alternative explanation for the findings is that stimulus response compatibility is actually key to automaticity
  –> it is not just a sensory process, but about the associations
  between stimulus and response
• when the S_R formats are similar then this supports automaticity

Question 16

attentional manipulations

Answer 16

• in the traditional Stroop task the argument that automaticity of word reading can explain the Stroop effect (interference) has been based on participants paying attention to whole words
• these words are thought to activate semantic and lexical processing
• so attention is paid across the whole word
• what happens when participants are asked to pay attention to a specific letter in the word?

Question 17

Besner study 1

Answer 17

• directed attention to a single letter in the word as that letter was the only part of the word in a coloured ink
• Results:
  –> Stroop effect eliminated when only one letter was coloured –> suggesting that paying attention to part of the word did not lead to automatic processing of the word at a semantic level

Question 18

Besner study 2

Answer 18

• attention was directed to a single letter in the word by having an arrow point to the target letter
• results:
  -> the Stroop effect was reduced or eliminated by cueing one letter of a coloured word

Question 19

conclusion form Besner

Answer 19

• automaticity of word reading is not independent of all
  other cognitive processes
• as where you
  pay attention and how you pay attention seems
  to affect whether word reading appears to be
  automatic

Question 20

stimulus onset asynchrony

Answer 20

• speed processing account:
  –> simply that words are processed more quickly than ink colour
• in the traditional Stroop task the word is presented at the same time as the ink: indeed the word is written in the colour of the ink.
• what happens if the presentation of the word and the ink colour is staggered (asynchrony)?

Question 21

Glaser and Glser (1982) - stimulus onset asynchrony manipulations

Answer 21

• presented the colour and word components of Stroop stimuli at different times
  –> a stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) manipulation
• results:
  –> for naming the ink (colour naming) you see the Stroop effect regardless of when the word stimuli was presented
  –> until word is presented at 300 and 400 ms after the ink
  (300 and 400 ms the irrelevant stimulus [word] is presented too late to interfere with processing of ink naming)
• no amount of head start for colour information produced interference on word reading

Question 22

conclusion from Glaser and Glaser (1982)

Answer 22

• speed of word processing being faster than ink processing cannot explain these findings
• there is more to automaticity than just speed of processing

Question 23

is automaticity all or nothing?

Answer 23

• there is a debate as to whether a process is either automatic or not (all or nothing) or whether automaticity can gradually develop (dimensional)

Question 24

can anything become automatic?

Answer 24

• Stroop Effect is often explained by the fact that word reading is automatic so interferes with naming the ink
• One question that is raised is that with practice can anything become automatic?

Question 25

MacLeod and Dunbar (1988)

Answer 25

• trained participants to name novel shapes with colour words
• there were 4 phases:
  1. first was baseline naming of the four familiar colours
  2. second was training in naming the four novel shapes by using the names of the same four colours
  3. third was naming the colours when they appeared as shapes
  4. forth was to name the shapes when they appeared in colour
• there were three experiments
  –> each experiment differed in the amount of training given 2 , 5 or 20 hours

Question 26

MacLeod and Dunbar (1988) - results

Answer 26

• initially (2 hours):
  –> colours interfere with naming shapes (naming the colour is the more dominant, automatic process)
• intermediately (5 hours):
  –> colours interfere with naming shapes and vice versa
• after extensive training (20 hours):
  –> shapes interfere with naming colours (naming the shape is now the more dominant, automatic process)

Question 27

MacLeod and Dunbar (1988) - conclusions

Answer 27

• a process is not either (completely) automatic or controlled but you can make something automatic with practice
• suggesting that automaticity is dimensional
  –> “continuum of automaticity”
• suggesting that perhaps most things may have the potential to become automatic with enough practice
• supports continuum of automaticity over relative speed of processing hypothesis

Question 28

skills or habits?

Answer 28

• there is a debate as to whether:
  –> skills are habits
  –> habits are skills
  –> whether the two are different

Question 29

features of habits

Answer 29

• over learnt stimulus-response pairs
• triggered by the environment
• rapid
• stereotyped
• inflexible
• ballistic
  –> once you start its hard to stop

Question 30

Bebko et al (jugglers)

Answer 30

• jugglers and novices
• juggling under different conditions (weight of balls, trajectory of balls) was still superior in jugglers than non-jugglers (novices)
• skill is maintained so skill has flexibility

Question 31

skills vs habit

Answer 31

• skills that are more habit like
  –> highly practiced
  –> fast
  –> low attention demands
• skills that are less habit like
  –> sequenced
  –> flexible
  –> intended

Question 32

defining a skill

Answer 32

hallmark of skill is the rich interplay between automatic and cognitive control processes and this is in contrast to habit

Question 33

habits vs skill (psychologists’ view)

Answer 33

• commonly characterize habitual actions as automatic, inflexible, and stimulus-driven
• insist that although there are elements of automaticity in skill, skilled actions remain goal-directed and highly flexible

Question 34

2 key features of a skill

Answer 34

1. flexible
2. goal-driven

Question 35

controlled & automatic processing (typing example)

Answer 35

• typing is a learnt process and skilled typists need to be accurate and fast
  –> involves both automatic and controlled processing
• we need to interpret words from info presented and then matched to output
  –> can measure errors via mismatch between intended output and actual output
• skilled copy typing depends on translation of words into motor commands for keystrokes
  –> and relatively automatic timing and execution of keystrokes
• errors may be observed through kinesthetic feedback from keystrokes

Question 36

Logan and Crump (2010) - typing task

Answer 36

• told to type a word
• typed the word
• given feedback
• 4 conditions:
  1. told their actual feedback (correct)
  2. told their actual feedback (incorrect)
  3. sometimes told they typed wrong when they typed right
  4. sometimes told they typed right when they typed wrong (corrected)

Question 37

two measures to assess performance in type task

Answer 37

1. Self-report (subjective perception of performance)
   –> are they aware of their actual performance or are they influenced by feedback?
   –> false reports of errors or corrected errors ?
2. Inter-key interval (typing speed as a measure of motor response)
   –> hitting the keys (typing) is automatic so motor response is unlikely to be conscious
   –> is the speed of typing influenced by errors?

Question 38

self report results - correct

Answer 38

typists were correctly able to state that they had made a correct entry (feedback also stated the entry was correct)

Question 39

self report results - error

Answer 39

most typists were aware that they had made an error (the feedback also stated error)

Question 40

self report results - inserted error

Answer 40

• most typists didn’t notice the error was inserted
  –> they believed that they had typed incorrectly when the feedback falsely stated that they had made an error
• an “illusion of authorship”:
  –> participants believed they had made errors they hadn’t

Question 41

self report results - corrected error

Answer 41

• most typists didn’t notice the error correction spontaneously
• an “illusion of authorship”:
  –> participants believed they had not made errors when in fact they had

Question 42

inter key interval results

Answer 42

• participants slowed when they made a real error (even if they weren’t told about it)
• didn’t slow when they were told (incorrectly) that they had errored
• disconnect between keystroke behaviour and self-report
  –> no illusion of authorship in keystroke behaviour

Question 43

meaning behind Logan and Crump (2010)

Answer 43

• typing skills are controlled by hierarchical loops
• outer loop = language comprehension & generation
  –> decides on the words to type
• inner loop= translates words into finger movements
• each loop is sensitive to different forms of feedback
  –> outer loop = visual feedback from screen
  –> inner loop = finger/keyboard interactions

Question 44

hierarchical control

Answer 44

• frees attention to regulate the hard parts
• complex behaviours are neither entirely automatic or controlled
  –> mix of both

Question 45

3 explanations of the barriers to performance of skill

Answer 45

1. arousal
2. choking
3. levels of attention

Question 46

Yerkes-Dodson Law (arousal)

Answer 46

• there is an optimum level of performance and arousal
• we perform better with more arousal up to a point
• past this point, more arousal leads to worse performance
• the inverted U hypothesis

Question 47

practice and the Yerkes-Dodson law (arousal)

Answer 47

• can deal with higher levels of arousal with practice
• the optimum level of arousal increases

Question 48

choking - barrier to performance

Answer 48

• choking under pressure (pressure to perform at high level) prompts attention to step by step elements of a well learned skill
• leads to errors and slowing

Question 49

Beilock et al. (2002b) - choking and dribbling

Answer 49

• either just do the dribbling task
• or do a dribbling task whilst listening to an audio stimulus and had to pay attention
• experts:
  –> best under dual-task conditions, but only right footed (their dominant foot)
  –> in right foot condition = attentional focus on dribbling hinders performance, distraction improves performance
• novices:
  –> always best under ‘skill focused’ conditions
  –> distraction hinders performance
  –> do better when only focusing on the skill

Question 50

levels of attention - barrier to performance

Answer 50

• where you focus attention is important:
  –> misallocation of attention can disrupt performance
• when typists are told to type with only one hand, their inner loop is focused
  –> performance declines

Question 51

ironic processing

Answer 51

• one way of accounting for disruption in processing is ironic processing
  –> thinking hard interferes with the process of doing it
  –> it hinders performance
• when mental capacity is reduced (stress, cognitive load, distraction) it can lead to opposite to intended goal
• the harder you try the more errors you make

Question 52

Ericsson’s theory of deliberate practice

Answer 52

• with deliberate practice, improvement still occurs but slows eventually
  –> after many years
• underpins expertise

Question 53

ten thousand hours rule

Answer 53

• to become an expert, you need have 10,000 hours of practise

Question 54

features of deliberate practice

Answer 54

• effortful, extensive practice
• breaks skill into components
• focus on reducing errors
• use of targets (which evolve as skill increases)
• individually tailored training (i.e. coaching)

Question 55

feedback about practice from elite violinists

Answer 55

• 4 to 5 hours of practice a day
• naps
• obtained feedback (coaching)
• trained the difficult stuff

Question 56

training errors and performance

Answer 56

• skaters who went on to win gold made more training errors than those who went on to win silver or bronze
• because they practiced beyond their current limit
  –> you identify errors, fix them and then improve
  –> you focus on the hard bit (so naturally you make more errors)
  –> not the easy bits you know you can do

Question 57

is 10,000 hours really ideal?

Answer 57

• Ericsson never claimed practice alone was enough
  –> conceded that innate height and environmental factors such as support are influential
• but he has claimed deliberate practice is the main influence on the development of expertise

Question 58

challenging deliberate practice and 10,000 hours (Dewar, 2014)

Answer 58

• evidence from around the world
• even with deliberate practice some people do not reach expertise
• those who are are more advantaged at the start reach expertise more/sooner/easier regardless of practise
• baseline levels of performance matter

Question 59

Macnamara & Maitra (2019)

Answer 59

• practice alone does not make an expert
  –> those who are better do begin with do better
  –> those with more practice were not necessarily better
• replication of Ericsson’s study but was was double blind assessment not observational
• practice alone is more important than coaching

Question 60

summary

Answer 60

• Stroop task is just one example of a conflict task
  –> by testing variations, we can understand automaticity
• skill requires coordinating automatic and controlled processing
• even if you have skill, other factors can hinder performance
• deliberate practice may not be as important as Ericsson’s has claimed