Unit 2 - Classic Cognitive Core Studies Flashcards
What is the background to Moray’s Attention Study?
Colin Cherry realised when deep in conversation, if you hear your name it draws your attention - cocktail party affect
What does dichotic listening mean?
Hearing different sounds in each ear
What does shadowing mean?
Focusing attention to what you can hear in only one ear and then verbally repeating it out loud
What is an affective instruction?
An instruction with an affective cue that had a strong meaning to you (name)
ie. “John Smith, change to your other ear now”
What is a non - affective instruction?
An instruction that did not begin with the participants name
ie “Change to your other ear” or “You can stop now”
What was the aim of experiment 1 from Moray’s study?
To test Cherry’s findings on attention “more rigorously”
What apparatus did Moray use in all 3 experiments?
Brenall mark IV stereophonic tape recorder
- modified with two twin amplifiers with two independent outputs
What sample did Moray use in experiment 1?
Undergraduate students and research workers of both genders at Oxford University
Outline the procedure of Moray’s first experiment?
- First message was a passage of prose (the attended message) and always read by a male speaker
- The participants always had to shadow one message
- In the other ear, there was a list of simple words repeated 35 times (rejected message)
- At the end asked to complete a recognition task:
- shown a list of 21 words with 3 unknown categories
- 7 from shadowed passage
- 7 from rejected passage
- 7 were similar words but not in either (control)
What were the results from Moray’s first experiment?
From shadowed message - 4.9 words
From Rejected message - 1.9 words
From control - 2.6 words
What did Moray conclude from his first experiment?
- Participants are much more able to recognise words from the shadowed passage.
- Almost non of the words from the rejected message are able to break the ‘inattentional barrier’
What was the aim for Moray’s second experiment?
To try and break the inattentional barrier using an affective cue
What was the IV from Moray’s second experiment?
Whether an instruction within the rejected passage was preceded by the participants name (affective cue) or not preceded by the participants name (non - affective cue)
What was the DV from Moray’s second experiment and how was it operationalised?
Whether participants are more likely to hear an instruction in a message they’re not paying attention to if it is preceded by their name
Operationalised by reporting if heard instruction or actually shadowed the instruction
Outline the procedure of Moray’s second experiment
- Two passages of light fiction were heard in each ear
- Ten paassages heard contained an instruction at the start and then another 6 within them
- Both passages read in a steady monotone voice by a male at about 130 words per min
- Three passages had affective instructions and seven didn’t
- They each shadowed the passages of light fiction
- They experienced the same ten passages in the same order (repeated measured design)
- Told the aim was to make as few mistakes as possible when shadowing the passages
What were the results from Moray’s second experiment?
Affective instructions in rejected passage = 39
- no. of times it was heard = 20
Non - affective instructions in rejected passage = 36
- no. of times it was heard = 4
What did Moray conclude about his second experiment?
- Less than 1% chance probability the results were due to chance
- Name broke through ‘block’ on rejected message - supports claim
- When given a warning to expect to change ears there was an increase in mean frequency in hearing instructions in rejected message
How did Moray’s second experiment lead to his third experiment?
It tested his theory of giving a pre-warning to participants
What was the aim of Moray’s third experiment?
To see if digits were as important as your name and to see if would break the block on the rejected message
What was Moray’s sample in the third experiment?
2 groups of 14
What was the experimental design of Moray’s third experiment?
Independent measures design
What was the IV of Moray’s third experiment?
The manipulation of the instructions given to ‘set’ the two groups of participants:
- One group told they were going to be asked about the shadowed messages at the end
- Other group told to remember as many digits as possible
What were the DV’s of Moray’s third experiment?
- Amount of digits remembered by 1 group
- Amount of Q’s answered correctly in shadowed passage by other group
Outline the procedure of Moray’s third experiment?
- 2 x 14 were asked to shadow one of the two simultaneous dichotic messages
- In some messages digits were put in the message at the end, in both messages or only one. Some messages had no digits (control passage)
What were the results from Moray’s third experiment?
Showed no difference in the mean scores of digits recalled correctly between the two ‘set’ conditions
What did Moray conclude from Moray’s third experiment?
The numbers (unlike the persons name) are not important enough to break through the block on the rejected message
What did Moray overall conclude about all his experiments?
- In a situation where subject will direct his attention to one ear and rejects a message coming to the other ear, almost none of the verbal content can penetrate the block set up
- A short list of simple words as the rejected message will show no trace of being remembered even when repeated several times
- Subjectively ‘important’ messages like a person’s name will penetrate the block set up, so participant will instructions
- Very difficult to make ‘neutral’ material important enough to break through block in dichotic shadowing
What ethics did Moray uphold?
Moray’s study was conducted ethically as the experiments did not put stress on participants
Was Moray’s study ethnocentric?
No - investigating a species - specific behaviour
Yes - only reflects English speaking westerners attentional processes
Did Moray’s study have internal reliability?
Yes - highly controlled lab experiment =, the apparatus and procedure were standardised so replicable
Did Moray’s study have external reliability?
Sample fairly small which could limit generalisbaility
Did Moray’s study have population validity?
Student and research workers were selected - outperform general population?
Did Moray’s study have ecological validity?
No - highly controlled, through headphones, no background noise and instructed to shadow, so lacks ecological validity
What debates does Moray link to?
- Psychology as a science
2. Usefulness of Research
How does Moray relate to the Psychology as a Science debate?
- controlled lab experiment which fulfill the scientific criteria
- Supports claim that psychology is a scientific discipline
How does Moray link the Usefulness of Research debate?
- provides rigorous, empirical evidence for Cherry’s cocktail party effect
- contributed to our understanding of auditory selective attention
How does Moray link to the cognitive area?
- investigates the cognitive process of attention
- aimed to investigate selective attention by finding material that can break through attentional barrier
How does Moray link to the key theme of attention?
- confirms Cherry’s theory
- found material that can break the block when focusing attention
- material that is neutral or not important will not break the barrier when attention is focused
Summarise the background of Loftus and Palmer’s study?
- Bartlett - human memory is reconstructive, alters info to make it make sense unconsciously
- Are eyewitness testimony’s in court reliable
- People who watch violence will remember less than people who hear about violence
What was the aim of the experiments conducted by Loftus and Palmer?
The investigate the effects of language on memory
What was the experimental design of Loftus and Palmer’s experiments?
Independent measures
Describe the sample used by Loftus and Palmer in the first experiment
45 participants
5 conditions with 9 participants in each
What was the IV of Loftus and Palmer’s first experiment?
the change of verb when asking speeding question
- contacted
- hit
- bumped
- collided
- smashed
What was the DV of Loftus and Palmer’s first experiment?
the mean speed estimate in mph per condition
What apparatus did Loftus and Palmer use in the first experiment?
7 film segments from the ‘Evergreen Safety Council of the Seattle Police Department’
- lasted between 5 and 30 secs
- safety promotion so speed was known
Outline the procedure of Loftus and Palmer’s first experiment
- Participants were shown 7 film clips and completed a questionnaire after each one (90 mins experiment)
- First asked to give an account of what seen
- Then asked to answer set of questions
- Experimenter interested in speed participants thought the car was going
“About how fast were the cars going when they (verb) each other?” - to counteract order effects, groups presented with different order of films
How was data collected in Loftus and Palmer’s experiments?
Self - report
What were the results for the accuracy of the speed estimates for 4 of the clips in Loftus and Palmer’s first experiment?
20 mph = 37.7
30 mph = 36.2
40 mph = 39.7
40 mph = 36.1
What were the results for the comparison of speed for each verb used in Loftus and Palmer’s first experiment?
contacted = 31.8 hit = 34.0 bumped = 38.1 collided = 39.3 smashed = 40.8
How did Loftus and Palmer explain the results found in their first experiment?
- response bias = responses given due to certain situation
ie. cannot decide between 30 and 40 but the word ‘smashed’ pushes 40 - the language used causes a change in the participants memory of events and the verb used might change their perception
Describe the sample Loftus and Palmer used in their second experiment
150 participants
3 groups - 50 participants in each
What were the IV’s in Loftus and Palmer’s second experiment?
- “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?”
- “About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?”
- no speed question (control condition)
Outline part one of the procedure in Loftus and Palmer’s second experiment?
- participants shown a film clip of a multiple car crash (less than a min, accident less than 4 secs)
- Given a questionnaire straight after viewing:
- describe accident in own words
- answer series of questions with one of the critical speed questions
Outline part two of the procedure in Loftus and Palmer’s second experiment?
- Participants came back a week later
- Questionnaire contained 10 questions
- Contained critical question:
“Did you see any broken glass?” answer yes/no
What were the results of the speed estimates withe the two verbs in Loftus and Palmer’s second experiment?
smashed = 10.46 hit = 8
What were the results for the broken glass question in Loftus and Palmer’s second experiment?
smashed yes / no = 16 / 34
hit yes / no = 7 / 43
control yes / no = 6 / 44
What did Loftus and Palmer conclude about their second experiment?
- the questions asked subsequent to an event can cause a reconstrucyion in memroy after event
- verb can affect the speed witness estimate and if see broken glass
How did Loftus and Palmer explain their results in the second experiment?
- merged info from original scene and info given after will produce an inaccurate memory of event
- inclined to make our memory make sense
ie. if believe it was a higher speed you’ll believe you saw broken glass
What ethics did Loftus and Palmer uphold?
The experiment was conducted ethically. Deception was used (leading questions) but was necessary so demand characteristics didn’t affect experiment
Did Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have internal reliability?
- high;y controlled lab experiment
- standardised so replicable
Did Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have external reliability?
Both samples were large enough
Did Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have internal validity?
- experiment had a high design validity
- knew they were in a study (could have tried to affect the outcome)
Did Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have ecological validity?
- controlled lab experiment
- seeing staged the same as real - life?
Did Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have population validity?
all students - cannot be generalised
Was Loftus and Palmer’s experiment ethnocentric?
No - species - specific behaviour
Yes - only students from upper and middle class
What debates did Loftus and Palmer relate to?
- Psychology as a Science
- Usefulness of Research
- Ethical Issues
How does Loftus and Palmer relate to the debate Psychology as a Science?
- controlled lab experiment that fulfilled scientific criteria
- psychology is a scientific discipline
How does Loftus and Palmer relate to the Usefulness of research debate?
- shows you can distort memories of eyewitness events which has considerable repercussions for the police
- led to how police should question witnesses
- however Loftus and Palmer’s results do not show a big extent of the sample answering wrongly especially with the broken glass - maybe quite difficult to change memory
How does Loftus and Palmer relate to Ethical Issues?
- ethically worthy
- how witnesses should be questioned to get a true picture of what happened
How does Loftus and Palmer link to the cognitive area?
- investigates the cognitive process of memory
- aimed to investigate the reconstructive nature of memory
- shown that info introduced after an event and leading questions would have an affect on eyewitness memory
How does Loftus and Palmer link to the key theme of memory?
- provides empirical evidence into effects of info received after event on person’s memory
- experimental demonstrations of effects of leading questions on eyewitness testimony and how memory is reconstructive
