cognitive area

OCR, the 20 core studies

COGNITIVE AREA

loftus and palmer- what is a leading question

• question phrased in a way that makes one response more likely than the other

• when asking a leading question participants may answer inaccurately

What are mental schemas and how do they impact memory recall? loftus

• An organized package of information that stores our knowledge about the world

• Theres one for each aspect of our lives and contains stereotypes and explanations we’ve acquired during our lives and the information is unwillingly used

• Mental schemas can aid or impair memory recall the stereotypes and explanations help us. This automatic process can make memory better or inaccurate.

Experiment 1 aim loftus

• To investigate how information provided to a witness after an event will influence their memory of the same event

Sample and features e1 loftus

• 45 participants (9 in each 5 conditions)

• Students at university of Washington

• All from USA

Method E1 loftus

• All 45 participants were shown 7 film clips of traffic accidents (5-30 seconds long)

• After each clip they were asked to describe an account of the accident they had just seen

• They were also given 10 specific questions in a questionnaire including one critical question “how fast were the cars going when they **** each other”

• There were 5 conditions (9 participants per condition) and each condition a different verb was used to fill the blank and critical question was randomly positioned: smashed, hit, bumped, collided and contacted

• The DV was the speed estimations in MPH

Results for experiment 1- mean speed estimates

·         Smashed- 40.5 mph

·         Collided- 39.3 mph

·         Bumped 38.1 mph

·         Hit 34.0 mph

·         Contacted 31.8 mph

·         Significant results suggesting memory can be influenced, changing interpretations of the event based on the verb used.

Conclusions Experiment 1 loftus and palmer

• Results may be due to distortion in the memory of the participant as a result of the verb used

• The results could be due to response bias

Experiment 2 aim loftus

• To investigate if participants memories had really been distorted by the verb used or whether it was a result of response bias.

• Done to provide additional insight into the origin of the speed estimate

Sample loftus E2

• 150 participants (50 in each condition)

• Students from university of Washington USA

method E2 loftus

• Participants were each shown 1 minute film clip containing a 4 second scene of multiple car accidents

• They were then asked a set of questions including the critical question “how fast were the cars going when they **** each other?”

• Blank was filled with smashed or hit (condition 1 or 2) or no question about speed was asked (condition 3)- control group

• ONE WEEK LATER (longitudinal) participants arrived and were asked questions about the clip they saw a week ago including one critical question

• The question was “did you see any broken glass” randomly positioned

• THERE WAS NO BROKEN GLASS

Results of experiment 2 loftus

• In the SMASHED yes- 16/50 no- 34/50

• In the HIT yes- 7/50 no- 43/50

• In the CONTROL GROUP yes- 6/50 no- 44/50  

What were the conclusions drawn?

• The results were not due to response bias but the use of the verb in the leading question altered the memory of events

• Memory is determined by 2 sources

  1. Information gathered from witnessing an event

  2. external information supplied after the event (leading questions)

• Overtime the information  from both sources may be combined in such a way that we are unable to tell from which source the specific detail is recalled. We only have 1 memory.

2.      Grant

• SENSORY All information enters the system from the environment through the senses and to the sensory store then stays there for a brief period of time before passing onto the short term memory- capacity-vast, duration- 0.25 to 0.5 of a second

• SHORT TERM this short term encodes accurate and visual information capacity- 7-+2 (magic number 7), duration- 30 seconds

• LONG TERM the multi store model of memory suggests the LTM has a potentially limitless capacity and duration but it is very difficult and is not impossible to prove this. Its encoding is semantic- that is meaning and understanding of something

• Memories are stored in the LTM are meaningful

• Tuing suggests that some aspects of environment during learning are stores/encoded with the to-be remembered item and become part of the memory trace (similar to what grant suggested)

Background- Godden and Baddeley 1975

Method- gave underwater divers a list of words to learn either on land or underwater

Result- the learning context was found to impact recall. They found that learning was better when context to present.

	Learnt on beach	Learnt underwater
Recall on beach	13.5	8.5
Recall underwater	8.6	11.4

Conclusion- we recall better in the same environment that we encoded the information- grant investigated noise not just environment.

Aim of grant

To show that environmental context can have a more positive affect on performance in a meaningful memory test when the test takes place in the same environment in which the to be remembered material was originally studied (matched) than when the test occurred in a different environment (mismatched

IVS and DVS grant

• IVS- studied in silence- tested in silence, studied in noisy – tested in noisy, studied in silent- tested in noisy, studied in noisy- tested in silent

• DVS- participants performance on the short answer test and a multiple choice test.

sample for grant

• 39 members of a psychology class (17-56, 23.4 was mean age)

• 17 females and 23 males

• Opportunity sampling was used as 8 pych students (serving as experiment) recruited 5 acquaintances (participants) from lea state university USA.

• 1 participants results were omitted.

method for grant

• Participants were asked to read the article once and could highlight and underline things if they wished. They were INFORMED their comprehension would be tested with both a short answer test and a multiple choice test.

• All participants wore headphone while they read those in the silent condition were told they wouldn’t hear anything but those in noisy condition said they would hear moderately loud background noise (ignore it)- was cafeteria at lunch time- movement of chairs, dishes no audible sentences.

• Reading times were recorded by experimenters of the article on psycho-immunology- an interesting, understandable and unfamiliar topic. (reading times not controlled for)

• 2 min break given to minimize memory recall from short term memory

• short answer test followed by multiple choice- then debriefed

• 30 mins long

controls in grant

• 2 min break to minimize recall from short term memory

• short answer then multiple choice to ensure memory was from article not multiple choice

• all participants wore headphones

results of short answer test grant

	Mean S	Sd S	Mean N	Sd N
Silent	6.7	1.22	5.4	1.9
Noisy	4.6	1.17	6.2	2.2

results of multiple choice grant

	Mean S	Sd S	Mean N	Sd N
Silent	14.3	1.58	12.7	1.64
Noisy	12.7	1.64	14.3	1.77

Score is out of 16

conclusions for grant

• There was no overall independent affect of noise on performance- therefore noise does not impact students capacity to study

• Context dependent memory has an effect on retrieval in both tests, suggesting students should study in exam conditions (quiet)

• In both testing conditions, studying and testing in the same environment (matched) was more beneficial.

3.      Moray

Background, what is attention and the different types

• Attention- mental process requires mental resources to direct and focus mental processes- mental processes are limited (more attention one task takes the less available for performing others)

• Divided attention- paying attention to more than one thing at one time, this is limited this impacts how much we can process at once.

• Selective attention- focusing on specific objects and filtering out others. Ability to attend to one source of information whilst ignoring ongoing messages around us.

previous research

cherry

• Used shadowing for his study of attention in listening (selective attention)- found participants who shadowed a message presented to one ear were ignorant of the content of a message simultaneously presented to the other ear.

• Moray interested in what kinds of stimuli might lead to situation where some features of rejected message break through the attentional barrier.

Aim moray

• The amount of information recognized in rejected message

• The affect of hearing ones own name in unattended message

• The effect of instructions to identify a specific target in the rejected message

Moray sample

• Undergraduates of both sexes from Oxford, England

• No participant number stated for experiment 1

• 12 participants in experiment 2

• 2 groups of 14 people used in experiment 3

Method experiment 1 Moray

IVs- dichotic listening test, recognition test

DVs- number of words correctly recognized in rejected message

• Before they began they practised 4 passages of prose

• They were then told in the experiment shadow (read out loud) the prose passages, while this was going on in the other ear a word list was read 35 times.

• As a control they were both read by a male voice

• Then 30 sec break before they were given a recognition test which had words from the passages, word list and some that were in neither as another control

• It was repeated measures design

   

results for experiment 1

• there was no trace material from the rejected message being recognized

• the difference between the new material and that from shadowed message was significant at the 1% level

• the 30 second delay was unlikely to have caused the rejected material to be lost because words from early in the shadowed message were recognised

• these findings support those found by Cherry

method of experiment 2 Moray

IV- whether or not the instructions were prefixed by the participants own name  

DV- number of effective instructions

• told they will hear two different spoken word pieces of audio in each ear at the same time

• instructed to shadow one of the passages- told they would be scored on how accurately they do this

• the instruction to the participant is given before it begins

• passages read at 130 words in steady monotone voice male

• the instruction would be to change ears

Results for experiment 2 moray

	Affective- proceed bystanders	Non- affective- not proceed by name
No* of times presented	39	36
No* of time heard	20	4

• Most participants ignored the instructions that presented in passages and said they thought this was an attempt to distract them

• The mean numbers of instructions heard when presented in rejected message was calculated and difference between ‘names’ and ‘no names’ was significant

• Only 4/20 occasions in which the ‘names’ instructions were heard did the participants actually make a change to other messages.

Method of experiment 3 moray

• IV- digits were inserted into both messages or only one, Whether participants had to answer questions about the shadowed message or remember all the numbers they could.

• DV- number of digits correctly reported

• Participants were required to shadow 1 of 2 simultaneously presented messages

• In some of the messages digits were placed towards the end of the message- these were sometimes present in both messages and sometimes only present in one message

• Position of number was varied and controlled with no numbers also used

One group were told they would be asked questions about the content of the shadowed message, the other was instructed to remember as many numbers as they could, this was an independent measures design

results experiment 3 moray

• Not significant

• The difference between number of digits reported and diversion of peoples attention was not linked after a test was done to check

• Numbers were compared within passages

conclusion 1 for moray

1. when participant directs their attention to the reception of a message from one ear and rejects the message from the other almost none of verbal content in rejected message is able to penetrate. R= mean recognition score from rejected message was 1.9/7

conclusion 2 moray

2. a short list of simple words presents as rejected message shows no trace of being remembered when presented many times R= there was no trace material from rejected message

conclusion 3 moray

3. subjectively ‘important’ messages such as a persons name can penetrate the block- the participant will hear instruction if presented with own name R= when name projected the effective instructions were heard 20 times

conclusion for moray 4

4. while not impossible it is difficult to make ‘neutral’ material important enough to break through the block in dichotic listening R= when name not presented the effective instructions were only heard 4 times

1.      Simons and chabris

Background

What is change blindness

• Where individuals often detect large changes to objects and scenes from one view to the next, especially if objects are not the centre of interest.

• Individuals only perceive and remember objects and details that receive focused attention- can’t pay attention to everything as there is so much to take in

What is inattentional blindness

• We don’t perceive something we have actually seen because our attention was not focused on it.

Niesser previous research

• 1979

• Continuous task- participants watch a basketball game on a transcript video and were asked to count the number of passes and some were just asked to watch the video

• Unexpected event- woman with umbrella walks through 30 seconds in for 4 seconds

• Results- 6/28 saw woman when counting passes

• 28/28 saw the woman when just watching the video.

Aim of simons and chabris

• They wanted to build on previous research from nessier to investigate the nature of unintentional blindness and they had 2 questions.

• To what degree are the details of our visual world perceived and represented?

• What role does attention play in this prosses?

Sample and features simon and chabris

• 228 participants- referred to as observers

• 36 discorded (192 remain) due to guessing the aim or the observer reported losing count of passes.

• All undergraduate students from Harvard university

• Sampling technique- self selected- rewarded with a candy bar

Method- features simon and chabris

• lab

• independent measures design

• IV- gorilla/ umbrella, transparent/opaque, follow black/white, easy (count passes)/ hard (passes and bounces)

• DV- who noticed unexpected event

procedure of simons and chabris

• 21 experiments, participants who were tested individually and gave informed consent in advance

• Before they watched the clip- told they would be watching 2 teams of 3 players playing basketball and should pay attention to black or white team, easy or hard. INFORMED CONSENT

• Each participant watched a 75 second video of players moving around in a random fashion In front left doors throwing a ball around

• Ball was orange and was thrown around in a standardized order

• Players also dribbled ball, waved arms and made other movements

• After 44-48 seconds of action either a Gorilla walks in thumps chest and walks off or woman with umbrella walks through- unexpected event lasts 5 seconds (videos filmed with a video camera and edited using a digital editing system.)

what happened after the video in simons and charbris

• Immediately after the video clip, observers were asked to write down the number of passes they counted

• They were asked 3 questions- ‘while you were counting, did you notice anything unusual in the video?’, ‘did you notice anything other than 6 players?’ ‘did you see a gorilla or a woman carrying a umbrella walk across the screen?’

• If participants answered yes they were asked to give details and the rest of the questions were snipped.

• They were also asked if they had ever taken part in a similar experiment, heard of experiment or heard of the phenomenon

• If they answered yes, data was discorded

• Participants were then DEBREIFED and rewatched video if they wished

• Procedure lasted around 5-10 minutes

why would data be discarded? simons and chabris

• 36 were discarded if the observer already knew about the phenomenon- controls for demand characteristics

• Or if the observer reported losing count of the passes- controls for participant variables

• Passes were incompletely/inaccurately recorded- controls for participants variables

• Observers answer could not be clearly interpreted or observers total pass count was >3 standard deviations away from the mean of the other observers In that condition- controls for participant variables

Findings/ results simon and chabris

• 54% out of 192 participants noticed unexpected event (46% didn’t)

• 64% noticed unexpected event In easy

• 45% noticed it in hard

• Umbrella woman was noticed more than the gorilla (65% vs 44%)

• Gorilla noticed more by those attending black team (58% in black and only 27% in white)

Conclusions simon and chabris

• Individuals have a sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events (noticeable event)

• Individuals fail to notice an ongoing and highly salient (important) but unexpected event if they are engaged in a primary monitoring task.

• Inattentional blindness is a common perpetual phenomenon

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

• Objects can pass through the attentional focus and still not be ‘seen’ if they are not specifically being attended to

THERE IS NO CONCIOUS PERCEPTION WITHOUT ATTENTION

strengths of cognitive area

• Uses a scientific method (laboratory experiments)

• Research has high relevance to real life and we can create applications

• Standardized- not time locked

weaknesses of cognitive area

• Reductionist- ignores complexity of human functioning

• Laboratory- low ecological validity

• Relies on inference as scientific equipment cant be used (minds cant be read)- social desirability bias