Psychology - Learning and Cognition: Cognitive Approach

anchoring bias

heavily relying on the first piece of information offered (the anchor) when trying to make decisions

classical conditioning

form of associative learning - argues that when a natural response to a stimulus is paired with a “neutral stimulus,” we connect those two stimuli in our mind so that exposure to the neutral stimulus will lead to a behaviour

operant conditioning

method of learning that occurs through rewards or punishments for behavior, where voluntary behaviors are strengthened or weakened by their consequences

Unconditioned stimulus (UCS)

A stimulus that prompts a natural, unlearned response.

Neutral stimulus (NS)

A stimulus in the environment that does not lead to any natural response.

Conditioned stimulus (CS)

A stimulus that used to be neutral. It became associated with a response because it was connected to an unconditioned stimulus.

Conditioned response (CR)

A response learned by pairing a neutral and an unconditioned stimulus.

Conditioning Phase (pairing)

he NS and the UCS are presented together repeatedly

Unconditioned Response (UCR)

The automatic, natural reaction to the UCS.

aversion therapy

used to help people stop certain habits, treatment based on classical conditioning

Thorndike’s Law of Effect

any behaviour followed by a positive consequence will likely be repeated, while responses followed by unpleasant consequences are less likely to be repeated

operant conditioning

argues behaviours are modified in response to a reward or punishment

positive reinforcement

the presentation of a reward to encourage the continuation of a behaviour

negative reinforcement

the presentation of a reward to encourage the continuation of a behaviour

positive punishment

the presentation of an aversive stimulus to discourage the continuation of a behaviour

negative punishment

taking away a reward/positive stimulus to discourage the continuation of a behaviour

variable interval schedule

although you expect a reward, you don’t know when you will get it

fixed interval schedule

there is a reinforcement after a specific number of responses or a specific amount of time

variable ratio schedule

a reinforcement schedule where a behavior is rewarded after an unpredictable number of responses

fixed ratio schedule

response is reinforced only after a specific, unchanging number of responses have occurred

System 1 thinking

fast, uses minimal effort (efficient way of processing info), prone to biases bc of heuristics, based on decisions on past experience and knowledge (already established schema)

Heuristics

a simple rule applied with little-no thought that quickly generates a probable answer

Strack and Mussweiler (1997)

The study by Fritz Strack and Thomas Mussweiler (1997) aimed to test the influence of anchoring bias on decision-making. The researchers used an opportunity sample of 69 German university students recruited from a university canteen. Participants answered questions on a computer and were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. One group received a low anchor question asking whether Mahatma Gandhi died before or after age 9, while the other received a high anchor question asking whether he died before or after age 140. After answering, participants estimated Gandhi’s actual age at death (78 years). Results showed that the low-anchor group estimated an average age of 50.1 years, while the high-anchor group estimated 66.7 years. This demonstrated that even unrealistic anchor values influenced participants’ judgments, showing the strong effect of anchoring bias on decision-making.

Decoy effect

when choosing between options on a menu, using a less attractive option (decoy) can affect our choices

Confirmation bias

the tendency to focus on and give greater credibility to information that fits with our existing beliefs.

Selective exposure

when people focus on information in their environment that aligns with their beliefs and attitude (e.g. if I’m against veganism, I won’t try a vegan dish)

Selective perception

when people view a situation through the filter of their existing beliefs or expectations (e.g. if a strong student says something wrong, one might assume that it was just risk taking and not that he was unprepared for class)

Selective retention

people are more likely to remember information that is correspondent with their interests, values, and beliefs rather than those that are contrasting.

Lord et al. (1979)

The study by Charles G. Lord, Lee Ross, and Mark R. Lepper (1979) aimed to test the effect of confirmation bias on decision-making. The study was conducted at Stanford University using 48 undergraduate students who already held strong opinions about capital punishment. Participants were asked to evaluate two fictitious studies: one that supported the idea that capital punishment reduces crime, and another that argued it had no measurable effect. The independent variable was the type of study presented, and the dependent variable was participants’ evaluation of the evidence. Results showed that participants rated the study supporting their existing beliefs as more convincing and credible, while rejecting the study that contradicted their views. This demonstrated that people tend to favor information that supports their preexisting beliefs, showing the influence of confirmation bias.

cognitive misers

wanting to use as little energy as we can to think — lazy thinkers

System 2 thinking

slow, deliberate, effortful, logical thinking, less prone to biases and errors, uses conscious reasoning

Wason (1968)

The study by Peter Wason (1968) aimed to investigate how people test logical rules and whether they show bias in reasoning. Participants were shown a set of cards with numbers and colors and asked which cards must be turned over to test the rule: If a card shows an even number on one face, then the opposite face is red. Most participants incorrectly chose cards that matched the wording of the rule (such as "8" and "red"). However, the correct answer was to turn over the "8" card and the non-red (brown) card, because these could prove the rule wrong. Wason found that participants made systematic errors due to matching bias, where people focus on information that matches the rule instead of testing it logically. This study supports the dual-process model, showing that people often rely on fast, automatic thinking (System 1) instead of slower, logical thinking (System 2).

matching bias

in an abstract problem, we tend to be overly influenced by the wording of the question

cognitive dissonance

mental discomfort experienced when a person holds two or more conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes, or when their actions contradict their beliefs

schema

creayed by Jean Piaget —mental representations based on prior experience and knowledge, help us predict what to expect based on what has happened before, organize our knowledge, help in recall, guide behaviour, help us make sense of current experiences

assimilation

the process of integrating new knowledge into existing schemas

disequilibrium

a state of cognitive, emotional, or physical imbalance that occurs when new information or experiences conflict with existing mental frameworks or physical stability

accommodation

when new information can’t be added to an existing schema, so a new one is created

bottom-up processing

data driven, perceptions are built from sensory input without prior knowledge

top-down processing

concept-driven, where the brain uses existing knowledge, expectations, and past experiences to interpret incoming sensory information

scripts

behaviour patterns learned through our interaction with the environment

cognitive scripts

mental road maps that contain the basic actions and behaviours expected in specific situations based on our past experiences

encoding

a process of memory; transferring information from sensory organs to internal mental structures (such as long term memory)

mental representation

a reflection of an object or an event in the mind

retrieval

a process of memory; extracting information from the long-term store when it’s needed

Anderson and Pichert (1978)

The study by Richard C. Anderson and James W. Pichert (1978) aimed to investigate how schemas influence the retrieval of information from long-term memory. The researchers used introductory psychology students who read a story from either a homebuyer or burglar perspective. The story contained 73 ideas, some relevant to each perspective. After a filler task, participants recalled the story from memory. Later, some participants were asked to switch perspectives, while others kept the same perspective, and they recalled the story again without re-reading it. Results showed that participants first recalled more information relevant to their assigned perspective. Those who switched perspectives recalled additional information related to the new perspective that they had not previously remembered. This demonstrated that schemas influence how information is retrieved from memory, not just how it is encoded.

social schemas

mental representations about groups of people - create the foundation for stereotypes

Self schemas

mental representations about ourselves - are generalized representations of ourselves

Schema-Congruent Information

information that matches and fits easily into your existing schemas

Schema-Incongruent Information

information that doesn’t match your existing schemas and creates surprise or confusion

Bartlett (1932)

The study by Frederic Bartlett (1932) aimed to investigate how schemas influence memory encoding and retrieval. Participants were asked to read and later recall a Native American folk story called War of the Ghosts, which contained unfamiliar cultural elements and supernatural ideas that were unusual for Western participants. Participants repeated the story and wrote down what they remembered after different time intervals. Bartlett found that participants changed the story over time to make it more consistent with their own cultural expectations. They simplified the story, omitted unfamiliar details, and added information to make it more logical. This showed that memory is reconstructive and influenced by culturally based schemas.

Bransford & Johnson (1972)

The study by John D. Bransford and Marcia K. Johnson (1972) aimed to investigate how context affects comprehension and memory of text passages. The researchers used an experiment with 50 high school students and an independent measures design. Participants listened to a confusing passage and were asked to recall as many ideas as possible. There were five conditions: no context (heard once), no context (heard twice), context given before the passage, context given after the passage, and partial context. Results showed that participants who received context before hearing the passage had the highest recall, averaging about 8 ideas, while those with no context had the lowest recall, averaging about 3.6–3.8 ideas. The study concluded that providing context before learning helps create schemas that improve encoding and memory recall.

Misleading question

one of the forms that post-event information can take; misleading questions suggest information that is not entirely consistent with what actually happened

Post-event information

information about an event provided (directly or indirectly) after the event already occurred

Recall

a form of retrieval, retrieval of required information from memory in the absence of any prompts

Recognition

a form of retrieval that involves identifying an object as previously seen

Reconstructive memory

the theory that views memory to be an active process of recreation of past events as opposed to a passive process of retrieval

Loftus & Palmer (1974)

The study by Elizabeth Loftus and John C. Palmer (1974) aimed to investigate whether misleading post-event information could alter eyewitness memory. The researchers conducted two experiments using university students in an independent measures design. In Experiment 1, participants watched videos of car accidents and were asked to estimate the speed of the cars using different verbs such as "smashed," "hit," or "contacted." Results showed that participants who heard more intense verbs estimated higher speeds. In Experiment 2, participants were later asked whether they saw broken glass, even though none was present. Participants who heard the word "smashed" were more likely to report seeing broken glass. The study concluded that misleading information after an event can change memory, supporting the idea that memory is reconstructive.

Social Learning Theory

assumes humans can learn by watching models and imitating their behavior

vicarious reinforcement

According to Bandura, by watching the rewards and punishments others receive, we decide whether to imitate their behavior

SLT - Attention

The learner must pay attention to the model to learn a behavior. Certain factors, including its attractiveness, authority, or desirability, may influence whether attention is paid to the model.

SLT - Retention

The observer must be able to remember the behavior that has been observed to produce that behavior immediately or after some time.

SLT - Potential

To reproduce an observed behavior, observers must be physically and/or mentally able to carry it out—that is, they need to have a certain level of self-efficacy.

SLT - Motivation

Learners must want to replicate the behavior that they have observed.  To do this, they must understand the potential outcome if they repeat the behavior – what Bandura called outcome expectancies.

modeling in SLT

involves learning through the observation of other people, which may lead to imitation if the behaviour is to be imitated leads to desirable consequence