The Principles of…… The Cogni2ve Level of Analysis Principle 1: Human beings are informa2on processors and mental processes guide behavior. •  We are always trying to process the info around us. •  Our percep2ons are usually based on what we already know. •  There is a rela2onship between our mental representa2on and the way we perceive and think about the world. What do you think this is? Principle 1 is demonstrated in Schema Theory •  A schema is a mental representa2on of knowledge in the brain. •  We have schemas for basically everything!!!! But does this one? Right now in your head, picture a model. Schema Theory •  They provide guidelines for interpre2ng Whether at religious school informa2on when or at a party, trying to make sense of you expect different the world. behaviors. •  They create expecta2ons on what will happen in certain situa2ons. What if someone threw you a curve ball by doing something you do not expect. Schema Theory Can even explain…. •  Stereotyping –  An overgeneralized belief about a group of people. Do schemas affect the way we perceive race? Schemas and Memory Reconstruc2on •  Our memories are not video and audio recordings. •  They are constructed by cogni2ve processes….like schemas. •  How do you think schemas can effect our memories? Schema Theory A Jean Piaget side note….. Assimila;on •  Incorpora2ng new concepts into exis2ng schemas. If I teach my 3 year that an animal with 4 legs and a tail is a dog…. Accommoda;on •  Changing exis2ng schemas to incorporate new informa2on. If I tell someone from the mid-­‐west to picture their schema of the Bronx they may talk about the gheSo areas. What would he call this? Darley and Gross (1983) •  Carried out a laboratory experiment on schema theory in the social world. •  OYen called the Hannah Study •  Par2cipants saw 2 videos of a girl. Darley and Gross (1983) •  In video 1, girl was playing in a poor environment. •  In video 2, girl was playing in a rich environment. •  Then they saw a video of the girl taking what looked to be an intelligence test and answering the ques2ons inconsistently. Darley and Gross (1983) •  When par2cipants were asked to judge the future of the girls, they all said the “rich” girl would do well and the “poor” girl would do less well. •  On average they judges the “rich” Hannah as having a 5th grade academic level, and “poor” Hannah at a 4th grade level. Darley and Gross (1983) •  The study demonstrates that par2cipants probably used pre-­‐
stored schemas of what it means to be poor and rich. •  They then interpreted the rest of the scene based on these schemas. Principle 2: The mind can be studied scien2fically. Cogni2ve psychologists use a wide array of methods to study the mind: •  Laboratory experiments •  Neuroimaging •  Case Studies •  Interviews •  Archival Research Principle 2 is demonstrated in Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on Aim: •  To inves2gate whether the use of leading ques2ons would affect recall in a situa2on where par2cipants were asked to es2mate speed. •  This is a situa2on that could happen when people appear in court as eyewitnesses. Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on Procedure: •  The student par2cipants saw videos of traffic accidents and had to answer ques2ons about the accident. Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on •  In experiment 1, the par2cipants were asked to es2mate speed of the cars based on a cri2cal ques2on: •  “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed/hit/collided/ bumped/ or contacted?” Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on Results: •  The mean es2mates of speed were highest in the “smashed condi2on” (40.8 mph). •  Lowest in the “contacted group” (31.8 mph). Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on Results: Were the results just lucky? •  The p-­‐value •  Anything p<.05 or less is significant. Which means there is a 5% chance the study is flawed. •  The results in LoYus were significant at p<0.005 (.
5% chance of that result occurring due to chance). •  The results indicate that memory is not reliable and can be manipulated by using specific words. Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on •  The cri2cal word in ques2on consistently affected the par2cipants' answer to the ques2on. •  One explana2on could be that the use of different words influenced the par2cipants’ mental representa2on of the accident…. •  i.e., the verb smashed ac2vates a cogni2ve schema of a severe accident and therefore speed es2mates increase. Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on •  It is not the actual details of the accident that are remembered but rather what is in line with a cogni2ve schema of a severe accident. •  Like reconstruc2ve memory. •  Or maybe they just suck at es2ma2ng speed? Lo>us and Palmer (1974) Reconstruc;on of Automobile Destruc;on Evalua2on: •  The experiment was conducted in a laboratory selng so maybe an ecological validity problem. •  Maybe too ar2ficial. •  Use of just students as par2cipants. •  But the controlled IV (words) and DV (speed) made it possible to establish cause/effect rela2onship. Principle 3: Cogni2ve processes are influenced by social and cultural factors. •  Research has shown that cogni2ve processes such as percep2on, memory and thinking are influenced by socio cultural factors. Principle 3 is demonstrated in BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Aim: •  To inves2gate whether people’s memory for a story is affected by previous knowledge (schemas) and the extent to which memory is reconstruc2ve. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Procedure: •  BartleS asked Bri2sh par2cipants to listen to a story. •  AYer a while he asked them to reproduced (repeat) the story. •  He asked them again and again (over a period of months and years) which he called serial reproduc2on. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” •  The story was an unfamiliar Na;ve American legend called “The War of Ghosts”. The W
ar o
f G
hosts One night two young men from Egulac went down to the river to hunt seals and while they were there it became foggy and calm. Then they heard war-­‐cries, and they thought: "Maybe this is a war-­‐party". They escaped to the shore, and hid behind a log. Now canoes came up, and they heard the noise of paddles, and saw one canoe coming up to them. There were five men in the canoe, and they said: "What do you think? We wish to take you along. We are going up the river to make war on the people." One of the young men said,"I have no arrows." "Arrows are in the canoe," they said. "I will not go along. I might be killed. My rela2ves do not know where I have gone. But you," he said, turning to the other, "may go with them." So one of the young men went, but the other returned home. And the warriors went on up the river to a town on the other side of Kalama. The people came down to the water and they began to fight, and many were killed. But presently the young man heard one of the warriors say, "Quick, let us go home: that Indian has been hit." Now he thought: "Oh, they are ghosts." He did not feel sick, but they said he had been shot. So the canoes went back to Egulac and the young man went ashore to his house and made a fire. And he told everybody and said: "Behold I accompanied the ghosts, and we went to fight. Many of our fellows were killed, and many of those who aSacked us were killed. They said I was hit, and I did not feel sick." He told it all, and then he became quiet. When the sun rose he fell down. Something black came out of his mouth. His face became contorted. The people jumped up and cried. He was dead. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Results: •  The par2cipants remembered the main idea of the story (the gist) but they changed unfamiliar elements to make sense of the story by using terms more familiar to their own cultural expecta2ons. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” •  The story remained a coherent whole although it was changed. •  It became no2ceably shorter aYer each reproduc2on. •  BartleS concluded that remembering is an ac2ve process. •  Memories are not copies of experience but rather “reconstruc;ons”. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Evalua2on: •  The results of the study confirm schema theory (and reconstruc2ve memory). •  But is was performed in a laboratory and might lack ecological validity. BartleM (1932) “The War of Ghosts” •  Par2cipants did not receive standardized instruc2ons and some of the memory distor2ons may be due to simple guessing (demand characteris2cs such as the Hawthorne effect) •  S2ll, this study is one of the most important in the study of memory.