Cognitive Approach Flashcards
(9 cards)
Describe the Cognitive Assumption of ‘The Computer Analogy.’
Cognitive psychologists often compare the human brain with a *computer. How we take information (input), store it (process) and then recall it (output).
During the process stage we actively use the internal mental processes of perception, attention, memory, schemata and language. Cognitive psychologists compare our brains to the hardware of a computer and the cognitive processes with the software of a computer.
For example, the multi-store model of memory proposed by Atkinson + Shiffron
Describe the Cognitive Assumption of ‘Internal Mental Processes.’
According to Cognitive Psychology, humans can be viewed as information processors, where essential cognitive processes enable us to understand the world around us.
The main Internal Mental Processes are:
- Perception: Taking in/perceiving sensory information from environment.
- Attention: The information taking possession of the mind.
- Memory: The storage/retrieval of information.
- Schema: Metal packet of information that allow us to make sense of the environmental information.
- Language: How we communicate that information.
Describe the Cognitive Assumption of ‘Schemata.’
Schemata are said to be organised packets of information that are created through assimilation from our environment, and can be refined through accommodation, allowing us to make sense of the world around us. tehe. Schemata do not always necessarily represent reality as they are built through personal experience (including through social exchanges - such as social media and opinions of others).
For example, a schema of a high school, for most people, would include: strict teachers, exams, hard work, perhaps negative feelings, ect. Alternately however, to a child who has never been to a high school, their schema may consist of media-influenced information, such as: ‘clichés,’ or freedom.
Apply the assumptions of the cognitive approach to explain two human behaviours.
Describe the Methodology of Loftus & Palmer’s study; ‘Reconstruction of automobile destruction.’
This study consists of two experiments conducted in a laboratory using an independent groups design. Each experiment consisted of a different number of participants: Experiment 1 consisted of 45 student participants, while experiment 2 consisted of 150 student participants.
The independent variable, of both experiments, was the verb used in the questioning, and the dependant variables were both the estimate of the speed (experiment 1) and whether the participants recalled broken glass (experiment 2).
Describe the Procedure of Loftus & Palmer’s study; ‘Reconstruction of automobile destruction.’
Experiment 1:
- Participants were shown seven films of different traffic accidents.
- After each clip, participants were asked to answer a questionnaire in which they were asked to give an account of what they had just seen.
- They were then asked more specific questions, including one critical question: ‘How fast were the cars going when they __ each other?’
- The verb used in the question varied between groups (5 groups of 9 participants): ‘hit,’ ‘collided,’ ‘bumped,’ ‘contacted’ and ‘smashed.’
- The participants mean speed estimate was then recorded (in mph).
Experiment 2:
- Participants were shown a film of a multiple car crash.
- Then, they were also asked a set of questions including the critical question about speed.
- The verb once again varied between groups (this time, 3 groups of 50), this time being ‘hit’ and ‘smashed.’ The other 50 were used as a control group and were not asked this question.
- 1 week later, the participants were asked further questions about the accident, the critical question being ‘Did you see any broken glass?’ There was no broken glass in the video clip.
Describe the Findings of Loftus & Palmer’s study; ‘Reconstruction of automobile destruction.’
Experiment 1:
- The group given the word ‘smashed’ estimated the highest speed, 40.8 mph.
- The group given the word ‘collided’ estimated on average 39.3 mph.
- The group given the word ‘bumped’ estimated on average 38.1 mph.
- The group given the word ‘hit’ estimated on average 34 mph.
- The group given the word ‘contacted’ estimated the lowest speed, 31.8 mph.
Experiment 2:
- Of the group who were asked the speed of the ‘smash,’ 16 reported seeing glass; 7 reported seeing none.
- Of the group who were asked the speed of the ‘hit,’ 7 reported seeing glass; 43 reported seeing none.
- Of the control group, 6 reported seeing glass; 44 reported seeing none.
Describe the Conclusions of Loftus & Palmer’s Study; ‘Reconstruction of automobile destruction.’
This study creates the conclusion that the form of a question may affect the witnesses’ answer to that question.
Loftus & Palmer proposed two possible reasons for this: response-bias factors (meaning that the critical words used in the question created a bias in a person’s response) or that the persons memory representation is altered (meaning that the critical word changes a persons perception of that memory).
However, the findings from Experiment 2 suggest that leading questions alters a person’s memory.
Blurt Cognitive Debate Essay Plan (sophie, ignore this one haha)
**Introduction: **
Applying this contemporary debate subject to psychology, this could be linked to the Cognitive approach and the assumption of Internal Mental Processes (IMPs). According to Cognitive Psychology, humans can be viewed as information processors, where essential cognitive processes enable us to understand the world around us. In context of eye-witness testimonies (EWTs), the IMPs involved in witnessing a crime are: perception - allowing the witness to perceive the crime happening, attention - in which the scene would take possession of the individual’s mind, memory - through which the event would be stored in the brain, the use of schemata - in which the brain utilises previously stored stimuli to understand what they are witnessing, and lastly, language - through which the witness would communicate the event they have witnessed.
P1:
Firstly, one argument posing the idea that EWTs are unreliable, is the idea that memories are easily susceptible to alteration. In Loftus + Palmer’s 1974 study, evidence was found to prove the impact of ‘leading questions’ on a person’s recollection of a witnessed crime. Participants were shown several videos of staged car accidents and were later given questionnaires, detailing the events witnessed. The key aspect of this questionnaire was the use of a ‘critical question’ in which different phrasing was used to ask the participants the speed they believed the cars to be going. Different verbs were used between participants, each with different connotations of severity, such as ‘hit,’ ‘collided,’ ‘bumped,’ ‘contacted’ and ‘smashed.’ This study showed that participants who were asked verbs with more severe connotations, such as ‘smashed,’ estimated a higher mean speed compared to other participants. Thus, it was concluded that the use of a leading question when taking an EWT can actually alter the individual’s recollection of the event. While the use of leading questions within legal cases is often discouraged, this study can be applied to the argument eye-witness accounts are easily susceptible to change and can therefore be proven as unreliable. Overall, the proven sensitivity of EWTs could create a long-term, social implication. If an individual were to be unfairly tried and imprisoned due to an unreliable EWT, not only would this create the social risk of the real perpetrator being free, but this may also create a sense of unease in society as citizens begin questioning the reliability of the legal system as a whole. The unreliability of EWT therefore could consequent in individuals feeling less safe/protected in society as a whole.
P2:
On the other hand, Loftus and Palmer’s study could be argued to be inadequate in assessing the reliability of EWTs, as it focused on small details and relied on an estimation. In a similar study conducted by Loftus, in 1975, participants were shown slides of a man stealing a large, bright red purse from a woman’s bag. The participants were later exposed to information containing both subtle errors and the more prominent error that the purse was brown. Although participants left many subtle errors unnoticed, 98% of participants correctly noticed that the purse they had seen was red.
