Week 1 - Introduction and Overview

Question 1

describe, with examples, four different methodological approaches to studying cognition

Answer 1

Cognitive Psychology - behavioural data from controlled studies of normal subjects (eg: memory testing for words)

Cognitive Neuropsychology - Studies of individual brain damaged patients (eg: brain damaged patient with short but not long term memory effects)

Cognitive Neuroscience - Maps brain functioning during behavioural tasks (eg: Using tech to map activity in brain)

Computational Cognitive Science - develops computational models of cognition to imitate results from experiments (eg: AI and robotics)

Question 2

describe, with examples, top-down and bottom-up processing

Answer 2

Top down processing: stimulus processing that is influenced by factors of individuals past experiences and expectations (eg; reading something as you it to be but on second look has errors in it)

Bottom up processing: stimulus processing that is directly influenced by environmental stimuli (eg: stimulus > direct response)

Question 3

identify some of the problems with introspection as a method of studying cognition. How do reaction times and errors help us test models of information processing?

Answer 3

Introspection - reflecting and reporting our inner sensations and experiences (what we think and feel). Based on subjective experience.

Problems: may not be a true indicator of how things really are, The McGurk effect: what we see overrides what we hear, synaesthesia- 2 or more sense are linked, not science based and is subjective.

Reaction times: can provide insight into how information is processed

Question 4

discuss, with examples, how association and dissociation logic can be used in cognitive neuropsychology to understand cognitive processing.

Answer 4

Association - If I’m good at one thing I’ll be good at another

Disassociation - occurs when a patient performs normally on one task but is impaired in another task.

Double disassociation - two patients with same brain injury, one performs fine in task A, but not in task b. Other patient has opposite pattern. Reduces risk of errors.