Cognition I COPY Flashcards

Question

PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES:

Answer 1

PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES: 1. Means-end analysis 2. Hierarchical organization 3. Automaticity 4. Analogy 5. Restructuring

Answer 2

PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES: * Means-end analysis: “What is the difference between my current state and my goal?” and “what means do I have for reducing this difference?” * Example: I want to go to the store to buy new shoes. **so compare current state to goal and figuring out how to get there\***

Answer 3

=Break the problem down into subroutines; e.g., locate my car keys, get driving directions to the store, drive to the store, select new shoes, purchase new shoes. even if not aware of it, some part of you doing this heirarchical thing, pick out shoes, try on teh shoes buy the shoes the step by step

Answer 4

Automaticity: Some subroutines can be engaged without any mental effort; e.g., driving a well-learned route to the shoe store; frees cognitive resources for other more demanding subroutines. for this you are not actually thinking about these things

Answer 5

Identify similarities between this problem and a previously solved problem and try adapting that solution some features that make it similar enough can spark ideas to deal with problem dealign with now

Answer 6

Rethink your understanding of the problem to highlight sub-goals or identify new analogies. restructuring- analogous problem you know how solve restructuring, you restructure

Answer 7

Nobel Prize Sidebar: Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002 for work with Amos Tversky that integrated insights on human judgment and decision making under uncertainty into economic science. Judgment = steps used to evaluate evidence and draw conclusions. Can be helped or hindered by judgment heuristics: shortcuts that enhance efficiency but occasionally lead to errors; examples: The availability heuristic: We tend to judge how often something occurs based on how easily examples of the thing come to mind. E.g., You are a psychiatrist treating a patient for depression and you want to estimate the likelihood that your patient will attempt suicide; because many examples of depressed patients attempting suicide come easily to mind, you predict that it is likely that your patient will attempt suicide. Problems: Your personal experience may not be representative of the world as a whole; sometimes examples of common events may not come to mind easily, or vice versa.

Answer 8

The availability heuristic: We tend to judge how often something occurs based on how easily examples of the thing come to mind. E.g., You are a psychiatrist treating a patient for depression and you want to estimate the likelihood that your patient will attempt suicide; because many examples of depressed patients attempting suicide come easily to mind, you predict that it is likely that your patient will attempt suicide. Problems: Your personal experience may not be representative of the world as a whole; sometimes examples of common events may not come to mind easily, or vice versa.

Answer 9

When asked to categorize individuals or objects, we tend to rely on whether they resemble our idea of the category as a whole. E.g., Your mother has made an appointment with a new doctor whom you do not know and asks to assess the doctor’s competence using information available online; because the doctor went to a good school, dresses professionally, runs an office with state-of-the-art equipment, and has three good patient reviews, you tell your mother that this is a “good doctor.” Problems: Sometimes categories are heterogeneous; many “good doctors” did not go to prestigious schools and vice versa.

Answer 10

Emphasizes two types of thinking that contribute to judgment; **aka intuition vs. reasoning.** - System 1/fast thinking: fast, effortless, and efficient; relies on heuristics and associations. - System 2/slow thinking: slow, laborious, but less prone to error; relies on deliberation, logic, and rule- driven reasoning.

Answer 11

heuristics= shortcuts\*

Answer 12

availability- highly highly influenced by how miuch things come to mind, preson likely to overestime how common moles become cancerous becuase so many examples come to mind of moles that were cancerous and became a problem; **but psychologiclaly if we can think of a lot of examples of something right off the bat we think it is common** representativeness heuristic- asked to make judgments about an individual or thing rely on category part of our mind, if we wanted to judge whether a lawyer is excellent or not we may be swayed by the diploma on is wall if they went to Yale law school; we automatically think better than others and a great lawyer, but this can lead us astray even though it allows us to think of things quicker

Answer 13

* Confirmation bias/belief perseverance * hindsight bias * Faulty logic * Loss aversion * Affective forecasting * Overconfidence * Functional fixedness * A self-serving bias * fundamental attribution error

Answer 14

We are slow to revise our existing beliefs → we tend to quickly accept evidence that is consistent with them and reject evidence that contradicts them. Confirmation bias, the tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs, both in the search for evidence and in the interpretation of evidence. definition= you already are focused on an issue, so you look for confirmation that it is true Confirmation bias has also been found to be stronger for emotionally charged topics, such as mistreatment of children.

Answer 15

The hindsight bias (also called “creeping determinism”) names a tendency for people to erroneously inflate (in retrospect) their own ability to have been able to predict an event, based upon already observed outcomes that could not have been accurately predicted in advance. • Example: One of many couples who have engaged in minor conflicts gets a divorce. An acquaintance says: “I knew it all along; they were going to get divorced!”

Answer 16

When asked to evaluate a syllogism—i.e., whether a conclusion follows logically from a set of premises—people tend to focus erroneously on whether the conclusion seems plausible, ignoring the premises. premise-a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion. "if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true"

Answer 17

People tend to weight losses more strongly than gains, so they usually take steps to minimize losses, even if those steps are risky.

Answer 18

People can usually predict the valence (good or bad) of their emotional response to an event but they tend to overestimate the duration and magnitude of their responses. new job’s happiness doesn;t last forever ppl good at predicting if something will make you happy or sad, but bad at predicting how long it will last, feeling doesnt last

Answer 19

People tend to overrate their confidence in their judgments relative to the objective accuracy of those judgments. • The “Lake Wobegon” better-than-average effect.

Answer 20

Functional fixedness: people tend to have trouble imagining novel uses for familiar objects.

Answer 21

A self-serving bias serves **to elevate or maintain an individual’s self-esteem:** * Positive events are generally attributed to an individual’s own personal qualities (otherwise known as dispositional attribution). * Negative events are attributed to external factors (otherwise known as situational attribution); relates to the idea of locus of control. See Behavioral II: Chapter 2: Self and Identity). * Example: A win at a trivia contest is attributed to a group’s natural intelligence; a loss is attributed to bad questions from the questioner. * **For depressed individuals, the self-serving bias may become inverted, wherein negative events are attributed to an individual’s own character and positive events to external/situational factors.**

Answer 22

The fundamental attribution error refers to the tendency of individuals to attribute the **behaviors of others primarily to dispositional (internal) factors intrinsic to another person’s character or personality.** •Examples: “Megan made the soccer team over me; coach must really like her more.” (Whereas perhaps in truth Megan is just a better player.) “Anouk hasn’t greeted me in the morning this week; she’s just an unpleasant person!” (Whereas perhaps in truth Anouk has suffered a personal loss.) (See also: Behavioral Sciences Study Outlines Part 2: Chapter 3 [Interacting with and Understanding Others]: Attribution Theory).

Answer 23

The actor-observer bias (also called the actor-observer asymmetry) refers to the tendency of people to judge (in their role as “observers”) the behavior of others (in the others’ roles as “actors”) **by different standards than one judges one’s own behaviors. Tends to be amplified in cases of negative outcomes.** * **Under actor-observer bias, individuals tend to attribute their own behaviors to situational (external) factors and the behavior of others to dispositional (internal) factors.** * Example: “Nathan and I just argued a ton over that news item about the Middle East; he’s just a jerk about it, but I’m feeling stressed and tired—that’s why I argued so much!”

Answer 24

1. Self-serving bias: bias toward internal locus of control in our own behavior and outcomes. 2. Fundamental attribution error: bias toward internal locus of control in others’ behavior and outcomes. 3. Actor-observer bias: self-serving bias for oneself; fundamental attribution error for others.

Answer 25

we judge ppl by different standards than we judge ourselves we tend to think it is because they are inherently jerks; when we know we are acting badly we are more liekly to say "But I am feelign stressed and tired that is why I am being a jerk"

Answer 26

A- answer, only if physcian never sees symptom so cannot interept it. Confirmation bias, the tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs, both in the search for evidence and in the interpretation of evidence. Confirmation bias has also been found to be stronger for emotionally charged topics, such as mistreatment of children. Parental concealment is a social interaction factor, related to impression management, rather than a cognitive processing factor. B. if in their mind and traied much more liekly to be like those bruises look suspcious. Confirmation bias, the tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs, both in the search for evidence and in the interpretation of evidence. Confirmation bias is clearly relevant to the aspects of a case to which a physician pays attention. C. The diagnosis can be affected by confirmation bias in both the search for evidence of child abuse and the interpretation of evidence.- huge grey area, baby with broken leg, room for physicians bias to creep in D. Confirmation bias has been found to be stronger for emotionally charged topics, such as mistreatment of children--\> also comes into play if acting super weird parents feel very sensitive and weird adn they can also lead ot clinicians feeling suspicious about things \* so those can all rule out can contribtue to confirmation bias definition= you already are focused on an issue, so you look for confirmation that it is true

Answer 27

A base rate fallacy is committed when a person judges that an outcome will occur without considering prior knowledge of the probability that it will occur. They focus on other information that isn't relevant instead. Imagine that I show you a bag of 250 M&Ms with equal numbers of 5 different colors. Then, I ask you what the probability is I will pick a green one while my eyes are closed? I also tell you that green M&Ms are my favorite and yesterday I picked out twice as many green M&Ms than red ones. If you ignored the fact that there are 50 of each color, and instead focused on the fact that I picked out twice as many green M&Ms than red yesterday, you have commited a base rate fallacy because what I did yesterday is irrelevant information.

Answer 28

a specific type of halo effect bias; people tend to rate attractively individuals more favorable for personality traits and characteristics than they do those who are less attractive

Answer 29

the tendency to believe that the world is fair and people get what they deserve; when bad things happen to others, it is the result of their actions or their failure to act, and when good things happen to us, it is because we deserve it “You got what you deserve”. “you got what was coming to you”. The “Just World Hypothesis” - Predictable result as a consequence for our actions. Noble actions performed/good deeds by an individual are rewarded, while evil acts/deeds are always punished. o Ex: our college Tom does a noble-act (helps an old lady cross the road. We would expect a predictable appropriate consequence such as a reward. o Ex: Tom performs an evil act, he gets punished. o Suggests there is some kind of special force, “cosmic justice” at play. **o Reason people think in this way because it helps individuals rationalize their or others good/fortune or misfortune. Also allows people to feel like they can influence their world – easier to engage in goal oriented behavior and plan for the future. Ex. if I go to school I will be rewarded in life. If I work hard, I will get what I want. If I do the right thing, I will get rewarded.** o However, just-world doesn’t always hold true – people are not always rewarded for their actions and punished for their evil deeds. Ex. Using this just-world hypothesis we may blame people in poverty for being poor because they deserve it. Or victims of domestic violence for being victims because they deserved it.

Answer 30

- when one trait of a person or thing is used to make an overal judgement of that person or thing - when piece of information oversahdows all else The halo effect is tendency people have inherently good/bad natures, rather than looking at individual characteristics. Ex. the physical attractiveness stereotype – believe attractive people have more positive personality traits. Ex. Jim, our initial overall impression is in the middle. His accounting rating/skills is very high, sales are negative, and leadership is moderately good. o Halo effect – as if someone has a halo over their head. If we have an overall positive first impression, we start to analyze all their skills based on our overall first impression rather than just skills. They get an overall boost in each of their skills because of our impression. Ex: Now imagine, he has overall very good impression, even though he has the same actual skillset. We would perceive that the person is much better at other skills not demonstrated. Regardless of evidence, we may perceive he’s actually pretty good at sales instead of below average, We may say he is extraordinary in leadership and accounting instead of just good. o Halo effect often happens with celebrities, and greater attractiveness. § Ex; we think attractive people are kind, good leaders, hospitable without actual evidence.

Answer 31

drawing conclusions /inferences about specific individuals based on aggregate data on the larger group. making inferences about individuals on information abotu groups that are not to be trusted Ex. of course he likes soccer, after all its the most popular sport in the world! The university of chicago produces the finest scholars in the country, so john who got his phd hter emust be one of the finest scholars in teh country" ex. if we find a national "aggregate: that republcians vote more frequently than dems that does not guarantee that every indiviudal republican we meet is going to vote and every individual that we meet is not going to vote

Answer 32

the logical fallacy occurs when someone draws a conclusion based on just a small sample size. in other words, the conclusion is supported by insufficient evidence. to generalize from a few/single observation"my friend has been eating only burgers, pizza, and fries for 10 years adn he has no health issues. Therefore, fast food is not unhealthy for you."there is no drug problem at our school I talked to 30 ppl from my class and none of them do drugs"

Answer 33

an attempt to defend a generalization of a certain group by exlcuding any controversial examples for not being "no scotsman puts sugar on his porridge. "but my uncle is a scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge" "but no true scotsman puts sugar on his porridge"

Answer 34

this fallacy occurs when the source cited as a reason to believe a claim is either: 1. not a reliable authority actually 2. a reliable authority on some subjects, but no the one in question. 3. or is asserting a claim that is quite controversial even among relaible authorities in the field ex. "I read in national eqniquere that acteress Jamie Lee curtis is really a man, or Dr. X is a nobel prize winning physicist, and he says that drining lemonAade can cure cancer"

Answer 35

the enumeration of favorable circumstances or counting the hits and forgetting the misses. ex. a state boasts of hte presidents it has produced but is silent about its serial killers

Answer 36

inferences about groups based on info about indivduals that is not to be trusted, cannot go from individual to group assumption ex. the majority of people in Country X cherish democratic ideals, conclusion: country x is a democratic society or every ingredient in this drink tastes great therefore the drink tastes great when ingredients are choclate cake, lemonate etc not a sound statement

Answer 37

a relationship that appaers to exist at face value , but that disappears when you control for another variable

Answer 38

assuming that an event must have been the cause of a later event b/c it happened earlierex. the rooster crows always before the sun rises, therfore the crowing rooster causes the sun to rise

Answer 39

Now imagine someone who we think is overall very poor. Even if baseline skills are same, we perceive them to all be lower **– the devil effect/reverse halo effect.** Can carry over into how we see other attributes about the person. Happens if overall negative impression or if one attribute is very negative. o Ex: From being good at accounting we can perceive them as being mediocre, we can perceive someone as being awful at sales (even though they are great). We can see them as having terrible leadership (instead of being moderately good). The reduction of our perception depends on the situation. • Ex: Halo effect: Teacher sees kid who is good can’t do no wrong. Reverse-halo/devil effect: Kid who is wrong that can do no right

Answer 40

o Reason people think in this way because it helps individuals rationalize their or others good/fortune or misfortune. Also allows people to feel like they can influence their world – easier to engage in goal oriented behavior and plan for the future. Ex. if I go to school I will be rewarded in life. If I work hard, I will get what I want. If I do the right thing, I will get rewarded. o However, just-world doesn’t always hold true – people are not always rewarded for their actions and punished for their evil deeds. Ex. Using this just-world hypothesis we may blame people in poverty for being poor because they deserve it. Or victims of domestic violence for being victims because they deserved it.

Answer 41

When the “just world hypothesis” is threatened (which occurs on a daily basis, we say “the world is not fair”....we see evil deeds being rewarded and good deeds being punished), we need to mentally make sense of them to keep just world hypothesis in tact– we use rational techniques or irrational techniques o Rational Techniques: 1. Accept reality 2. Prevent or correct injustice – with charities, sign a petition or changes to legal system o Irrational techniques can also be used 1. Denial of the situation – refuse to accept the situation 2. Reinterpreting the events – change our interpretation of the outcome, the cause, and the character of the victim. • Ex. If a Victim of violence that was hurt, they were really hurt, we can reinterpret outcome (wasn’t that bad, it was a trip, it could have happened to anyone), reinterpret cause (victim was working in a bad neighborhood), or reinterpret character of victim (I always thought she was a good human being but I now realize she probably isn’t, she was hanging around with the wrong people, etc.) 3. Attribution Theory - JWH overemphasizes/attribute people’s actions to personal/dispositional/internal factors and underemphasise situational factors that are at play. Ex; poor person = personal miss-failings instead of recognizing the complex situational/environmental causes.

Answer 42

Ethnocentric: judging someone else’s culture from the position of your own culture o Viewing our own culture to be superior to that of others o Can lead to cultural bias and prejudice o Using one’s own cultural standards, such as norms and values, to make judgements about another culture.

Answer 43

the practice of assessing a culture by its own standards rather than viewing it through the lens of one’s own culture. Judge and understand another culture from within their culture – o No absolute right or wrong, but we have different cultures which are themselves valid. o Important to consider: Can falter if someone uses it to conduct activities that violate rights of humans no matter what culture they’re from. o “Refers to an awareness of differences across cultures in norms, values, and other elements of culture”

Answer 44

Xenocentrism: judging another culture as superior to one’s own culture

Cognition I COPY Flashcards

(68 cards)