OCR Psychology - Cognitive area

How many experiments did Loftus and Palmer carry out?

2

What experimental design did Loftus and Palmer use?

Independent measures design

What was the IV in Loftus and Palmer’s study

Critical verb used - hit, contacted, bumped, collided + smashed

What was the DV in Loftus and Palmer’s study?

The participants’ speed estimates

How many participants were in Loftus and Palmer’s 1st experiment?

45 - split into 5 groups of 9

How many film clips did the participants watch in Loftus and Palmer’s study?

7

How was Loftus and Palmer’s procedure standardised?

Participants filled out the same questionnaire + they all watched the same clips

Which verb gave the highest speed estimate in Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Smashed

Which verb gave the lowest speed estimate in Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Contacted

What was the average difference between the speed estimates in Loftus and Palmer’s study?

9mph

What was one conclusion of Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Leading questions can reconstruct memory

How many participants were in Loftus and Palmer’s 2nd experiment?

150 students, 3 groups of 50

What was the IV in Loftus and Palmer’s 2nd experiment?

Critical verb - smashed + hit

What happened a week after Loftus and Palmer’s 2nd experiment?

Without seeing the clip again, all participants were asked if they had seen broken glass

How many participants reported seeing broken glass in Loftus and Palmer’s 2nd experiment?

7/50 in the “hit” condition + 6/50 in the control group

What was the aim of Loftus and Palmer’s study?

To see if changing the verb in a question affects participants’ speed estimates

What was the aim of Grant et al.’s study?

To see if recall and recognition is better in the same context where information is learnt

What experimental design was used in Grant et al.’s study?

Independent measures design

What were the independent variables in Grant et al.’s study?

Whether the participants learnt and were tested in mis-matching / matching conditions

What were the conditions in Grant et al.’s study?

silent-silent, silent-noisy, noisy-noisy, noisy-silent

What was the sample in Grant et al.’s study?

39 Americans, aged 17-56, mixture of males + females

What sampling method was used in Grant et al.’s study?

Opportunity sampling, 8 psychology students were the experimenters and they recruited 5 people

What made Grant et al.’s procedure standardised?

Each participant wore headphones, noisy conditions listened to background noise from a cafeteria, read the same psychoimmunology article + the recall questions were asked first

Which questions tested recall in Grant et al.’s study?

10 short answer questions

Which questions tested recognition in Grant et al.’s study?

16 multiple choice questions (4 possible choices)

What was the average score of those in the silent-silent condition in Grant et al.’s study?(recognition)

14.3

What was the average score of those in the noisy-silent condition in Grant et al.’s study? (recognition)

12.7

What was the average score of those in the silent-silent condition in Grant et al.’s study? (recall)

6.7

What was the average score for those in the noisy-silent condition in Grant et al.’s study? (recall)

4.6

What is an application from Grant et al.’s study?

Students are more likely to perform better if they revise in matched contexts to test conditions

What is a key principle of the cognitive area?

Internal mental processes such as memory and attention affect behaviour

What is the computer analogy?

Humans input information through our senses and output information through behaviour

How many experiments did Moray carry out?

3

What is the cocktail party effect?

The ability to focus attention on a single talker who says your name in the midst of a busy environment

What was the aim of Moray’s 1st experiment?

To see whether we remember more from a shadowed message and if we “block” rejected information that we are not paying attention to

Who were the participants in Moray’s 1st study?

Undergraduate students

What were the IVs in Moray’s 1st study?

A shadowed message + a rejected message

What was the DV in Moray’s 1st study?

The number of words recognised correctly

What was the procedure in Moray’s 1st study?

A short list of simple words was repeated 35 times (rejected message) + a prose passage was played in the other ear (shadowed messaged)

What experimental design did Moray use in the 1st study?

Repeated measures design

How many words could participants remember from the shadowed message in Moray’s study?

6

How many words could participants remember from the rejected message in Moray’s study?

2

What was the sample in Moray’s 2nd experiment?

12 participants, 6 in each condition

How was the procedure standardised in Moray’s 2nd experiment?

All participants shadowed 10 short passages, they were told to pay attention to a certain ear + in some conditions their names were used

What was the IV in Moray’s 2nd experiment?

Whether or not instructions included their name or not

What was the DV in Moray’s 2nd experiment?

The number of affective instructions recognised

What is an affective instruction?

An instruction which has personally relevant information (e.g a name)

What was the sample in Moray’s 3rd experiment?

28, two groups of 14

What was the experimental design used in Moray’s 3rd experiment?

Independent measures design

What was the IV in Moray’s 3rd experiment?

Whether the participants would change their focus with instructions or not

What was the DV in Moray’s 3rd experiment?

If the participants noticed the numbers within the messages

What is one conclusion of Moray’s study?

Personal relevant information (e.g a name) can penetrate the attentional block set up when focusing on different auditory information

What is inattentional blindness?

Failing to see an event / object in our visual field as we focus on other things

What was the aim of Simon and Chabris’ study?

To see whether people will notice and unexpected event if they are paying attention to something else

What was the sample in Simon and Chabris’ study?

228 American undergraduate students (only 192 used)

What experimental design did Simon and Chabris use?

Independent measures design

How many conditions were in Simon and Chabris’ study?

16

What are the IVs in Simon and Chabris’ study?

transparent + umbrella woman, transparent + gorilla, opaque + umbrella woman, opaque + gorilla

What were the tasks in Simon and Chabris’ study?

white + easy, white + hard, black + easy, black + hard

What the DV in Simon and Chabris’ study?

The number of participants who noticed the unexpected event

How was Simon and Chabris’ procedure standardised?

A standardised script was used, each clip was 75s, between 44-48 the unexpected event occurred + set of questions asked after the videos

What percentage of participants noticed the unexpected event in Simon and Chabris’ study?

54%

What percentage of participants did not notice the unexpected event in Simon and Chabris’ study?

46%

What percentage of participants noticed the unexpected event in the opaque condition in Simon and Chabris’ study?

67%

What percentage of participants noticed the unexpected event in the opaque hard task in Simon and Chabris’ study?

62%

Which unexpected event was noticed more in Simon and Chabris’ study?

The umbrella woman, 65%

What is one conclusion of Simon and Chabris’ study?

The level of inattentional blindness depends on the difficulty of the primary task

What are strengths of the Cognitive area?

scientific controlled experiments + adds to understanding of human behaviour

What are weaknesses of the Cognitive area?

human mind ≠ computer + reductionist

What is an application of Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Police officers should avoid using leading questions when interviewing witnesses + all eyewitness accounts should be supported by corroborating evidence

What is an application of Moray’s study?

Teachers can gain students’ attention by calling their names

What is an application of Simon and Chabris’ study?

Driver awareness lessons to warn people to look out for hazards (unexpected events)