Cognitive Psychology - Year 2 OCR Component 2
- Created by: erose20
- Created on: 10-12-19 16:15
View mindmap
- Cognitive Psychology
- Moray
- Aim
- The first experiment aimed to test Cherry's theory known as 'shadowing'
- Experiment 2 and 3 aimed to look at factors that can affect attention
- Methodology
- Lab experiment
- Experiment 1 and 2 were Repeated Measures Design
- Experiment 3 was an Independent Measures Design
- 12p's in experiment 2, 2 groups of 14 in experiment 3
- Dont know how many p's were in experiment 1
- Procedure
- Experiment 1
- Participants had a list of words read into one ear passage into the other - they has to shadow the passage
- They were given another list of words and had to identify which they had heard
- Experiment 2
- Participants shadowed 10 short passages.In the unattended ear they would include '*name* you may stop now"
- In other conditions they wouldnt use their name,and just say the instruction
- Experiment 3
- Participants shadowed 1 of 2 passages.
- Either one or both of the passages had numbers inserted throughout. The P's had to recall the numbers they heard.
- Participants shadowed 1 of 2 passages.
- Experiment 1
- Results
- Experiment 1
- Mean number of words recalled: 4.6 Shadowed, 1.9 Rejected, 2.6 Similar words
- Significant difference in recognised words between shadowed prose and unattended message
- Experiment 2
- Most p's ignored the instructions in the shadowed message as they thought they were trying to put them off
- Name included: 20 out of 39 messages were heard. No Name: 4 out of 36 messages were heard
- Experiment 3
- No significant difference between these two groups
- Numbers were not important enough to break the attention barrier
- Experiment 1
- Conclusions
- Almost no verbal content from the rejected message can get though the attention block
- Names can get through the block in attended and unattended message
- Evaluation
- Lab experiment controlled and standardised
- Not generalisable, is representative
- Lacks Ecological Validity
- High Internal Validity
- Aim
- Previous Research
- Neisser et al
- 2 basketball teams passing a ball, 1 black 1 white. P's told to focus on 1 team
- During the video a woman holding an open umbrella walked across the screenn
- 6 out of 28 students saw the woman
- Becklen and Cervone
- Similar to Neisser but included another condition to test inattentional amnesia
- They stopped the video as soon as the woman left the screen
- This showed no significant difference
- Neisser et al
- Simons and Chabris
- Aim
- To investigate influences on inattentional blindness
- Methodology
- Lab Experiment
- Independent measures
- 16 individual condition
- 228 participants - all undergrad students
- Controls (Videos)
- 4 video tapes, 75 seconds long. 2 teams of 3 players, wearing either black or white
- Around 46 seconds, either a gorilla or a woman with an open umbrella walked across the screen
- In the control condition, 12 extra p's watched an opaque video with the gorilla.
- It walked from the right to the left side of the screen and the gorilla stopped to beat its chest in the middle
- In the transparent video the 2 teams and unexpected event were filmed separately and the videos were layered on top of each other
- In the opaque condition, all 3 things were filmed at the same time
- Procedure
- P's were told to focus on black or white team
- Easy Condition: they counted how many passes were made. Hard Condition: they counted how many bounce and aerial passes were made
- They were then asked 3 questions
- Did you notice anything unusual in the video?
- Did you notice anything other than the 6 players
- Did you see a woman with an umbrella / a gorilla
- If the p answered yes to any of these, the remaining questions were skipped
- If the participant had already heard of the previous studies, their data was discarded
- The p's could re-watch the video if they wished and were debriefed
- P's were told to focus on black or white team
- Resuts
- 54% noticed the unexpected event overall and 46% failed to notice
- More participants noticed the unexpected event in the opaque condition
- The umbrella was noticed more
- In the gorilla condition, they were more likely to see it when watching the black team
- Conclusions
- The level of blindness depends on the difficulty of the task
- More likely to notice events if the events are similar to the team they are paying attention to
- Objects can pass through without being noticed
- Evaluation
- Lab experiment - high control
- But couldn't control how much attention the p's payed
- High external reliability
- Ethnocentricism
- Lacks ecological validity
- High internal validity
- Aim
- The Debates
- Nature/ Nurture
- Internationalist we are born with thought processes but our environment can affect these
- Reductionist/ Holism
- Reductionist as it only focuses on cognitive
- Individual/ Situational
- Situational as our thought processes are influenced by our environment
- Psychology as a Science
- IS scientific as it mainly uses scientific methods to test
- Free will/ Deteminism
- Deterministic as we don't choose to have negative thoughts
- Nature/ Nurture
- Moray
Comments
No comments have yet been made