Cognitive Studies Flashcards
1
Q
A study for MSM
A
Milner and HM 1966
2
Q
A study for WMM
A
Landry and Barting 2011
3
Q
A study for schema theory
A
Loftus and Palmer 1974
4
Q
A study for thinking and decision making
A
Englich and mussweiler 2001
5
Q
A study for research methods into cognitive processing
A
Milner and HM 1966 - longitudinal case study
6
Q
A study for ethical considerations into cognitive processing
A
Milner and HM 1966
7
Q
A study for biases in thinking
A
Englich and mussweiler 2001
8
Q
A study for reconstructive memory
A
Neisser and Harsh 1992
9
Q
A study for research methods into reliability of cognitive processes
A
Loftus and Palmer 1974 - true experiment
10
Q
A study for the influence of emotion on cognition
A
Neisser and Harsh 1992
11
Q
A study for research methods into emotion and cognition
A
Neisser and Harsh 1992 - case study
12
Q
A study for the ethics in investigating cognitive processes
A
HM and Milner 1966
13
Q
A study for the ethics into emotion and cognition
A
Neisser and Harsh 1992
14
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 aim
A
To investigate the effect of schema on memory
15
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 sample
A
150 students
16
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 method
A
- 1-minute film depicting a multiple-car accident lasting around 4 seconds
- 50 - About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
- 50 - About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?
- 50 not asked to estimate speed
- One week later asked did u see broken glass yes or no (was no broken glass)
17
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 results
A
- Smashed - 10.46 mph - 16 said yes, 34 no
- Hit - 8.00 mph - 7 said yes, 43 no
- Control - 6 said yes, 44 no
18
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 conclusion
A
people tend to change details of an event when they try to remember using past knowledge or schema
19
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 strengths
A
- confounding variables can be controlled so that it is really the effect of the independent variable that is measured
- Independent samples design - less demand characteristics
20
Q
Loftus and Palmer 1974 limitations
A
- Student sample so not generalisable
- Low ecological validity
- Students so might not know much about car speed
21
Q
Englich and mussweiler 2001 aim
A
to determine the affect the anchoring bias had on participants thinking and decision making
22
Q
Englich and mussweiler 2001 sample
A
- 19 young trial judges
- 15 male, 4 female
- Mean age 29
- Mean experience 9 months
23
Q
Englich and mussweiler 2001 method
A
- given a rape case
- prosecutor demanded sentence of 2 months vs 34 months
- Allowed 15 min to form an opinion
- Participants asked:
- Do you think that the sentence was too low, adequate, or too high?
- What sentence would you recommend?
- How certain are you about your sentencing decision? (a scale of 1 – 9)
- How realistic do you think this case is? (a scale of 1 – 9)
24
Q
Englich and mussweiler 2001 results
A
- average rating for realism was 7.17
- average rating of 4.53
- low anchor average sentence was 18.78 months
- high anchor average sentence was 28.70 months
25
Englich and mussweiler 2001 conclusion
When presented with an anchor the brain will use that to base it’s decision on
26
Englich and mussweiler 2001strengths
- true experiment - cause and effect relationship
- Independent samples design
- use of the pilot group helped to establish reasonable anchors
27
Englich and mussweiler 2001 limitations
- Independent samples design - participant variability - confounding variable
- Small sample
- low scores on the judges' sense of confidence indicate that they may have been aware that their judgement was being influenced by other factors
- low ecological validity
28
Neisser and Harsh 1992 aim
Whether flashbulb memories are susceptible to distortion
29
Neisser and Harsh 1992 sample
106 Emory uni students
30
Neisser and Harsh 1992 method
- Questionnaire 24 hours after event
- 2 ½ years later given the same questionnaire + rate confidence from 1-5
- only 44 took part
31
Neisser and Harsh 1992 results
- Mean score for accuracy was 2.95/7 and 11 scored 0
- Only 3 scored 7
- average confidence was 4.17/5
32
Neisser and Harsh 1992 conclusion
Flashbulb memory are susceptible to distortion over time
33
Neisser and Harsh 1992 strengths
- longitudinal
- applicable
- Transferability to other situations like 9/11
34
Neisser and Harsh 1992 limitations
- Not replicable
- Don’t know how often the participants discussed or replayed
- Participant attrition
- self reported data
35
Brown and Kulik 1977 aim
to investigate whether surprising and personally significant events can cause flashbulb memories
36
Brown and Kulik 1977 sample
40 black and 40 white American male participants
37
Brown and Kulik 1977 method
fill out a questionnaire regarding the death of public figures - JFK, MLK and someone they personally knew
38
Brown and Kulik 1977 results
- 90% gave significant detail
- 75% black participants had flashbulb memories of MLK while only 33% of white
39
Brown and Kulik 1977 strength
- Replicable - reliable
40
Brown and Kulik 1977 limitations
- Sampling bias - all male and american - not generalisable
- Social desirability effect
- Can’t test accuracy of their memories
- Can’t see if they actually had a flashbulb
- made the assumption that because someone is black MLKs death had emotional impact and if white not so much
41
HM and Milner 1966 backstory
- HM had epilepsy and the severe seizures meant he couldn’t lead a normal life - no medication had an effect
- William Scoville removed the hippocampus from HM’s brain as an experimental surgery in hopes to help him
- HM retained long term memory such as events from childhood
- But forgot things he has just learn (short term memory) like names of people he had just met (anterograde amnesia)
- His personality appeared mostly unchanged
- No intellectual impairment
- Couldn’t recall the last year before the operation
- Brenda Milner studied him until he died in 2008
42
HM and Milner 1966 method
- Psychometric testing: IQ testing was given to HM. His results were above average.
- Direct observation of his behavior
-Interviews with both HM and family members
- Cognitive testing: memory recall tests as well as learning tasks - such as reverse mirror drawing
- Corkin later did an MRI to determine the extent of the damage done to HM's brain
43
HM and Milner 1966 results
- HM could not acquire new episodic knowledge (memory for events) and he could not acquire new semantic knowledge (general knowledge about the world) - removed brain structures important for the transfer of information from short-term to long-term memory
- able to form a cognitive map of the spatial layout of his house - spatial memory not encoded the same as semantic or episodic memories
- capacity for working memory - able to have normal conversation which requires a minimal level of retention
- Could recall 3 digit numbers 15 minutes later
procedural memories maintained - knew how to mow a lawn and improved performance of new skills like reverse mirror drawing where he had to acquire new eye-hand coordination
44
HM and Milner 1966 conclusion
- Implicit memory contains several stores - for example, procedural memory, emotional memory, and skills and habits. Each of these areas is related to different brain areas
45
HM and Milner 1966 strengths
- Long case study - over 50 years = change could be observed over time
- method triangulation
- several other case studies of patients like HM (eg. Clive Wearing)
- High ecological validity = observed in his natural environment
- high ethical standards of consent, confidentiality, and protection from harm
46
HM and Milner 1966 limitations
- cannot be easily replicated
- do not have a lot of data on HM's actual cognitive abilities before the accident
- Uncontrolled - was it the epilepsy that had the effect on his capabilities?
- Only one person and might no be the same in other demographics
47
Landry and Barting aim
to see what happens when asked to carry out a dual-task technique that focuses on the phonological loop in the working memory model
48
Landry and Barting sample
34 undergraduate psychology students
49
Landry and Barting method
- Allocated 1 of 2 conditions
- Experimental group
- Control group
- Both saw lists of letters for 5 sec, wait 5 sec then recall them but experimental had to carry out articulatory suppression task (saying “1,2”)
- 10 lists of random F, K, L, M, R, X and Q as they don’t sound similar
50
Landry and Barting results
Mean percent of accurate recall in the control group was 76% compared to a mean of 45% in the experimental group
51
Landry and Barting conclusion
Agrees with WMM as articulatory suppression is preventing rehearsal in the phonological loop because of overload = difficult to memorise letters in experimental conditions but control condition did not experience overload
52
Landry and Barting strengths
- High internal validity
- Reliable as supports WMM
- Replicable
53
Landry and Barting limitations
- Low ecological validity
- participant variables
