Psychology - The Cognitive Approach
- Created by: Kittus
- Created on: 27-10-19 18:24
View mindmap
- Cognitive Approach
- Assumptions
- Computer Analogy
- The idea that the human brain works like a computer
- Input -> PROCESS -> Output
- Process
- Actively use cognitive process of perception, attention and memory
- Memory
- We remember in 2 ways and they are the most fragile
- Primary Information - the first pieces of info retained
- Recency - the last pieces of info retained
- Multi Store Model
- Th Idea that our memory is like a ware house with different 'departments' of information
- Short Term memory in the front, long term in the back
- Our memories are reconstructed
- We remember in 2 ways and they are the most fragile
- 2 types of knowledge
- Declarative Knowledge (information you know)
- Procedural Knowledge (Things you know how to do)
- The idea that the human brain works like a computer
- Schemas
- Organised packets of information for every event / role / process and relationship
- Affects how we understand things and how we act
- Schemas are built through experience however don't always represent reality as they are built through social exchanges i.e. conversations with others and the media.
- Event Schemas - known as scripts
- Role Schemas - tell us about roles (burglar / nurse)
- Internal Mental Process
- Humans are basically information processors
- Cognitive processes include: perception, attention, memory and language
- They all work together to help us understand our surroundings
- Example: We see a dog. We know it's a dog..,
- We have perceived its features, searched through our memories for a 'match' with that we have already seen/ experienced, then name it with our knowledge of language
- Cognitive processes include: perception, attention, memory and language
- Humans are basically information processors
- Computer Analogy
- Relationship Formation
- Schema Theory (Relationship Schema)
- The idea we have set scripts, criteria and expectations for our relationships and partners
- At the beginning our schemas are unreliable as it's not built from personal experience, rather what you learn from media and friends
- Develop with time and experience
- Negative points
- Accepting abuse can be part of your relationship schema
- If x person did something and it was a sign of cheating, if z person does it - can be paranoid when unnecessary
- Halo Effect - Dion et al (1972)
- Attractive people = attractive personality traits
- This theory is seen in Disney films
- Interestingly pretty females were seen as less inteligent
- Someone's attractiveness can be a factor in if you get in a relationship with them and what you expect from them
- Study found teachers gave cut 'attractive' infants more attention
- Perception of Self and Others
- Self confidence, self esteem and self worth effect who you form a relationship with and how
- Perception isn't always realistic
- Bias and false interpretations
- Influential Factors
- Bullying
- Religion
- Culture / social norms
- Influential Figures
- Other people / relationships / company
- Support / accomplishments
- Media
- Physical Appearance
- Matching Hypothesis - Walster (1960's)
- The idea that people with equal levels of attractiveness are happier in their relationships
- A 1/10 with a 1/10 will be just as happy as a 10/10 with a 10/10
- 4/5 difference rating out of 10 would be unhappy
- 8/10 with a 10/10 would still be quite happy
- A 1/10 with a 1/10 will be just as happy as a 10/10 with a 10/10
- 8/10 with a 10/10 would still be quite happy
- Why this could be wrong
- Perception of beauty
- Other factors; money, hobbies, mental health
- Social Exchange Theory
- Idea of weighing the positives and negatives of a relationship with someone
- See if it's 'worth' being with someone
- Stay if benefits outweigh the costs
- Idea of weighing the positives and negatives of a relationship with someone
- Schema Theory (Relationship Schema)
- Classic Evidence (Loftus and Palmer, 1974)
- Methodology
- 2 Experiments
- 150 participants
- 45 participants
- Independent Groups Design
- Conducted in Laboratory
- Students
- 2 Experiments
- Procedures
- Experiment 1
- Answers recorded in mph
- Critical Changes: Hit, smashes, collided, bumped and contacted
- Details: Shown 7 clips of traffic accidents. Questionnaire after. Asked series of questions too
- Groups: 5 groups of 9
- "About how fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?"
- Experiment 2
- looks at if leading question bias is a response or if it alters the memory
- Critical changes: smash and hit
- Groups: 3 groups of 50
- Control group were not exposed to any question
- PART 1 - Shown a film of a multiple car crash, accident lasted less than 4 sec, asked set of questions including critical question
- Critical Q: How fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?
- PART 2 - Return week later, asked further questions, no broken glass in film, thought car was faster = imagine broken glass
- Critical Q: Did you see any broken glass?
- Experiment 1
- Findings
- Experiment 1
- "contacted" estimated the lowest speed
- "smashed" higher speed
- Mean speed estimate for each group
- Experiment 2
- P1
- Same conclusion as E1
- P 2
- "Smashed" group were more than twice as likely to say yes
- "Smashed" = 16 yes / 34 no , "hit" = 7 yes / 43 no , control = 6 yes / 44 no
- P1
- Experiment 1
- Conclusions
- Critical word influences or bias persons response
- The memory representation is altered, critical word changes the memory so perception of events is effected
- Findings from 2 suggest leading questions does not cause results bias but altered memory
- Carmichael et al(1932)
- Ethics
- Deceived
- Told it was an EWT experiment
- Not told it focused on leading questions
- Study wouldn't of worked if they knew
- No valid consent
- Psychological Harm
- People could already have trauma, didn't make sure everyone was in the right place psychologically
- Could of caused psych. trauma
- Arguable that it wasn't too traumatizing and worse is depicted in the media
- Deceived
- Social Implications
- workplace
- law
- Education
- Families
- Health
- Effectiveness
- The Sample (-)
- US
- College Students
- Controlled Experiment Positive
- The Sample (-)
- US
- College Students
- Experimental control
- Lab
- The Sample (-)
- Controlled Experiment Negative
- Artifficial Results
- Not a personal experience - only a simulation
- Ecological Validity is low
- The Sample (-)
- Methodology
- Therapies
- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
- Aaron Beck & The Cognitive Triad
- He noticed 'The Cognitive Triad' while treating depressed patients and developed CBT from it
- The Cognitive Triad
- Where depressed people had unrealistic thoughts about:
- The Self
- The World
- The Future
- Tackle depression and pessimistic views by breaking a point in the cycle
- CBT Compnents
- 1) The Cognitive Element - identifying negative thoughts
- 2) The Behavioral Element - reality testing during session or as homework
- Dysfunctional Thoughts Diary
- Keep records of events leading to any unpleasant emotion
- Record the automatic negative thought
- Rate how much they believe in this thought (1-100)
- Write rational responses (could it be...)
- Rate belief in the rational response (1-100)
- Re-rate beliefs in the automatic thought (1-100)
- Rate belief in the rational response (1-100)
- Write rational responses (could it be...)
- Rate how much they believe in this thought (1-100)
- Cognitive Re-structuring
- Reveal thought patterns to therapist
- Identify and change negative thought patterns
- 'Therapy during therapy'
- Taught to challenge automatic dysfunctional thoughts
- Replace with constructive thoughts
- Try new ways of reacting / behaving
- Pleasant Activity Scheduling
- Nice thing a day
- Activation technique - helps clients change behavior
- Moving away from negative thinking and maladaptive behavior
- Keep record of the experience
- Strengths and Weaknesses
- Weaknesses
- Costly
- Commitment (time)
- Long process
- Lying
- Need rational agent with good level of cognition
- Communication
- Over dependent
- Slow results
- Doesn't work for everyone
- Strengths
- No medication or addiction
- Impartial
- Long term solution
- Positive consiquences
- Non invasive
- Individual in control
- Weaknesses
- Ethical Issues
- Patient Blame
- What is rational?
- Effectiveness
- Research Support (+)
- Therapist Competence
- Individual Differences
- Empowerment
- Aaron Beck & The Cognitive Triad
- Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT)
- Ellis (1950's)
- Way to identify negative thoughts is to use the ABCDE Model
- A - Activating Event
- B - Belief
- C - Consequences
- E - Effects of Disputing
- D - Disputing
- Logical Disputing
- Empirical Disputing
- Pragmatic Disputing
- Way to identify negative thoughts is to use the ABCDE Model
- Musturbatory Thinking
- Thinking certain ideas MUST be true for happiness
- I MUST be approved by people I find important
- I MUST do very well or I'm worthless
- Others MUST give me what I need or they are rotten
- People MUST live up to my expectations
- Unconditional Positive Regard
- Strengths and Weaknesses
- Weaknesses
- Costly
- Commitment (time)
- Long process
- Lying
- Need rational agent with good level of cognition
- Communication
- Over dependent
- Slow results
- Doesn't work for everyone
- Strengths
- No medication or addiction
- Impartial
- Long term solution
- Positive consiquences
- Non invasive
- Individual in control
- Weaknesses
- Ethical Issues
- Client Distress
- Over dependence
- Forceful Therapy
- Patient Blame
- Effectiveness
- Not suitable for all
- Appropriateness
- Research Evidence
- Irrational Environments
- Ellis (1950's)
- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
- Evaluation
- Scientific Approach (+)
- Mediational Process (+)
- Important Contributions (+)
- Determinist Approach (-)
- Nature and Nurture (-)
- Mechanistic Approach (-)
- Assumptions
Comments
No comments have yet been made