Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Cognitive Psychology > terms and models - TERM 2 > Flashcards

terms and models - TERM 2 Flashcards

1
Q

iconic and echoic memory

A

sensory memory
iconic = visual info
echoic = acoustic info

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

working memory

A

storage and manipulation of information

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

flexibility

A

arbitrary connections between items
limited capacity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

multicomponent model of WM

A

CE as homunculus
visuospatial sketchpad, episodic buffer, phonological loop = subvocal rehearsal through articulatory loop

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

assumptions of multicomponent model

A

central executive = flexible allocation of attention

storage systems = domain specific STM

episodic buffer = binds information from different sources

problem = CE is homunculus (not explained)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

word length effect exp

A

recall shorter words easier than longer words as refreshed quicker within 2 seconds

decay if not refreshed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

phonological similarity effect

A

recall is worse when items sound similar

words that are semantically similar have no effect on WM - means that WM coding is phonological (only affected by sound of word not meaning)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

articulatory suppression

A

asked to utter irrelevant word while presented with words to remember

stope subvocal rehearsal

word length effect doesn’t exist with visual presentation - only auditory (if someone reads the words aloud to you)

because words enter straight to phonological store

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

semantic relatedness

A

improves recall when related

interference can strengthen semantic link between items

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

deafness

A

have sign-based phonological store
use manual articulatory rehearsal mechanisms to refresh information in phonological store

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

visuospatial info

A

doesn’t integrate with phonological loop except in the episodic buffer

prediction that visual and spatial stores are separate supported

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

mental rotation task

A

presented with pairs of objects and asked to decide whether they are identical or mirror images of each other by mentally rotating one of the objects to align it with the other

blind participants generated spatial representations just as good

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Klauer and Zhao

A

memorised dots on a grid (spatial) or Chinese characters (visual)

visual interference tasks affected visual task (dots)
spatial interference tasks affected spatial task (character)

= competition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

domain specificity

A

complex span task

predicts lower recall for same-domain (overloading)

combination of verbal and visuospatial materials

Vergauwew - no effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

decay

A

info gets weaker over time = time-based decay

restoration mechanisms = rehearsal and refreshing

forgetting may be due to events rather than time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

focus of attention

A

only representations in the focus of attention are consciously available
capacity = 4+/-1

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

cowans embedded process model

A

WM holds limited info - heightened state of availability

LTM has an activated portion holding relevant information for current cognitive task (small)

WM has narrow focus of attention - excludes irrelevant information

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what limits working memory

A

decay
interference
limited resource

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

interference

A

types=
proactive = older impair new memory
retroactive = new impair old memory

confusion - similar info competes for retrieval

superposition - new information (that looks similar) encoded on top of existing info

overwriting -new info (that sounds similar) replaces stored info

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

limited resource

A

resourced flexibly allocated and in discrete (limited number of items)/continuous (equal spread of resource to all items) units

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

slot models

A

resources are distributed in discrete units
quality not perfect but high

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

flexible resource models

A

distributed flexibility
either SMALL number of `HIGH quality objects
or HIGH number of LOW quality objects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

why does WM capacity vary?

A

executive attention hypothesis - differences in ability to control attention

binding hypothesis - encoding information simultaneously. Capacity relies on number of bindings maintained
more bindings = better WM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

binding hypothesis - DETAIL

A

bindings are temporary links
WM capacity limit = number of bindings maintained, arises from interference

less interference = more complex structural representations

difficult to test against executive function hypothesis as bindings may be maintained by executive attention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

executive attention hypothesis - DETAIL

A

2 systems in brain in which info us used, engaged with:

system1 = quick easy access
system2 = controlled, effortful (ATTENTION CONTROL SYSTEM

we have one executive function that underlies WM and reasoning through maintenance (keep relevant info) and disengagement (getting rid of old info)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

transfer effects

A

improvement on practice task lead to improvements on unpracticed task.

improvements due to strategy based training (task specific e.g mnemonics) or process-based training (transfer to other contexts, complex span tasks)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

functional overlap

A

improvement expected if practice and no practice tasks share underlying processes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

measuring training effects

A

performance at pre-test compared to performance at post-tests
put against active control group (help with placebo)

e.g
n back task
complex span task

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Klingberg training study - WM

A

children with ADHD

training programme with WM tasks

used ravens progressive matrices - test reasoning

big pre-post difference in intensive training for reasoning compared to active control

-uncorrected differences in change are only small (small sample)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Klineberg study - repeated

A

larger sample

training was adaptive (changes as you improve) rather than high v low dose

larger benefit in adaptive training

limitation - experimental baseline was higher before exp

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

near transfer v far transfer

A

near = transfer of skills to a task closely related (same underlying process)

far = transfer of skills to a task not closely related

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Redick et al

A

no significant near or far transfer effects in spatial and verbal reasoning tasks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

limitations of WM training

A

insufficient evidence
lack of active controls
small sample sizes
lack of active controls
lack of theoretical frameworks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

multiple sources of variances framework

A

training affected by intervention specific factors, individual differences

mechanisms of transfer:
enhanced capacity - training increase info held in WM (training leads to broad transfer effects)

enhanced efficiency - more efficient use of training = selective transfer effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

de simoni - mechanisms of transfer study

A

binding task
updating task
visual search task

no evidence for near or far transfer effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

differences in training benefits

A

magnification - people with higher ability gain more - larger improvement seen in younger adults in initial task

compensation - people with lower ability gain more - use different strategies for same outcome in older adults

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

cogmed

A

WM training programme

study:
larger improvements in verbal near transfer tasks
n-back yields larger for far transfer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

lexical characteristic that affect speed of access

A

word length
frequency of words
neighbourhood density - lots of neighbours= slower processing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

spreading activation

A

facilitates predictions of words next appearing via activation of items that are related to acoustic input

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

challenges for lexical access

A

accents
speech is a continuous stream
co-articulation
homonyms (same sound, different meaning)
ambiguous word boundaries (only fools and horses - four candles/fork handles)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

categorical perception

A

ability to distinguish between sounds on a continuum based on voice onset times

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Ericcson study

A

increase in memory span from 7 to 79 digits with 230 hours of brain training

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

bottom up processing

A

process by which speech sounds initially analysed and recognised based on acoustic features

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

top down processing

A

use of linguistic knowledge and contextual clues to facilitate recognition of speech sounds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

mechanics of lexical access

A
  • Gradual activation of the word that matched the sound
  • Activate all words that match same start sound of a word and gradually de-activate words that no longer match sounds
  • Gradually activate the matching word that relates more than other words
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

cohort model

A

bottom up processing

we access words in lexicon via activation of words sharing initial features and gradually de-activate words that stop matching = uniqueness point

= neighbourhood effects (similar words compete), frequency effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

gating experiments

A

shown fragment of words that gradually reveal whole word

asked to guess what the word is

  • aligns with assumptions of cohort model
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

architecture of cohort model

A

speech input > lexical item

facilitatory signals are sent to words that match

inhibitory signals are sent to words that do not match

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

phoneme restoration effect

A

don’t need to hear all the phonemes to understand word

doesn’t align with bottom up processing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

cohort model - 3 stages to word recognition

A

access - acoustic phonetic info mapped

selection - candidate words that mismatch are deselected

integration - semantic, syntactic properties of word are checked against the sentence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

cross modal priming

A

prime word is auditory
target word is visual
shorter RT when words are related

then do the same but with fragments not full words

biasing the sentence had no difference in priming effect - only when given the full word not fragments

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

context in the cohort model

A

Sentence context doesn’t influence the process of lexical access – integration is affected by sentence context

items that match acoustic input but not sentence context are activated - context only relevant when reached uniqueness point

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

priming paradigm

A

what we did in RM
prime word then target word
unrelated/related
uses spreading activation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

TRACE model vs cohort model

A

TRACE emphasises top down processing while cohort minimises its impact

cohort predicts lexical accès is bias to activation of words with shared onsets
TRACE accommodates activation of rhyming competitors

TRACE provides no account on context

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

uniqueness point

A

point at which other candidates have become deactivated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

TRACE model

A

Features activate phonemes that activate words

more matching features = more activation = correct word

radical activation model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

architecture of TRACE

A

hierarchical network of nodes (facilitatory connections): features, phonemes and words = dominant bottom up processing

opposite direction = top down

top down processing increases activation of phonemes and features

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

visual word paradigm

A

eye tracking study
showed words overlapping phonology that don’t start with same onset as speech input, are activated in speech perception

results:
rhyming competitor receives activation (looked at)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

TRACE - top down

A

faster identification of letters in words rather than nonwords

other evidence:
could detect phonemes in nonword that were word like

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

orthography

A

the written word

61
Q

3 different routes to understanding words

A

Written word > activate letters > activate phonemes > activate phonological form > semantics

Written word > active letters > activate orthographic form > activate phonological form > semantics

Written word > active letters >activate orthographic form > semantics

62
Q

dual route cascade model

A

Excitatory and inhibitory connections
Motivate process or stop a process
Adjusts strengths of connections, provides input and assess output

63
Q

dual cascade lexical route

A

Orthographic lexicon > semantics > phonological lexicon

used for irregular words as need semantics to understand meanings

64
Q

dual cascade non lexical route

A

Spelling to sound > phonological lexicon

relationship between letters and sounds = grapheme phoneme correspondence = REGULAR WORDS

dyslexia - deficit in non-lexical route so issues reading non-words

65
Q

graphemes

A

single grapheme = single phoneme
a single phoneme (sound) can be represented by more than one grapheme (letter)

leads to regular (mint) and irregular words (pint)

WRITTEN REPRESENTATION OF PHONEME

66
Q

shallow and deep orthography

A

shallow - transparent language, spelling of words map directly on to its pronunciation

deep - opaque language, spelling of words don’t map directly on to its pronunciation

67
Q

advantages of dual route cascade

A

accounts for orthographic and phonological lexicon

accounts for regular and irregular words

accounts for new or novel words (grapheme-phoneme correspondence)

68
Q

self-teaching hypothesis

A

children de-code words
using existing phonological representations - then develop orthographic representation

69
Q

what is needed to develop orthographic lexicon

A

phonological representations
good verbal language
exposure to printed word

70
Q

learning to read: DRC

A

contextual cues (spoken words) and exposure to print (lots of reading on regular basis)

71
Q

why may some people have difficulty reading?

A

struggle to link graphemes and phonemes

72
Q

what is dyslexia

A

difficulties in accuracy or fluency of reading that are not consistent with persons age, educational level or intellectual abilities

difficulty decoding (phonological processing)
test using phoneme deletion/substituion task

73
Q

lexical retrieval

A

recognising whole words
tested using rapid automatic naming of regular and irregular words

74
Q

verbal STM

A

retaining information

tested using word and digit span

75
Q

phonological awareness

A

being able to drop phonemes from word (e.g. say school without ‘s’)

difficulty appears 1st yr of school but goes away by 6th year

learning how to read separates groups more

dyslexic pp can do the task, just slower with less fluency

76
Q

phonological deficit

A

less robust orthographic lexicon and less fluidity reading
difficult decoding
knock on effects - less motivation to read so limited orthographic lexicon

77
Q

surface dyslexia

A

typical decoding but difficult spelling

phonological awareness unimpaired
irregular word reading impaired

unable to distinguish between homophones
LEXICAL ROUTE IMAPIRED

78
Q

phonological dyselxia

A

deficits in non-lexical route
problems reading non-words

79
Q

helping dyslexia

A

uses contextual cues
e.g. lets go for a … PINT
helps with irregular words
studied by Frith and Snowling - found dyslexia readers use context more for regular words

require stronger semantic processing to compensate for weaker phonological processing

80
Q

bilingualism

A

ability of communicating in two languages and the linguistic knowledge base the enables this ability

81
Q

types of bilingual

A

simultaneous bilingual = more than 1 language from birth

early sequential bilingual = learning second language after first

late sequential bilingual = learning second language after first later in life

82
Q

how we learn bilingualism

A

learning in a natural environment
learning at school
balanced (uses both languages equally)/unbalanced bilingualism

83
Q

commonalities of bilingualism

A

effects of languages on perception (e.g. colour)
mental representation of timelines
expression
theory of mind
executive functions

84
Q

lexicon in bilingualism

A

separate lexicons with separate semantics

or one lexicon (compound system = all representations link to one semantic store subordinative system = second language linked to semantic store of first language)

85
Q

evidence for shared and separate stores

A

1 group who learnt languages in separate context and other in fused context

fused showed less difference in semantic ratings

separate group had separate semantic stores, fused had shared

86
Q

lexicosemantic representation

A

representation differs depending on monolingual or bilingual, context acquired, word type, learning strategy

87
Q

revised hierarchical model

A

L2 (language 2) strongly links to L1 as it is a reference - translating this way is quicker

suggests L1 is linked to semantics more than L2

overtime we build conceptual links

88
Q

Kolers language switch costs

A

pp slower to name images when switching between languages (delay)

languages can be switched on or off and effort is needed to switch = separate lexicons

89
Q

language interdependent lexicon

A

1 lexicon
competition for selection from both languages

90
Q

naming pictures for L2

A

beginners: find semantics and find relevant phonological and orthographic representations from L1

translating from L1 to L2 is slower e.g.
dog > chien SLOWER than chien > dog

prolific: developed semantic links

91
Q

bilingual stroop task

A

incongruent (colour and name is different) and congruent conditions + neutral (*)

significantly slower to respond to colour words compared to * regardless of language of the word or language response

= don’t switch off language and have one lexicon

92
Q

priming effects - bilingualism

A

prime (first word) - L2
target - L1
= quicker RT BECAUSE LINK IS STRONGER L2 > L1

asymmetrical semantic priming = only L2>L1 not L1>L2

counter evidence however

93
Q

bilingual Interactive activation model

A

ONE LEXICON -
activation is bottom up from features to words
- recognition of a word inhibits activation of other words

activation of letters is not language selective
all words that match input are activated

at word level, semantic representations linked to words are activated

high frequency words have higher resting activating level

94
Q

switch costs

A

cross language lexical decision task

pp slower to recognise words in mixed lists because one language is inhibited

95
Q

consequence of having more than one language

A

inhibitory feature of language node (domain general) in BIA model = competition between languages and stronger inhibitory control

96
Q

blumenfield and marian

A

pp with high proficiency more likely to look at cross language competitor then pp with lower proficiency = more lexical connections

  • better inhibition

negative correlation between Simon effects and cross language competitors = high levels were able to inhibit inappropriate responses more easily

97
Q

automaticity

A

tasks performed to be automatic
more specific than skill

98
Q

tasks used to measure automaticity

A

stroop - colour of ink
flanker - respond to central arrow
Simon - push named button
go/ no-go - capacity to not respond

99
Q

stroop task results

A

slower RT to incongruent information suggests automaticity of word interrupts processing of colour

(meant to say colour not word)

100
Q

Durgin arguement

A

when asked to read word aloud, response is quicker as less processing

conflict when visual stimuli (written word) needs to translate into verbal responses (naming colour) = slower

101
Q

stroop task manipulation

A

point to ink that matched word (slower) or ink colour in word (quicker)

longer RT and more errors when. pointing to colour patch = reverse stroop effect

goes against automaticity

102
Q

attentional manipulations

A

directed attention to single letter in stroop task
when asked to name colour of ink, there was no effect/interference = easier

automaticity depends on where and how you pay attention

103
Q

stimulus onset asynchrony, speed of processing

A

words are processed more quickly than ink colour

staggered presentation of word and ink colour =
when word presentation too late, it doesn’t interfere with processing of ink name

104
Q

MacLeod and Dunbar - stroop

A

pp named colours
assigned these colours to shapes

pp asked to name colours when shapes appeared
pp asked to name shapes when appeared in colour

after 2 hrs - colour interfere with naming shapes
after 5 hrs - colours interfere with naming shapes
20 hrs - shapes interfere with naming colours

SUGGESTED AUTOMATICITY CAN BE PRACTICED

105
Q

comparing skils and habits

A

skill is the interplay between automatic and cognitive control processes

habit are automatic and inflexible

106
Q

juggling study

A

juggling under different conditions
skill was maintained
demonstrates skills rather than habits

107
Q

typing as a skill

A

controlled and automatic processing

Logan and crump -
1st condition = asked to type violin and were correct
2nd = showed error
3rd = typed correct but told was incorrect
4th = the opposite

measured using self report and typing speed

108
Q

Logan crump results

A

correct condition = typists correctly stated they were correct

error condition = most were aware they made error

inserted error condition = illusion of authorship (pp believed they made error when they didn’t)

corrected error = pp believed they had not made errors when in fact they had

pp were slower when made real error

109
Q

hierarchical loops - typing skills

A

outer loop - language comrephensions and generation - sensitive to visual feedback
inner loop - translated words into finger movements - motor skills - sensitive to Finger/keyboard interactions

110
Q

YERKES DODSON law - arousal

A

arousal and performance
right level = peak performance
too much arousal = decline
practice = shifts graph to right so need more arousal to decline performance

111
Q

choking under pressure - football

A

experts - best under dual-task conditions but for right foot

right foot condition - attentional focus hinders performance = distraction improves performance

novices - distraction hinders performance

112
Q

attention and performance

A

where u focus attention is important - misallocation of attention can disrupt performance

113
Q

ironic processing

A

thinking hard interferes with the process of doing it
when mental capacity is reduced, it can lead to the opposite intended goal

114
Q

theory of deliberate practice

A

underpinning expertise
focus on reducing errors
effortful and extensive practice
= expert

115
Q

against deliberate practice

A

higher performers have head start

116
Q

two types of bias

A

availability bias - over-estimating frequency of rare events
framing bias - switching decisions based on framing of question

117
Q

rationality

A

set of norms
correspond to reality

118
Q

rationality -probability based on value

A

rational choice is to invest to maximise expected value (what it will have in future)

119
Q

value and utility - decision making

A

future uncertain
asses risks and benefit
increase chance of positive outcome
knowledge to estimate probability of future events

120
Q

risk aversion

A

tendency of people to accept a sure outcome over a riskier outcome

121
Q

expected utility theory

A

we choose option that maximises utility (satisfaction)
value is not utility - utility is how much u enjoy it, value is cost

122
Q

marginal utility

A

as money increases, each addition to ones fortune becomes less important

123
Q

calculating expected utility

A

E = p*U
e= expected utility (change to decimal)
p= probability
u= utility

multiple options =
E = p1U1 + p2U2

124
Q

loss aversion and prospect theory

A

when guaranteed loss, ppl choose option where loss may or may not happen rather than optimal utility

innate motive to avoid loss

125
Q

ecological rationality

A

how you should behave in the environment to survive rather than simply by norms

correspondance more important than coherence

126
Q

heuristics

A

mental shortcuts

can have biases
recognition heuristic = when one option is recognised, it will be given higher value than the one not recognised
works when some knowledge

127
Q

adaptive value

A

value of an action across time
maximises long term expected value - avoid costly mistakes

128
Q

heuristics v rational thinking - dual process theory

A

heuristics = quicker, automatic, effortless, unconscious

129
Q

Wasons 2-4-6 task

A

given sequence of numbers
pp asked to guess rule
pp usually give a rule more abstract than the actual rule
= confirmation bias

positive or negative test strategies

130
Q

biases are not mere errors

A

bias = systematic deviations from right choice

131
Q

testing small group decision making

A

3-6 people
short tasks - decision tasks (wagons - 80% correct in group but 80% wrong individually)
common aims

132
Q

are groups better than individuals?

A

groups performed at the accuracy of second best member of group

process loss = group decisions are worse than individual (madness of crowd)

process gain = group decisions are better than individual (wisdom of crowd)

133
Q

task types - comparing groups

A

intellective v judgement tasks
well-defined (intellective) v ill-defined (judgment)

intellective - time means groups performed as well as best individual on intellective tasks

judgement - best member outperforms groups

when no Clear answer, groups perform at average level of members

134
Q

standards of comparison

A

synergy in group

135
Q

coordination methods

A

how group functions

no discussion = average individual

anonymous, no discussion = Delphi method

best individual chose to answer in group = dictator method

group agreement = consensus method

discuss and revise = dialectic methods

136
Q

evidence for different coordination methods

A

best improvement in dictator, then Delphi, then dialectic
least improvement in consensus

137
Q

individual differences

A

access to cues
ability - memory capacity
willingness to coordinate

138
Q

achieving group consensus

A

by revision (within individual) and weighting (multiple judgements)

139
Q

Gigone and Hastie - lens model

A

framework showing diff factors affecting group cognition

difficult to study as limited access to internal thoughts

140
Q

wisdom crowds

A

influences: uncorrelated errors and no systematic bias (mean closer to true value)

correlated errors - due to limited information, shared biases and group conformity (REDUCES wisdom)

141
Q

groupthink

A

polarisation in group decision making

high cohesive groups exhibit premature consensus seeking = poor decision making

142
Q

criticisms of groupthink

A

not a distinct phenomenon
lack of evidence for all constructs

143
Q

helping wisdom of crowds

A

diversity in group - longer in complex discussion

144
Q

argumentative theory of reasoning

A

reasoning is aimed to persuade not find the truth
able to refine beliefs through debates

145
Q

collective intelligence

A

ability of a group to perform a wide variety of tasks

not limited to specific tasks

146
Q

correlations of c factor in intelligence

A

not correlated with individual intelligence

correlated with:
average social sensitivity
equality in distribution of turn-taking
females in group
diversity (cognitive too)

147
Q

study for collective intelligence

A

272 pp
34 groups in each condition (online or face-to-face)

say emotion related to pair of eyes
intelligence measured (ravens advanced progressive matrices test)

found predictors of group intelligence:
social sensitivity
amount and distribution of communication

148
Q

WM v LTM

A

WM =
active
relevant to goal
immediate use
limited capacity

LTM =
remote
everything learned
permanent (ish)
unlimited

Cognitive Psychology (4 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions