Cognitive level of Analysis PDF

Preview

Summary

Cognitive level of Analysis...

Description

Cognitive level of Analysis General Learning Outcomes Explain how principles that define the cognitive level of analysis may be demonstrated in research. What does this Research Research Research Principle #1 principle mean? Cognitive Schemas are mental Martin and Loftus and Ross and processes are representations of Halvorsen – Palmer – the Milsom – influenced by knowledge. Cultural the gender cultural and influences – people schemas (of stereotypical Different social factors. have trouble what boys schemas of teaching remembering stories and girls can words methods about other cultures. and cannot influenced the influenced the Culture includes do) were speed encoding language, tradition, able to affect estimates process and beliefs, and identity. the memory (memory) recall of a story Social influences of the “War of the include gender, photos. Ghosts” society, school and the environment. Principle #2 What does this Research Research Research principle mean? The mind can be The mind can be Martin and Yuille and Loftus and studied studied through Halvorsen Cutshall – Palmer scientifically developing theories experiment case study experiment and using a number of scientific research methods. Theories are continually tested, accepted, and rejected. Scientists have usually used the experimental method. Discuss how and why particular research methods are used at the cognitive level of anagt tvlysis. Research Method How Used Why Used Research Aim Clear cause and Experiment Method effect Procedure Procedure can be Results repeated – results are

Case Study

Discuss ethical considerations related to research studies at the cognitive level of analysis. Research: Ethics: Confidentiality – the study is a case study, Yuille and Cutshall and involves real-life witnesses. This also saves people from being embarrassed or humiliated in any kind of way. Right to withdraw – recalling a traumatic incident (burglary, dangerous) Research: Ethics: Freedom from mental and physical harm – Phelps and Sharot recalling a traumatic incident (9/11, dangerous) Right to withdraw – may experience mental harm from the recall Research: Ethics: Informed consent – videos are frightening Cahill and the PET scan may be uncomfortable (takes a long time) Briefing – people should know about the nature of the experiment, reassurance Cognitive Processes Evaluate schema theory with reference to relevant research studies. Research: Research: Research: Martin and Halvorsen Loftus and Palmer Anderson and Pichert

Evaluate two models or theories of one cognitive process with reference to research studies. Theory or Model: Research: Flashbulb Theory Cahill Phelps and Sharot Theory or Model: LeDoux’s model Strengths:

Research:

Explain how biological factors may affect one cognitive process. Research Biological Factor Cognitive Process Walker Sleep – more sleep leads to Memory – even though the better memory sleep deprived group had an entire night to catch up on sleep,they still did worse

Discuss how social or cultural factors may affect one cognitive process. Research Social/Cultural Factor Cognitive Process

With reference to relevant research studies, to what extent is one cognitive process reliable? Research Reliable/Not Reliable? Phelps and Sharot – to the extent of proximity Neisser and Harsch – to the extent of personal relevance

Discuss the use of technology in investigating cognitive processes. Research Technology Used Cahill PET scan Walker

fMRI scan

Phelps and Sharot

fMRI scan

Cognition and Emotion To what extent do cognitive and biological factors interact in emotion? Research Interact/Do not interact? Walker – biological factor of sleep Interacts

Evaluate one theory of how emotion may affect one cognitive process. Theory: Research:

Research:

Research:

Theory/Model/Concept: Schema Theory Source(s): page 70-71 (textbook)

Description:  Networks of knowledge, beliefs, and expectations about particular aspects of the world  Cognitive theory about info processing  Can describe how specific data/knowledge is organized/stored so it can be accessed when needed (used to make sense of the world)  Suggests that what we know will influence the outcome of processing

Strengths:  Experiments show clear cause and effect (can control variables)  nothing else is influencing the results  Shows the effects of schema, shows that schema is definitely the cause of the effect on memory  Triangulation  researcher – multiple studies  Theory  cognitive (all), sociocultural playing a role in ex. Martin and Halvorsen, Anderson and Pichert Limitations:  Experiments lack ecological validity  we do not know if schema theory would apply in a real life situation  Need triangulation to support claims (ex. Little data triangulation)

 Doesn’t explain where schema comes from Theory/Model/Concept: Flashbulb Memory Source(s): page 91 textbook

Description:  A special kind of emotional memory, which refers to vivid and detailed memories of highly emotional events that appear to be recorded in the brain as though with the help of a camera’s flash  Supported by LeDoux’s model

Strengths:  Can explain why very emotional memories are often more vividly remembered over time, but it cannot explain why these memories are no more accurate than any other memories  Generated studies, modified with idea that the event should have personal relevance  Supported by LeDoux’s model (shows the biological aspect of flashbulb memory)  Yuille and Cutshall, Phelps and Sharot have ecological validity  Shows the recall of vivid emotional events are accurate

Limitations:  Cannot preserve everything in scene “flashbulb” is a misnomer  “Reconstructed” memory where the emotional importance may influence the way memory is reconstructed especially with confabulation, discussing with people over time or if memory

doesn’t have personal relevance  Factors that affect theory  personal importance and proximity (supported by Yuille and Cutshall, Neisser and Harsch, and Phelps and Sharot)  Must be close in order for theory to work

Theory/Model/Concept: Source(s):

Description:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Theory/Model/Concept: Source(s):

Description:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Theory/Model/Concept: Source(s):

Description:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Name of Technology

PET (page 44 to 45 and 86 of textbook)

Source(s): Description

  

Positron emission tomography Monitors glucose consumption/metabolism in the brain Injected with radioactive glucose

Strengths



Can record ongoing activity in the brain such as thinking

Limitations

   

Resolution is low Injection of glucose (potential harm) No ecological validity Comparatively harder to do

Name of Technology Source(s): Description

MRI (page 44 to 45 and 86 of textbook)

    

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Detects changes in the use of oxygen Uses magnetic fields and radio waves 3D images of brain STRUCTURES (MRI) 3D images of brain FUNCTIONS (fMRI)

   

3D images shows brain activity and behavior high resolution easy to do



can’t record ongoing brain activity such as thinking radio waves (potential harm) claustrophobia

Strengths

Limitations

 

Researcher(s): Anderson and Pichert

Source(s):

text page 72

Aim: To determine if schema affects memory intake, storage, and recall

Method: experiment IV: schema (buyer or burglar) DV: what is remembered from the story

Procedure: 1. Divided people into two groups (for 1st trial) 2. Gave schemas to each of the group (either buyer or burglar 3. Read story 4. 12 minutes of distracting activity 5. Recall story (5 minute delay) 6. Tested then put people into 4 groups (2 stayed the same, 2 switched schemas) 7. All four groups were tested again

Results:  Participants in changed schema group recalled 7% more on the second recall test compared to first trial  Memory of new info related to new schema increased by 10 percent  Memory related to old schema decreased

Strengths:  Variable control (schema is the cause and effect is the memory change)  Shows the effects of schema theory

Limitations:  Ecological validity (does schema theory work in a real life environment?)  Demand characteristics (will the participants act differently because they know they are in a study?

Researcher(s): Martin and Halvorsen

Source(s):

page 212 textbook

Aim: To determine how info may be distorted to fit existing schemas Method: experiment IV: schemas (gender role photos) DV: what is recalled of the photos Procedure: 1. Showed group of 48 boys and girls (ages five to six)

pictures of males and females in activities that are consistent or inconsistent with gender schemas 2. One week later, ask children to remember pictures and record what they remembered

Results:  Children remembered the photos in line with their gender schemas (of what boys and girls can and cannot do)  Ex. A boy playing will a doll was remembered as a girl playing with a doll

Strengths:  Shows influence of gender schema  Cause and effect  Experimental format  Maximum control of variables

Limitations:  No ecological validity  Cultural and social factors are not considered  Cannot explain how or why gender schemas develop  Only children (middle class, US families) limited participant variability Researcher(s): Loftus and Palmer Source(s): page 84 textbook

Aim: To see if changing one word in certain critical questions would influence the speed estimates Method: Experiment IV: the word used (smashed, collided, contacted, hit, bumped) DV: speed estimates Procedure: 1. 45 students were shown videos of traffic accidents 2. Students were asked “How fast were the cards going when they hit each other?” with the word “hit” being replaced with other verbs doing various trials

Results:  “Smashed” had the highest mean speed estimates  “Contacted” had the lowest mean speed estimates  Our schema of different words had an effect on speed

as well as perception of consequences

Strengths:  Cause and effect  Maximum control of variables (IV and DV)

Limitations:  Ecological validity  Do not know if it would work in a real life situation  Participant variability (culturally biased) only US university students

Researcher(s): Ross and Milsom

Source(s): page

113 duotang

Aim: To see the effect of different teaching methods on the encoding process and recall. Method: experiment IV: teaching method (taught orally or visually) DV: memory of words and themes of story Procedure: 1. 2 groups of students (college students of Winneba Training College and New York University) heard the story “War of the Ghosts” twice without taking notes 2. Sixteen days later, students were asked to write down as much of the text as they could remember

Results:  Ghanaian students remembered a significantly higher percentage of themes and a larger number of words than the American students did.  The way you learn can influence what you remember

Strengths:  Cause and effect  Maximum control (both due to experiment format)

Limitations:  Ecological validity (not applicable to real-life situation)

Researcher(s): Cole and Scriber (1)

Source(s):

page 80-81 text

Aim: To investigate memory strategies in different cultures.

Method: experiment IV: schooled/non-schooled (US/Liberian) DV: recall of a series of words (objects) Procedure: 1. Developed culturally relevant word lists 2. Asked Liberian children (of varying ages) to recall as many items as possible from 4 categories: utensils, tools, clothing, vegetables 3. Repeated 15 times 4. Liberian children were asked to remember as much as possible

Results:  Non-schooled children stopped improving in free-recall tasks past age of 10 (did not improve with practice)  Schooled children remembered more and they improved more quickly, using strategies to remember such as chunking

Strengths:  Cross cultural validity  Age difference  Cause and effect  Maximum control

Limitations:  No ecological validity

Researcher(s): Cole Scribner(2)

Source(s): page 80-

81 text

Aim: To investigate memory strategies in different cultures. To see if children will remembered more if the info is presented in a more meaningful way. Method: experiment IV: schooled and non-schooled children (US/Liberian) DV: memory of objects Procedure: 1. This time, objects were presented to the children in a meaningful way in a story (narrative)

Results:

 The non-schooled children recalled the objects easily and actually chunked them according to the roles they played in the story

Strengths:  Maximum control of variables  Cause and effect  Some cross-cultural validity

Limitations:  No ecological validity

Researcher(s): Walker Source(s): duotang page 7 Aim: To investigate how sleep deprivation affects the brain’s ability to make new memories. Method: experiment IV: amount of sleep participants got (either 35 hours of sleep deprivation or no sleep restrictions) Procedure: 1. Students divided into 2 groups, one sleep deprived for 35 hours, the other with no sleep restrictions 2. Shown 150 slides

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Source(s):

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s):

Source(s):

Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Source(s):

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method:

Source(s):

Procedure:

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Source(s):

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Source(s):

Results:

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Source(s):

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Source(s):

Strengths:

Limitations:

Researcher(s): Aim:

Method: Procedure:

Results:

Source(s):

Strengths:

Limitations:...