Cognitive Psych Exam 4

family resemblance

• members of a category resemble one another

• feature-based

• characteristic features define categories

prototype theory

identify a “best example” - average of all known examples

draw inferences from said prototype

graded membership

some members are better than others

• this depends on the resemblance to the prototype

• often partial, not complete

sentence verification task

is this sentence true or false?

• ex:

  • people live in houses.

  • tacos are sandwiches.

  • the ocean is soup

• response time is slower for less prototypical items

  • ex: penguins are birds.

production task

• free response

• name as many examples as possible

  • ex: birds

• more prototypical items named earlier + more often

rating tasks

on a scale of 1 to 7, how BLANK is this:

basic-level categorization

• a “natural” level of organization - not specific or general

• conversational and reasoning level

• usually a single word; more complex = using a phrase

basic-level categories

some category members are privileged

• privileged → these are the ones closest to the prototype, meaning they’re more likely to be named/identified faster when asked

some types of categories are also privileged

exemplars

• conceptual knowledge is likely represented by prototypes

• some category members are “better” than others

• prototypical members are privileged

• specific and concrete

• prototypes are general and often abstract

exemplar-based reasoning

reasoning that draws on specific category members for inference

exemplars and prototypes

• both have advantages

  • prototypes are economical and quick

  • exemplars are precise and informative

  • both can be modified by context

  • usage of both of these is individual-specific

categorizing via resemblance difficulties

• for most concepts, definitions aren’t available

• you can rely on a mix of prototypes and exemplars

• typicality plays a large role in thinking

  • how much a particular item is representative of its kind

  • higher typicality = more privileged

typicality vs. categorization

• judgement of category membership depends on judgement of typicality

• rating task - how “even” or “odd” is this number?

• category membership and typicality were independent

• “deep” features matter more than current properties

• “deep” features depend on essential properties, tuned to a category

• natural vs. manmade differences

explanatory theories

• more holistic approach

• concepts are composed of “theories”

• “theories” are:

  • less precise

  • less elaborate

  • provide a knowledge base

  • allows for incorporating new knowledge

inferences based on theories

• categorizing is important

  • apply existing knowledge

  • incorporating new knowledge

• inferences are guided by typicality

• inferences are guided by broader sets of beliefs

different profiles/different concepts

• people may think about different concepts in different ways

  • differing intrinsic beliefs

  • ex: natural vs. manmade objects (aka artifacts)

  • goal-driven categories

  • rational categories

  • event categories

  • various beliefs influence categorization

goal-driven categories

defined by purpose

relational categories

defined by relationship

• ex: “rivalry” or “companion”

event categories

defined by events

• ex: “dates” or “shopping trips”

proposition

smallest units of knowledge

distributed processing

• in the propositional network model:

  • ideas are represented with local representations

    • information is encoded in a few identifiable nodes

• connectionist networks rely on distributed representations

  • no one node represents content; content is not stored in one place

  • concepts are a pattern of simultaneous activity across many nodes

    • the same nodes will participate in other patterns, too

parallel distributed processing

PDP

• system handling information where many steps happen at once

• needed when information has distributed representation

• strength of nodes in a network determines efficient activation

language

translation of ideas into communication

• follows well-defined patterns

sentences

• sequence of words following the rules of syntax

• expresses an intended meaning by a speaker

• composed of phrases, which are composed of words

morphemes

• smallest language unit that carries meaning

• two kinds:

  • content/free - carriers of meaning

  • function/bound - specify relations among words

phonemes

unit of a sound that distinguishes one word from another

• ex: “beg” vs. “peg”

• not speaker’s accent or emphasis when talking

voicing

production of speech

• rapid opening and slowing of vocal folds

• produces a buzzing sensation

manner of production

how airflow is obstructed to produce speech sound

place of articulation

where airflow is obstructed to produce speech sound

speech segmentation

“slicing” speech stream from words into phonemes

coarticulation

preceding/following sounds affect current sound production

• not uttering one sound at a time

• ex: “puh” = p + a

phonemic restoration effect

“fill in the gaps” of missing phonemes based on probability

categorical perception

speech sounds are heard as members of a category

• between-category differences are easy to detect

  • ex: '[toh] vs. [pa]

• within-category differences are difficult to detect

  • ex: [pa] vs. [ba]

sound

morphemes and words

• sequence of phonemes

orthography

morphemes and words

• sequence of letters

semantic representation

morphemes and words

• what it means

phonological representation

morphemes and words

• composition of phonemes

syntax

rules governing word combinations when forming phrases/sentences

meaningful =/= correct

phrase-structure rules

• what elements must be within a phrase

• what sequence those must be placed

prescriptive rules

• how something is supposed to be; what’s proper

  • ex: ain’t vs. isn’t

descriptive rules

description of regularities in a pattern of observations

how phrase-structure rules actually work

parsing

• divide input into appropriate elements (words into phrases)

• meant to help identify syntax

garden-path sentences

• temporary ambiguity within a sentence

• understanding changes after the full sentence

extralinguistic context

physical and social setting of the encounter

• “put the apple on the towel into the box”

prosody

speech intonation/pattern of pauses

• sarcasm

pragmatics

knowledge of how language is normally used

• Grice’s Maxims of Conversations

  • quantity

  • quality

  • relevance

  • manner

Broca’s Area

• left frontal lobe area

• speech production

• damage causes nonfluent aphasia

  • unable to speak/write

Wernicke’s Area

• temporal lobe, parietal adjacent

• speech perception/understanding

• damage causes fluent aphasia

  • speech is meaningless

  • cannot understand speech

overregulation errors

related to the process of language learning

• principles that are too broad

• young children make these mistakes when learning grammatical rules

  • ex: go → goed; instead of went

semantic bootstrapping

related to the process of language learning

• figuring out syntax from semantic relationships

linguistic relativity

“Whorfian Hypothesis”

• your language forces certain modes of though

• dues to structure/vocabulary

• evidence:

  • color perception

  • directions (absolute vs. relative)

  • events (active vs passive.)

• alternative hypothesis:

  • rather than a direct relationship, language guides attention to shape thinking

• experimental follow-up

  • ask participants to attend to relevant information

  • language effects go away w/ instruction

chronometric studies

“time-measuring”

• studies that measure how much time a task takes

image-scanning procedures

• step 1: memorize the map

• step 2: form an image of the island; point their “mind’s eye” at a specific landmark

• step 3: imagine a black speck moving from Landmark A to Landmark B

• step 4: press a button when the speck “arrived” at Landmark B

• people scan at a constant rate

• response times directly proportional to distance, even when “zooming in” or “zooming out” is required

mental rotation task

determines the difference between shape pairs

• rotates? mirrored? completely different?

• response times are influenced by how different the shape pairs are

• this happens in both 2D and 3D

• more brain activity needed for greater rotation difference

• activation is in the visual cortex

descriptions

things that focus on the unique/prominent features

depictions

things that focus on the size/position of features; you’re looking at the “bigger picture” here

demand character

cues within an experiment that signal how a participant is “supposed” to respond

• imagery is not a simulation; it’s not being caused by this

aphantasia

lacking the ability for visualization

eidetic imagery

• a person can retain long-lasting and detail visual images that can be scrutinized as if they were physically present

• “photographic memory”

percepts

internal representations of the world from perceptions; organized depictions

• they’re similar to pictures, but distinct

• show what a stimulus looks like directly

• organized depictions → unambiguous compared to literal pictures

image files

the “recipe” or set of instructions for constructing an active image

verbal label

represents memorization of a description, not the image itself

• this is what’s most relevant to language

• this would make storage simpler

dual coding

information has both the word and the picture

schematic knowledge

factual information about experience, location, etc. that gives you an expectation on what you’ll see

• this is what visual memory is heavily influenced by

boundary extension

tendency to remember pictures as being less “zoomed in” than actuality

binocular rivalry

• when input to one eye cannot be integrated with input in the other eye

  • one is competing with the other

• individuals tend to be aware of only one eye’s input at a time

• visualization influences this pattern/relationship

neglect

people fail to orientate, report, or respond to stimuli located in their visual field

Segal/Fusella

• small findings, but consistent

  • forming visual images interferes with seeing

  • forming auditory images interferes with hearing

  • reduction in performance and an increase in false errors when there was this contrast in methods

Farah

• further study of Segal/Fusella

  • perception and image being related to one another helps with processing the information faster

  • binocular rivalry

cui

• participants self-rated how vivid their imagery was

• during fMRI scan, participants visualized a specific scene (someone climbing up stairs)

• high self-reported vividness corresponds with higher activation in the visual cortex

Francis Galton

• collected self-report data through introspection

• people varied widely, even if it was the same stimulus they were seeing

  • some highly vivid, some no imagery at all

  • “visualizers” and “non-visualizers”

• “translation step” → significantly different enough for a difference in what they were reporting

  • possibly everyone has the same image, but described it differently

generativity

the capacity to create endless combinations of fundamental units

concepts

mental representations of categories or ideas

typicality

degree to which an item is representative of a category (high or low prototypicality)

• this doesn’t equal categorization

typicality effect

ability to judge highly prototypical objects more rapidly

categorization

process of grouping items in categories based on shared characteristics

collins/quillian model

hierarchical structure linking concepts through nodes

• conceptual knowledge

• how much time needed to confirm semantic facts

• data incomplete

• resemblance effect is missing

• association links and nodes

• general information linked to higher-level concepts

  • ex: birds + feathers, not robins + feathers

language learning process

stages and errors in children’s language acquisition

visual imagery

• relies on vision areas

• damage to vision areas won’t interfere with spatial ability, and vice versa

• color, shape, and spatial positions would need this type of imagery

• scanning tasks could use either

spatial imagery

• complex navigation needs this type of imagery

• scanning tasks could use either