The Cognitive approach
Loftus and Palmer – Leading questions, accuracy of eye-witness testimony MEMORY
Baron-Cohen – Autism – THEORY OF MIND
Savage-Rumbaugh – Chimps language acquisition - LANGUAGE
Assumptions
1)
2)
3)
The brain is like a computer processing information. Sometimes known as
the boxes and arrows approach.
The study of internal mental processes is important in understanding
behaviour - cognitive processes actively organise and manipulate the
information we receive – humans do not just passively respond to their
environment.
The human brain is seen as a ‘black box’, the contents of which can be
surmised by inputting information and recording an output. (e.g. in Loftus
and Palmer the information put in are the car crash films and the idea of
‘smashed’ and the output is a distorted memory (broken glass being seen),
which suggests that inside the ‘black box’ memory is reconstructed).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
Strengths of Cognitive Approach
High levels of control in laboratory
conditions
May be able to help those with
cognitive problems and may lead to
practical applications for
teaching/treatment
Increases our understanding of
cognitive abilities of other species
Explanations are based at a functional,
psychological level compared to the
physiological approach
Weaknesses
Weaknesses of Cognitive Approach
Laboratory research may have low
ecological validity
Cognitive research tends to be
reductionist (reduced to something that
is too simple).
Cognitive research tends to use
quantitative rather than qualitative
measures
Example from Core Study
Loftus and Palmer controlled many
variables
Baron-Cohen - Could teach autistic
children to recognise emotions. Loftus
and Palmer - Leading questions could
not be used in interrogation.
Savage-Rumbaugh – Bonobo chimps
have advanced language skills
Baron-Cohen uses the ‘theory of mind’
as an explanation for autism rather than
a malfunction in the structure or
chemistry of the brain.
Example from Core Study
Eyes Task may not be the same as real
life. Loftus and palmer used films
rather than real accidents and therefore
the emotional impact was lost.
Baron-Cohen suggests that autism can
be detected by whether Ps can
recognise emotions or not.
In Loftus and Palmer we do not get the
Ps accounts of why they thought there
was broken glass.
Too cold – ignoring the emotional life
of humans, their conscious experience
and possible use of freewill.
In L&P the Ps personal experiences of
accidents in terms of emotion are
ignored.
One weakness of the cognitive approach is that most of the data collected is
quantitative, meaning that it is numbers that can be analysed, for example in L&P we
are told that more people estimated faster speeds when given the verb ‘smashed’ in
the leading question, also the same word seems to cause participants to think they saw
broken glass when in reality there had not been broken glass. The cognitive approach
should look at people’s reasons for their actions. This type of data is known as
quantitative data. For example in Loftus and Palmer it would have been useful to
know why participants thought they had seen broken glass.
Notice I have made a mistake, which if I did not re-read my answer I would have left
as it is and therefore lose marks.
The last ‘quantitative should have been ‘qualitative’.
Similarities and differences between studies
The cognitive approach
Studies
Loftus and Palmer and
Savage-Rumbaugh
Loftus and Palmer and
Baron-Cohen
Savage-Rumbaugh and
Baron-Cohen
Similarity
Both used a laboratory
setting to test Ps
Both have useful practical
applications.
Both collected quantitative
data
Both used Ps with deficits.
Savage-Rumbaugh used
common chimps with poor
language skills and BaronCohen used Tourettes and
Autistic Ps.
Both have useful practical
applications.
Difference
Loftus and Palmer used
humans whereas SavageRumbaugh used chimps
Loftus and Palmer was a
lab expt whereas BaronCohen was a quasi
experiment.
L&P generalises to whole
population, whereas B-C
generalises to specific
groups.
As the first box.
Savage Rumbaugh tested
for language whereas
Baron-Cohen tested for the
‘theory of mind’
Also Savage-Rumbaugh
was a longitudinal case
study, Baron-Cohen used
many participants in a
snapshot study.
b) Describe how the cognitive approach could explain errors in recall from an
eyewitness. (4)
Or
b) Describe how the cognitive approach could explain language acquisition. (4)
Or
b) Describe how the cognitive approach could explain autism. (4)