Chapter 5: Cognitive Approach to Understanding Behaviour
Essential Questions
How do psychologists adopting a cognitive approach study behaviour?
How is human memory modelled by cognitive psychologists?
What are schemas and how do they influence memory?
What factors influence our thinking and decision-making?
How reliable are our cognitive processes?
How do emotions influence our thinking and decision-making?
How does digital technology influence cognitive processes? (HL only)
Myths and Misconceptions
Psychologists should only investigate what they can observe.
This was the point of view of psychologists called behaviourists. They believed only direct observable behaviour should be the focus of psychological studies. Psychologists interested in memory and thinking rejected this idea. In this chapter we will examine the contribution of cognitive psychologists to our understanding of human behaviour.
People think logically and make sensible decisions.
Though our biological classification of Homo sapiens comes from Latin meaning ‘the wise human’, our thinking is often illogical and our decisions prone (prone = susceptible, liable, predisposed) to biases. In this chapter we will investigate why our cognitive processes are not always reliable.
Some experiences in our lives are unforgettable.
A common belief is that deeply emotional experiences produce vivid, exact and long-lasting memories. In this chapter, we will read research into whether memories can be imprinted upon the mind so powerfully that they can be recalled in photographic detail.
1. The Cognitive Revolution
The historical background to cognitive psychology is behaviourism. Behaviourists argued that only direct observable behaviour should be the focus of investigations into human behaviour. From this viewpoint, psychologists argued that the mind cannot be studied scientifically as the mind cannot be observed directly. By the second half of the 20th century, psychologists interested in memory and thinking rejected this approach. They noted there are many phenomena we cannot directly observe. For example, we cannot observe air but we can infer (infer = to guess that something is correct because of the information that we have) its presence. We can breathe air and see how it moves trees. In a similar way, cognitive psychologists cannot observe mental processes but we can assume mental processes from human behaviour.
Researchers taking a cognitive approach study the mental structures and processes involved in behaviours such as attention, perception, memory, thinking and decision-making, problem-solving and language. Such processes are labelled cognition. While psychologists taking a biological approach study the relationship between the brain and nervous system and human behaviour, cognitive psychologists examine the relationship between cognition and human behaviour. Cognitive psychologists argue they are able to study mental processes by building theoretical models and then testing predictions based on these models. As computers became more widespread, psychologists likened mental processing to the operation of a computer. Information was seen as being inputted through our senses to our brains. This data then underwent mental processing. Behaviour was the output of this system. These ideas were revolutionary and cognitive psychologists produced a huge outpouring of research studies.
2. Research Methods of the Cognitive Approach
Cognitive psychologists use several research methods:
Case studies
Experiments
Observations
Interviews
Ask YourselfWhich research method would be most effective in understanding Malala’s decision to campaign for the education of girls in Pakistan? (See Chapter 1)
2.1 Case Studies
Case studies examine correlations between mental processes and behaviour. Case studies sometimes focus on people with unusual mental abilities, or with mental processing problems. They can be longitudinal, which means the investigator studies the person for several years by re-testing or re-interviewing them at regular intervals.
Case studies investigate mental processes of one person or a few people. They provide in-depth information about phenomena that cannot be studied experimentally.
2.2 Experiments (laboratory/field/quasi/natural)
To examine the links between brain activity, mental processing and behaviour, psychologists design laboratory (true) experiments and use brain imaging technology. Though mental processes are not being directly observed, these processes are inferred from the brain activity and the behaviour.
Experiments are useful because they can identify cause-and-effect relationships between two or more variables. Some of the experiments we will study are actually natural or quasi-experiments because the independent variable is often age or gender.
2.3 Observations
Observation is often part of case studies and experiments. Observation can be quantitative and qualitative, depending on how the data is collected. If the researcher uses a list or grid that involves checking whenever a particular behaviour is exhibited, then the data is quantitative. If the researcher makes notes about the behaviour being observed and then writes down their own thoughts about that behaviour, then the data is qualitative.
2.4 Interviews
Structured interviews comprise a checklist of questions with tick boxes or yes and no answers. Unstructured interviews are similar to a conversation between two people, with a video or sound recorder used to capture the tone of the interviewee’s comments and replies. Interviews can be a mixture of closed questions that need factual answers and other more open-ended questions that allow the interviewee to expand and discuss. Focus group interviews involve the interviewer facilitating a discussion amongst a group of interviewees.
Cognitive psychologists use interviews to supplement other methods, to develop theories and to gain in-depth insight into behaviour. Cognitive testing can sometimes form part of an interview. The interview is used to gain access to the person’s mental processes through conversations about their behaviour and feelings.
2.5 Ethics Consideration of the Cognitive Approach
Psychologists endeavour to consider the following in their research into cognitive processes:
anonymity
debriefing
deception
informed consent
right to withdraw
undue stress or harm
As you read about studies conducted by cognitive psychologists, think about the following:
Why are these considerations important?
How did the psychologist resolve any ethical issues? For example, how could the use of deception or stress be justified? Should psychologists undertake a cost/benefit analysis before undertaking research?
Have ethical considerations changed over time?
3. Cognitive Processing
3.1 Models of Memory
Memory models provide a framework for an understanding of conceptualizations of human memory processes over time. Examples relevant to the study of memory models include explicit/implicit memory, sensory memory, short-term memory, long-term memory, central executive, phonological loop, episodic buffer, and visuospatial sketchpad.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
James (1890) was the first psychologist to suggest there are two separate types of memory. He called them primary memory and secondary memory. Information is first stored in primary memory. Secondary memory is where the memory stays when it is not being retrieved. Information in primary memory is continuously accessible because it takes an active cognitive process to retrieve information in secondary memory.
Miller (1956) investigated the capacity of short-term information storage. He conducted tests of memory such as repeating a series of digits and found that memory was limited to seven items in most people. Some people could remember nine and some five, but for most seven items was the norm. However, the definition of an item is flexible, and if the information was chunked into seven items, each containing several pieces of information, then the capacity for remembering was extended.
In the 1960s and 1970s, several models of memory were proposed. Early theories like the multi-store model (MSM) focused on storage of information. As computer functions became more complex, so theories of memory as operating as a computer also looked at processing rather than just at capacity and storage. An example of this model is the working memory model (WMM).
To evaluate any model of behaviour a series of questions need to be asked: Are the concepts? Is the model static or dynamic in the way it shows a psychological process? Have studies supported the model?
Keep these questions in mind as we study these models.
The multi-store model (MSM) was first proposed by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968). Their theory suggests that information flows through three stores. Each store has different capacities and can store information for different durations. Information is first stored in sensory memory for a fraction of a second. This information is then transferred to short-term memory if we attend to and make note of it. Short-term memory has a limited capacity of seven items +/−2. Information is stored in the form of sound for about 30 seconds. This information will then be transferred to long-term memory. When the material is not rehearsed, new information that enters the short-term memory store will displace older information. The information in long-term memory is processed semantically (semantically = by meaning). The capacity of this store may be unlimited.
Ask YourselfBased on your experience, does this model make sense to you?
Strengths of the multi-store model
The multi-store model was an influential theory and prompted a great deal of research into memory. For example, Glanzer and Cunitz (1966) provided evidence that confirmed the model. They did this by conducting studies on the serial position effect using free recall experiments. These experiments involve giving participants a series of twenty or more words to remember and then asking them to recall these words in any order. The results generally fall into a pattern the researchers call the serial position curve. As you can see, participants recalled more of the first words and the last words on the list (see Figure 5.2). This primacy effect showed these first words had been transferred into long-term memory. The recency effect indicates that the last words on the list were also remembered as well as they were still in short-term memory when the participants recalled the words.
Focus on Research
Building on this research, Glanzer and Cunitz (1966) designed experiments to test their Multi-Store Model of Memory (MSM). They aimed to test the hypothesis that there are two distinct storage mechanisms the STM store and the LTM store.
Two repeated measures experiments were conducted. In Experiment I, 240 Army enlisted men were presented with lists of 20 common one-syllable nouns. The presentation rate, the time intervals between one word and the next, varied from 3 to 6 to 9 seconds.
The results indicated that spacing affects the shape of the serial position curve, but the effect is limited to the beginning of the list, not the end. The investigators concluded that this was evidence that the LTM store was distinct from the STM store.
In Experiment II, 46 Army enlisted men were presented with lists of 15 common one-syllable nouns. They were asked to recall the list immediately or after a 10 or 30-second interval in which they performed a distraction task of counting backwards.
Results showed that the recency effect was strongest for immediate recall but declined after that. This variable did not impact the primacy effect. The investigators once again concluded that the results demonstrated the existence of two distinct memory stores.
Weaknesses of the multi-store model
The MSM was criticised as being simplistic. The models did not capture how the different stores interact with each other. For example, the information stored in the LTR could influence what information is judged important by the STM. Baddeley and Hitch (1974) argue that the memory stores are more complex than depicted by the MSM. Craik and Lockhart (1972) point out that rehearsal alone does may not account for the transfer of information from STM to LTM. The type of information being processed and the level at which this information is processed may also influence what information is transferred to the LTM. You can find more information about Craik and Lockhart here.
A further criticism was that many of the studies that support the model lack ecological validity as they rely on random lists of words presented to participants in a laboratory setting.
The working memory model
While the MSM showed that a theoretical model could be effective in investigating cognitive processes there were significant limitations. As a result, some psychologists argued that there must be more than one type of long-term memory store. Shallice and Warrington (1970) undertook a case study of KF who was involved in a motorcycle accident. They found he was still able to form new long-term memories even though his short-term memory capacity was nearly zero. Short-term memory is, according to the MSM, the gateway to long-term memory, so his long-term memory should also have been damaged, at least for events that happened after the accident. As KF could still form new long-term memories, Warrington and Shallice argued there must be another way to access long-term memory other than what is depicted by the MSM.
Building on Atkinson and Shiffrin’s research, Baddeley and Hitch (1974) developed an alternative model of short-term memory which they called the working memory model (see Figure 5.3). They argued that short-term memory is not a static store, but is a complex and dynamic information processor.
The central executive is the most important part of the model, although little is known about how it functions. The central executive monitors and coordinates the operation of the visuo-spatial sketchpad and phonological loop and relays information to long-term memory. The central executive decides which information is attended to and where to send it. Baddeley suggests the central executive acts more like a system which controls attention rather than as a memory store. The central executive enables the working memory system to selectively attend to some stimuli and ignore others. The phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad are specialised storage systems. See this interview with Baddeley on the functions of the central executive.
The phonological loop is the part of working memory that deals with spoken and written material. It consists of two parts: one is the phonological store, which acts as an inner ear and holds information in a speech-based form for 1–2 seconds. Spoken words enter the store directly. The other part is the articulatory control process. This process converts written words into an articulatory (spoken) code so they can enter the phonological store and it acts like an inner voice rehearsing information from the phonological store. It circulates information round and round like a tape loop. This is how we remember a telephone number we have just heard. We say it aloud or in our minds over and over again and so keep it in our working memory.
The visuo-spatial sketchpad deals with what things look like and how we are in relation to other objects as we move around. If we are asked what our friend looks like, we see a picture of them in our minds. This is our visuo-spatial sketchpad drawing from our long-term memory.
Baddeley (2000) updated the working memory model after it failed to explain the results of various experiments, adding the episodic buffer. The episodic buffer acts as a ‘backup’ store which communicates with both long-term memory and the components of working memory.
Ask YourselfBased on your own experience, does this model make sense to you?
Strengths of the working memory model
The WMM provides a more comprehensive and thorough explanation of memory storage and processing compared to the MSM. Most psychologists now agree that short-term memory is a working memory with processing and filtering powers. The model can be applied to reading and tasks like mental arithmetic and verbal reasoning. The model explains what happens to memory in cases of brain damage.
Experimental studies also support the model by showing that there are separate systems in working memory. Hitch and Baddeley (1976) conducted a dual-task study to find if working memory had more than one process. Their model predicts that two tasks cannot be performed successfully if they use the same component of working memory. On the other hand, if two tasks use different components, they can be carried successfully.
To test this theory, participants were asked to do two tasks at the same time – a task which required them to repeat a list of numbers, and a verbal reasoning task which required them to answer true or false to various questions. The participants could carry out both tasks satisfactorily, and the researchers suggest that this is because each task using a different element of working memory.
This finding was supported by Robbins et al. (1996) who conducted a number of experiments that asked participants to play chess and do another cognitive task at the same time. They found that playing chess involved using the visuo-spatial sketchpad and there was no interference when participants were asked to play chess and repeat words at the same time. However, when participants tried to play chess and tap numbers on a keyboard at the same time, there was interference as the model would predict.
Limitations of the working memory model
Andrés and Van der Linden (2002) examined patients with frontal lobe damage and concluded that not all central executive processes are located there. Evidence indicates there are common brain areas but there are also differences in how different tasks are performed.
There is little direct evidence for how the central executive works and what it does. The capacity of the central executive has never been measured. The working memory model only involves short-term memory, so it is not a comprehensive model.
Finally, the model does not explain changes in processing ability that occur as the result of practice or time.
3.2 Schema Theory
Cognitive schemas are seen as mental representations that organize our knowledge, beliefs, and expectations. Examples relevant to studying schema processing include but are not limited to: top-down/bottom-up processing; pattern recognition—the matching of a current input to information in memory; effort after meaning—the attempt to match unfamiliar ideas into a familiar framework; stereotyping—a fixed mental representation of a group of individuals.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
Bartlett (1932) first introduced schema theory to psychology. A schema can be defined as an internal mental representation that helps us organise and make sense of information. While conducting a series of studies with British students recalling Native American folktales, he noticed the participants often recalled information inaccurately. He found familiar information replaced unfamiliar information as the participants tried to make sense of the story as they recalled it. To account for these findings, Bartlett proposed that people have schemas which can be defined as unconscious mental structures that represent an individual’s experience and knowledge of the world. Schemas are composed of old knowledge. He stated that they are ‘masses of organized past experiences’ (1932: 197–198). These experiences affect a person’s current understanding and memory. For example, going to school helps us to develop a schema of a typical classroom and what you would find in it. Schema processing is automatic and below our level of awareness but as we shall see later in the chapter, biases in thinking and memory can result.
Focus on Research
Bartlett (1932) investigated schemas and the constructive nature of remembering. He believed that when people are asked to remember a story they make sense of it in their own way. We use schemas to help us understand the world and we try to fit any new information into these existing schemas. He proposed that memory is a reconstructive process affected by our own culture and expectations.
Bartlett based these ideas on a series of memory exercises. His participants were British male and female undergraduate students in Bartlett's university classes. One study investigated how well a North American folk story called 'War of the Ghosts' could be remembered. The story contained several unusual and strange supernatural elements. To the British participants, parts of this story may have made little sense. Participants read the story and then repeated the story from memory after differing periods (the procedure is called repeated reproduction, which should not be confused with serial reproduction when information is passed from one person to the next). These periods varied from days to years. Bartlett found that the participants changed the story as they tried to remember it. He noted:
The story became more consistent with the participant’s own cultural expectations, that is, names and places were unconsciously changed to fit the norms of British culture. For example, a canoe was recalled as a boat. He called this a process of assimilation.
The story became shorter with each retelling as participants omitted information judged as unimportant. He called this a process of levelling.
Participants changed the order of the story to make sense of it and added details. The overall theme of the story was remembered but unfamiliar elements were changed to match the participant’s culture. This process was called sharpening.
Loftus and Palmer (1974) supported this early work by Bartlett schema and introduced the idea that schemas are susceptible to manipulation by information introduced after an event. They focused on eye-witness testimony and found that changing the verb used when questioning eyewitnesses about a video of a car accident changed how the event was remembered. The different verbs in the questions activated different schemas which then influenced the estimations of speed. For example, the typical schema of cars smashing into one another implies the cars were moving very fast compared to cars contacting each other.
Rumelhart and Norman (1983) wanted to understand the properties of schemas and how they affect memory. They argued that schemas represent all kinds of knowledge including semantic meanings and procedures. Schemas could consist of sub-schemas. For example, a restaurant schema would comprise an ordering schema, an eating schema and a paying schema. They noted that all schema are based on personal experience and are updated to make sense of new information.
Schema theory has also been used to explain cross-cultural differences. For example, Filmore (1975) noted that the English verb to write and the Japanese word kaku are direct translations of each other, but to write in English does not mean the same as it does in Japanese. To the Japanese, kaku can be an image, a sketch or a word or a character. The writing schema in English is broader and includes language. You cannot write an image. Schema theory has been used by psychologists to explain why people from different cultures can misunderstand each other.
Schema theory has been applied to treat people suffering from mood disorders. Beck (1979) argued that faulty cognition can lead to depression, and he devised a schema therapy to correct this faulty thinking in the mind of the sufferer.
Critiques of schema theory have focused on the vagueness of the concept (Cohen 1993). Others say schemas are too rigid and simplistic. For example, Clark (1990) writes that schema theory tries too hard to use a single framework to explain how knowledge is acquired, stored and retrieved.
Despite the limitations outlined above, there is broad support for schema theory.
Focus on Research
Tuckey and Brewer (2003) examined how a crime schema influenced the types of details witnesses recalled over several interviews. Some witnesses experienced a delay before the initial interview and some between subsequent interviews. Data showed that, in general, schema-irrelevant memories (memories that neither confirmed nor contradicted the crime schema) were more often forgotten than schema-consistent and schema-inconsistent memories after the initial interview. Delaying the initial interview negatively affected recall at the initial interview, but led to less decay over subsequent interviews.
Witnesses used their schemas to interpret any unclear information and, as a result, made more schema-consistent mistakes and were more likely to report false memories about any ambiguous details.
3.3 Thinking and Decision-making
Thinking involves using information and doing something with it, for example, making a decision. Modern research into thinking and decision- making often refers to rational and intuitive thinking. Examples of thinking and decision- making could be but are not limited to framing, heuristics, loss aversion, and appraisal.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
We take thinking for granted but it is complex and an active process. Information is gathered, stored and analysed to make judgements and decisions and to reach conclusions. These cognitive processes are aspects of directed thinking because this type of cognition aims to achieve a goal. Several models of thinking and decision-making have been proposed to understand how we think and make decisions to achieve these goals. We will examine:
Dual processing model
Dual processing model
The dual processing model assumes that we think in two ways across several tasks: System 1 thinking and System 2 thinking. System 1 thinking is automatic, quick and requires little effort. Kahneman (2011) describes this as fast thinking. System 1 tends to be our default system of cognition when we are short of time or too tired to give a question a lot of thought. Thinking in this mode operates below our level of conscious awareness and is a more instinctive way of processing information and figuring things out. System 1 relies on feelings, intuition and a toolkit of hidden mental shortcuts to help guide our way through the choices we make, rather than thinking about each one methodically and consciously. Though fast, it is prone to biases. We will explore these biases in the next section on the reliability of cognitive processes. System 2 is more rational, analytical and goal-directed thinking and requires deliberate effort and time. System 2 refers to the processes that kick in when we stop, pay attention and think. Kahneman describes this as slow thinking. Though slow, it is less prone to biases.
One way to contrast these two thinking systems is to examine how we learn to drive a car. At first, a new driver needs to concentrate on each of the actions involved in driving. With more experience and confidence, automatic processing takes over and the driver can talk to a passenger or listen to music. If the weather changes or an emergency arises, the driver can quickly revert to more deliberate driving.
Cognition involves both types of thinking depending on the problem to solve or the decision to make. At times we might make more instinctive and emotional choices and on other occasions, decisions may be less emotional and more analytical.
Table 5.1 summarises some of the differences between the two systems as outlined by Kahneman.
System 1 | System 2 |
Unconscious reasoning | Conscious reasoning |
Automatic | Controlled |
Low effort | High effort |
Large capacity | Small capacity |
Rapid | Slow |
Includes recognition, perception, orientation | Includes rule following, comparisons, weighing of options |
Independent of working memory | Limited by working memory capacity |
Non-logical | Logical |
Table 5.2 Differences between System 1 and System 2 thinking
Focus on Research
Bonke et al. (2014) aimed to determine if unconscious thought (intuitive and automatic thinking) led to better performance than conscious thought (rational and controlled).
Aims: Determine whether "educated intuition" led doctors to make more accurate estimations about patients' survival probabilities than more deliberate thought.
Type of study: Experiment.
Participants: 86 medical experts and 57 novices selected by purposive sampling from academic and non-academic hospitals and from a university medical centre in the Netherlands between April 2009 and May 2011.
Procedures: The participants were presented with four fictitious medical case histories. The four case histories were presented by a computer in the form of statements and clinical test results. Half of the participants were encouraged to engage in conscious thought for four minutes about the patient's life expectancy. The other half were distracted by performing an anagram task for four minutes. The participants were then asked to estimate the probability that each patient would be alive in 5 years.
Results: There was a significant difference in task performance between the novices and the experts. There was no significant difference in accuracy between the conscious and unconscious thinking conditions.
Conclusion: Unconscious, intuitive thought did not lead to better or worse performance than deliberate, conscious thought.
Algorithms and heuristics
Algorithms can help people solve problems and make decisions. An algorithm is a well-defined process that will produce the right solution or the best decision. Algorithms are an example of System 2 as they require deliberate thinking, logical rules and procedures. Solving a maths problem by using a formula is an example of an algorithm in action. Finding a solution by trial and error is another example as is following a recipe to bake a cake. Follow the steps and you get the right outcome.
Heuristics are mental shortcuts or rules of thumb that generally, but not always, produce the right outcome. Heuristics offer a trade-off between helping us make quick decisions and being occasionally wrong. Some of these easy and quick mental shortcuts are described below.
Representative heuristic
We make decisions based on whether an individual, object or event looks like what we expect it to be.
Imagine this situation:
A stranger tells you about a person from the US who is short, slim and likes to read poetry and then asks you to guess whether the person is more likely to be a professor of classics (Ancient Latin and Greek language and culture) at Harvard or a truck driver. Which would be the better guess?
Like most people, you guessed the Harvard professor. You could make that quick decision because your view of a poetry-lover did not conjure up an image of a truck driver. However, as Nisbett and Ross (1980) pointed out, this representative heuristic leads you to ignore relevant information. At most, there might be 20 classics professors at Harvard and perhaps only half of them like poetry and even less are short and slim. But how many truck drivers are there in the US? Hundreds of thousands. How many are slim and short? Even 10% is a huge number. How many of them like poetry? Maybe only 1%, but that is still more than our slim, short, poetry-loving Harvard professors.
The availability heuristic is used to judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily examples of that event come to mind. Tversky and Kahneman (1974) investigated the availability heuristic by asking a simple question: Are there more words in the English language that start with the letter ‘k’ than words that have ‘k’ as the third letter? As expected, most participants answered words starting with ‘k’ as those words came more readily to mind compared to words like ‘joke’ or ‘bake’.
While the above example is probably only of interest to avid Scrabble players, the availability heuristic can also be at play in our social relationships. Ross and Sicoly (1979) investigated fairness in social relationships when people were engaged in a joint project. The researchers asked different groups of people about how they contributed to a joint project. For example, married participants were asked about shared household and child-rearing duties, academics were asked about how they contributed to the completion of a project and sports people were asked about about their efforts in supporting their team. The results showed that participants were more likely to recall their contributions than the contributions of others.
Ask YourselfThink of group projects you have been involved with. Have you felt you did more of the work than others? Is there a possibility that the available heuristic leads you to make a wrong judgement about how the work was completed?
Focus on Research
Fox (2006) aimed to understand how the availability heuristic (or in this case the unavailability of information) influences judgements about the quality of university courses. In this field experiment, sixty-four business students at an American college completed a mid-course evaluation form. They were randomly assigned to two conditions. Half of the participants were asked to list two ways the course could be improved before they provided an overall rating for the course from one to seven with seven being the highest. The other participants were asked to list ten ways the course could be improved before they gave their overall evaluation. The results showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the mean score of 4.92 for the group asked to list two improvements and the mean score of 5.52 for the group asked to list ten improvements. Fox explained this paradoxically (paradoxically = not what is expected) in terms of the availability heuristic. When participants struggled to think of ten ways to improve the course they misinterpreted the difficulty of recalling problems with the course as evidence that there were not so many problems after all.
3.4 Assessment Advice: Cognitive Processing
Question | Study |
SAQs Outline/describe/explain | Suggested Studies |
One research method (approach to research) used when investigating cognitive processing | Any of the studies listed below are suitable for these SAQs |
One ethical consideration of research into cognitive processing | |
The multi-store memory model | Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) |
The working memory model | Baddeley and Hitch (1974) or Robbins et al. (1996) |
One model of memory | Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) or Robbins et al. (1996) |
One study into one model of memory | Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) or Robbins et al. (1996) |
(Cognitive) schema theory | Bartlett (1932) |
One study investigating (cognitive) schema theory | Bartlett (1932) |
One model of thinking and decision-making | Kahneman (2011) Bonke et al. (2014) |
Intuitive (automatic) thinking | Kahneman (2011) Bonke et al. (2014) |
Rational (controlled) thinking | Kahneman (2011) Bonke et al. (2014) |
QUESTIONS (ERQs) Discuss/evaluate/contrast/to what extent? | |
Research methods (approaches to research) used when investigating cognitive processing | Any two studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
Ethical considerations of research into cognitive processing | Any two studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
Two models of memory | Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) & Robbins et al. (1996) |
Research (studies) investigating one or more memory models | Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) & Robbins et al. (1996) |
(Cognitive) schema theory | Bartlett (1932) & Tuckey and Brewer (2003) |
One or more models of thinking and decision-making | Kahneman (2011) Bonke et al. (2014) & Fox (2006) |
Research (studies) investigating thinking and decision-making | Kahneman (2011) Bonke et al. (2014) & Fox (2006) |
4. Reliability of Cognitive Processes
4.1 Reconstructive Memory
Human memory is not an exact copy of events, but rather a reconstruction that may be altered over time, through discussions with others or input from the media. Research shows that memory may be changed during storage, processing and retrieval, due to schema processing.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
Freud proposed the first psychological theory of memory. According to his psychoanalytic theory, people force themselves to forget painful memories by repressing them into the unconscious. These memories continue to exist but can only be recovered by a psychologist or psychotherapist using hypnosis or dream analysis. Many researchers disagree and believe that recovered memories were created memories of events that never took place. Less controversial is research into the subtle factors that can influence how we recall events. Bartlett (1932) showed how schemas can change how we recall stories and his pioneering studies were supported by Loftus and Palmer (1974) who investigated eyewitness testimony.
Focus on Research
‘Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory’, is a study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) that investigated the reliability of memory. The study aimed to investigate how information provided after an event influenced a witness’s memory of that event. The researchers changed the verb in a question when asking the witnesses to recall an event. The hypotheses for the study were as follows:
Null hypothesis: Modifying the wording of questions after an event will not influence the accuracy of memory of a witness for that event.
Research hypothesis: Modifying the wording of questions after an event will influence the accuracy of memory of a witness for that event.
Two laboratory experiments made up the study. Both experiments adopted an independent measures design. The IV was the verb used to describe the event. In the first experiment, the DV was the participant’s estimate of speed in miles per hour of the cars involved in the accident and in the second experiment the DV was whether or not the participant believed they saw broken glass at the crash scene.
The researchers used an opportunity sample of 45 college students of the University of Washington for the first part of the study and 150 participants for the second part.
The study had two parts.
First study
In the first study participants were shown seven 5–30 seconds film clips of traffic accidents. The clips were excerpts from safety films made for the education of drivers. After each film participants filled in a questionnaire about the accident. The critical question (IV) here was, ‘About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’ Different conditions were used, where the verb was changed to ‘smashed’, ‘collided’, ‘bumped’, ‘hit’ and ‘contacted’. Participants were asked to estimate the speed in miles per hour.
The films were shown in different orders in each condition. This first study was conducted over one-and-a-half hours.
Second study
This study used 150 participants divided into three groups. All participants watched a one-minute film on a multiple-car accident. They then answered some questions about the film. The critical question was, ‘How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’ The verb was changed to ‘smashed’ in the comparison group. The control group was not asked to estimate the speed.
Results and conclusions
When the critical question had the word ‘smashed’ or ‘collided’ speed estimates were higher than that for the other words. For ‘smashed’ it was 40.8, for ‘collided’ 39.3, while for ‘contacted’ the estimate was 31.8 miles per hour.
According to Loftus and Palmer, the speed estimate was moderated by the verb used to describe the intensity of the crash. The greater the intensity conveyed by the word, the higher the speed estimate to match it. The researchers did note that the estimate could be the result of demand characteristics. Since the participants were unsure of the speed, they offered a figure that they thought would be most suited for the purpose of the study. Again, the choice of verb acted as a cue to make the participant guess what range of speed the researcher might be looking for.
Figure 5.5 Speed estimates for the verbs in Experiment 1
In the second study participants were asked about the speed of the cars and about seeing any broken glass around the scene of the accident. See Table 5.2.
Response | Smashed | Hit | Control |
Yes | 16 | 7 | 6 |
No | 34 | 43 | 44 |
Table 5.3 Response to the question ‘Did you see any broken glass?’
The word ‘smashed’ which employs a more forceful impact, drew more than twice the ‘yes’ responses than when the word ‘hit’ was used.
This result indicates that questions can alter the memory of events and lead to distortions. One initial change in wording can have prolonged effects on memory. Loftus and Palmer offered the reconstructive hypothesis to explain the phenomenon: A person obtains two kinds of information about an event – the first is the information obtained from witnessing the event itself; the second is the information supplied or acquired after the event. If there is some difference between the two sources, integration of information can lead to memory distortions.
How did this study contribute to understanding human behaviour?
The findings of this study have implications for examination of witnesses and how courts should consider eyewitness testimony. Questions that lead a witness to answer in a particular way lessen the accuracy of testimony given by witnesses to crimes. As demonstrated, a single change of word can bring significant changes in how an event is remembered.
4.2 Biases in Thinking and Decision-Making
Humans rely on intuitive thinking and take cognitive shortcuts resulting in a number of well- researched biases.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
Human beings are not always rational thinkers. Instead, they rely on intuitive thinking and take cognitive shortcuts. We have already investigated System 1 thinking and the use of heuristics to make decisions that can lead to poor outcomes. Cognitive psychologists have investigated a wide range of cognitive biases, two of which are confirmation bias and illusory correlations.
Confirmation bias is defined as the tendency to seek out information to confirm what you already believe. We unintentionally look for material that supports our opinions and tend to overlook evidence that does not support our viewpoint. When we consider evidence, we tend to interpret it to support our views. Our memories are also affected as we tend to selectively recall information that reinforces our views.
Imagine you are writing an essay on refugees. You believe nations should do all that they can to help these people in need. The tendency will be for you to search for information that supports your view and give lesser weight to any evidence that argues against refugee programmes.
Nickersen (1998) reviewed investigations of the confirmation bias and concluded that it is problematic, pervasive and strong. So powerful is the bias that he was doubtful you can give fair consideration to a belief that opposes your viewpoint. He advises that making people aware of the bias can help guard against it, as can encouraging people to adopt an alternative hypothesis as early as possible in the thinking process.
Ask YourselfWhen you studied approaches to research you examined the term ‘experimenter bias’. Is this bias related to confirmation bias? Why? Why not?
Focus on Research
Hill et al. (2008) investigated the role of confirmation bias in interviewing a suspect to a crime. They designed a study to examine whether an expectation of guilt on the part of the interviewer influenced their behaviour. Sixty-one undergraduate students were asked to make up questions they wanted to ask a person suspected of cheating. Before they wrote their questions, they were either led to believe that the suspect was guilty or that they were innocent. Those participants who had heard that the suspect was guilty formulated more questions that presumed the suspect was guilty than presumed the suspect was innocent. These results indicate that expectations of guilt can have an effect on questioning style.
An illusory correlation is a belief that two things are associated when there is no actual or only a minor association. Imagine a situation where a person concludes Chinese students are better at studying maths because they knew a couple of Chinese students who won an international maths competition. They may be making an illusory correlation. This belief could then be reinforced by the confirmation bias. The person ignores other students from different races who are also good at maths while ignoring Chinese students who are average or poor maths students.
Focus on Research
Hamilton and Rose (1980) investigated illusory correlations in the maintenance of social stereotypes in three experiments with seventy-three male and seventy-seven female high school and undergraduate students and adults. In the first experiment, participants read sets of sentences that described different occupations with pairs of adjectives. For example doctors (thoughtful, wealthy), and salesmen (enthusiastic, talkative). Other non-stereotypical traits were included such as boring, clever, demanding and courteous. In the second experiment, the trait adjectives were either consistent with stereotypic beliefs about one of the occupational groups or unrelated to the group’s stereotype; in the third study, traits were either inconsistent with or unrelated to a group’s stereotype. Participants estimated how frequently each of the trait adjectives had described members of each of the occupational groups. Each study revealed systematic biases in the participants’ judgements so that the perceived correlation between traits and occupations was more congruent (congruent = similar to or in agreement with something) with existing stereotypical beliefs than the actual correlation. Findings indicate a cognitive bias in the processing of new information about social groups that are influenced by existing stereotypes.
The study shows an example of stereotypical thinking. Hamilton and Rose (1980) argued that illusionary correlations are triggered when two fairly infrequent situations or events occur together. The observer’s heightened attention to these events results in them being better encoded and remembered. As we know from the availability heuristic the more easily a memory is retrieved, the more it influences our thinking. We tend to overestimate the frequency of these events. For example, if we see a car driven by a young man mount a pavement and narrowly miss hitting a child, we only need to see a young man driving a little erratically a few days later to become convinced that ‘all young people are bad drivers’. Illusory correlations can lead people to remember information that confirms the expected relationship.
Focus on Research
Risen et al. (2007) conducted four studies to explore the phenomenon of ‘one-shot’ illusory correlations. These correlations were formed from a single instance of unusual behaviour by a member of a rare group. In Studies 1, 2 and 3, unusual behaviours committed by members of rare groups were processed differently than other types of behaviours. They received more processing time, prompted more attributional thinking, and were more memorable. In Study 4, the authors obtained evidence from two implicit measures of association that one-shot illusory correlations are generalised to other members of a rare group.
The results suggest that one-shot illusory correlations arise because unusual pairings of behaviours and groups uniquely prompt people to consider group membership as the explanation of the unusual behaviour. (i.e. ‘The only reason for this strange behaviour must be that they are members of this particular unusual group’).
4.3 Assessment Advice: Reliability of Cognitive Processes
QUESTION | STUDY |
SAQs Outline/describe/explain | Suggested Studies |
One research method (approach to research) used when investigating the reliability of one cognitive process | Any of the studies listed below are suitable for these SAQs |
Ethical considerations of research into the reliability of one cognitive process | Any of the studies listed below are suitable for these SAQs |
The reliability of one cognitive process | Loftus and Palmer (1974) |
Reconstructive memory | Loftus and Palmer (1974) |
One (cognitive) bias in thinking and decision-making | Hamilton & Rose (1980) or Hill et al. (2008) |
One theory of cognitive bias | Hamilton & Rose (1980) or Hill et al. (2008) |
QUESTIONS (ERQs) Discuss/evaluate/contrast/to what extent? | |
Research methods (approaches to research) used when investigating the reliability of cognitive processes | Any two studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
Ethical considerations of research into the reliability of cognitive processes | Any two studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
The reliability of one or more cognitive processes | Loftus and Palmer (1974) & Tuckey and Brewer (2003) |
Reconstructive memory | Loftus and Palmer (1974) & Tuckey and Brewer (2003) |
One or more theory of reconstructive memory | Loftus and Palmer (1974) & Tuckey and Brewer (2003) |
Cognitive bias in thinking and decision-making | Hamilton & Rose (1980) & Risen et al. (2007) |
One or more theory of cognitive bias in thinking and decision-making | Hamilton & Rose (1980) & Risen et al. (2007) |
5. Emotion and Cognition
5.1 The Influence of Emotions on Cognitive Processes
Psychological and neuroscientific research has revealed that emotion and cognition are intertwined. Memories of emotional events sometimes have a persistence and vividness that other memories seem to lack, but there is evidence that even highly emotional memories may fade over time.
Source: IB Psychology Guide
Psychological and neuroscientific research has revealed that emotion and cognition are intertwined. Emotions involve physiological changes like arousal but we may not be fully aware of these biological events. They also involve a subjective feeling of the emotion and associated behaviours. These emotions perform an adaptive function as they shape the experience of events and guide the individual in how to react to events, objects and situations regarding personal relevance and well-being.
To understand how emotions influence cognitive processing this section will focus on memory. In general, emotional episodes tend to be better remembered. We tend to pay close attention to them as they connect us to important people and issues in our lives. These connections increase the strength of the memory. The biological changes associated with emotions also facilitate how memories are consolidated.
Freud’s theory about repression was an early attempt to understand how emotions affected memory. Levinger and Clark (1961) set out to test this theory by looking at the retention of associations to emotionally charged words, such as ‘quarrel’, ‘angry’ and ‘fear’, compared with the retention of associations to neutral words like ‘cow’, ‘tree’ and ‘window’. When participants were asked to give immediate free associations with the words, it took them longer to respond to the emotionally charged words, and their galvanic skin responses were higher. (Galvanic skin response is a method of measuring how the skin conducts electricity, which varies according to its moisture level. Galvanic skin responses are a way of measuring psychological stress or arousal). Immediately after the word association tests, participants were given the words again and asked to remember the associations. They still had difficulty remembering the associations to the emotionally charged words. This study supports Freud’s repression hypothesis.
Focus on Research
Brown and Kulik (1977) aimed to test their theory that flashbulb memories are more vivid and more accurate than normal memories. They conducted questionnaires of eighty US participants, forty African Americans and forty Caucasians, between twenty and sixty years old. (Note that there are two types of surveys: interviews and questionnaires. For the purpose of DP psychology, surveys within the qualitative approach will refer to interviews, while surveys within the quantitative approach will refer to questionnaires.) The participants answered questions regarding ten different important events. Nine events were public and most related to assassinations or attempts to kill well-known personalities. The tenth event was of a personal nature. They were asked to recall where they were and what they were doing when they first heard the news of each event. They were also asked to indicate how often they had rehearsed information about each event. The researchers found the assassination of President Kennedy generated the most flashbulb memories, with 90% of participants recalling where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news. Most participants’ personal flashbulb memories related to the death of a parent. They concluded the level of emotional arousal determined whether a memory was a flashbulb one or not and these findings supported their theory.
Subsequently, psychologists have questioned the idea that flashbulb memories are a special category of memory. The challenge for researchers is determining whether these memories as described by participants are accurate.
In order to test the theory of flashbulb memory, Neisser and Harsch (1992) interviewed participants about the 1986 Challenger space shuttle disaster, one day after it happened and again two-and-a-half years later. One day after the event, 21% of participants reported hearing about the disaster on TV. But two-and-a-half years later, 45% reported hearing about it on TV. Their memories of how they knew about the Challenger explosion had changed over time. In the second interview, some of the participants incorrectly reported where they were when they first heard of the disaster. Neisser and Harsch concluded that although flashbulb memories are vivid and long-lasting, they are not always reliable.
Parkin et al. (1982) replicated Levinger and Clark’s study but challenged their conclusion. While Levinger and Clark tested participants immediately after asking them to recall associations, Parkin added a time delay: participants were asked to recall their associations seven days after the original test. They found that emotions did reduce immediate recall, but one week later the associations to the emotionally charged words were remembered better than those relating to the neutral words. These results refuted the theory of repression.
Further research into how emotion can affect cognitive processes has focused on flashbulb memory theory (FMT). Flashbulb memories are defined by Brown and Kulik (1977) as memories of highly charged emotional information. They tend to be more vivid, long-lasting and accurate than other memories. They theorised that these events are maintained in a unique memory store through discussion and rehearsal.
Focus on Research
Talarico and Rubin (2003) conducted a study to investigate FMT theory. On 12 September 2001, fifty-four university students recorded their memory of first hearing about the terrorist attacks of September 11th in New York and also their memory of a recent everyday event. This is the first study into flashbulb memory that has used the memory of an everyday event as a control. Participants were interviewed again either one, six or thirty-two weeks later. Consistency for the flashbulb and everyday memories did not differ, in both cases declining over time.
However, self-ratings of vividness, recollection and belief in the accuracy of memory declined only for everyday memories. Initial emotion ratings correlated with a later belief in the accuracy, but not consistency, for these flashbulb memories. Initial emotional ratings also predicted later post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms. The researchers concluded that flashbulb memories are not special in their accuracy, as previously claimed, but only in their perceived accuracy.
In summary, the current view of FMT is that emotions enhance the vividness of the memory and confidence in the reliability of that memory. The true question is not why flashbulb memories are so accurate because they are not, but why people are so confident for so long in the accuracy of their flashbulb memories.
5.2 Assessment Advice: Emotion and Cognition
QUESTION | STUDY |
SAQs Outline/describe/explain | Suggested Studies |
One research method (approach to research) used when investigating emotion and cognition | Any of the studies listed below are suitable for these SAQs |
Ethical considerations of research into emotion and cognition | Any of the studies listed below are suitable for these SAQs |
One theory of the influence of emotion on one cognitive process | Brown and Kulik (1977) |
One theory of the influence of emotion on cognition | Brown and Kulik (1977) |
QUESTIONS (ERQs) Discuss/evaluate/contrast/to what extent? | |
Research methods (approaches to research) used when investigating emotion and cognition | Any two of the studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
Ethical considerations of research into emotion and cognition | Any two of the studies listed below are suitable for these ERQs |
One or more theories of the influence of emotion on one or more cognitive processes | Brown and Kulik (1977) & Talarico and Rubin (2003) |
Research (studies) into the influence of emotion on one or more cognitive processes | Brown and Kulik (1977) & Talarico and Rubin (2003) |
6. Cognitive Processing in a Technological (Digital/Modern) World
Cognitive process in the technological (digital/modern) world (HL only)
Remarkable advances in technologies in the last few decades have seen a dramatic increase in the distribution and use of information encoded as digital sequences. How this digital world impacts cognitive processes is an HL extension topic. In particular, you will study:
The influence (positive and negative) of technologies (digital/modern) on cognitive processes.
Methods used to study the interaction between technologies and cognitive processes.
Memory
How digital technology affects cognitive processes and human interaction is a controversial topic. Both positive and negative effects have been the subject of research. On the positive side, some argue digital technology can enhance cognitive functioning. For example, video gaming can improve perception, mental rotation skills, visual memory, attention, task-switching, multi-tasking and decision-making. On the negative side, some contend that digital technology can lead to distraction, reduced attention spans, a sense of social isolation, scattered thinking and a decline in the ability to think analytically.
Memory has been the focus of several investigations. For example, Sparrow et al. (2011) were interested in how search engines might affect memory. They likened these search engines to external memory sources accessible when information is needed. In this way, digital technology is changing the way information is stored. You may not remember the information, but you do know where you can find that information when necessary.
Sparrow et al. were confident that memory is adapting to new computing and communication technology and they reached this conclusion after a series of experiments. The researchers showed participants trivial pieces of information, for example ‘an ostrich’s eye is bigger than its brain’. These statements were then typed into a computer by the participants. Half the participants believed what they typed would be saved while the other half were informed the information would be lost. Participants who believed the information would be lost recalled more statements than the participants who were told that the information would be saved.
Additional experiments followed the same set of procedures but this time the computer responded either by saying ‘Your entry has been saved’, ‘Your entry has been erased’ or ‘Your entry has been saved to…’ followed by a folder name. Each person was then shown a list of statements and asked two questions: ‘Have you seen this fact before?’, ‘Was this fact saved or deleted?’ or ‘Where was this fact saved?’
When a fact had been flagged as one that the computer erased, participants had a better memory of the fact itself. However, when the computer told them that the fact had been saved and where it had been saved, they more accurately remembered that it had been saved and where it had been saved compared to remembering the fact itself.
Based on these results the researchers challenged simplistic arguments that digital technology is detrimental (detrimental = make something worse) to cognitive processes like memory. Some people argue that knowing where to find information, which is almost immediate with a digital device in our hands, critically evaluating that information, and then using the information in an analytical process is better than having a basic memory of the information. Especially in a learning (school) context, higher order thinking skills can be developed sooner with outsourcing some factual knowledge to ‘search engines’ because the testing of regurgitated factual information takes away time from developing higher order thinking skills.
Ask YourselfDo you think that the potential to ‘outsource’ information to digital devices has a positive or negative effect on cognitive processes? Why? Why not?
With the widespread use of search engines like Google, commentators used the term the ‘Google effect’ to describe the tendency to forget information that can be found readily online. Kaspersky Lab, an internet security company, used the term ‘digital amnesia’ to describe this process and they conducted a survey on their customers to understand the process.
Focus on Research
Kaspersky Lab (2015) conducted an internet survey of 6,000 consumers aged from sixteen to over fifty-five. Males and females were equally represented, with 1,000 participants from each of the following countries: the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Benelux. Participants were asked to recall important telephone numbers. They were also asked how and where they stored information they located online.
An analysis of their data found that:
More than half of adult consumers could recall their home phone number, 53% of parents could recall their children’s phone numbers and 51% their work phone number.
One in three participants reported they were happy to forget or risk forgetting information they can find – or find again – online.
36% of participants reported that they would turn to the internet before trying to remember information.
24% reported they would forget an online fact as soon as they had used it.
The results were consistent across male and female respondents but higher rates of amnesia were prevalent in older age groups. The overall conclusion of the study was that connected devices enrich lives but they can result in digital amnesia.
Video games
How video games affect children and adolescents remains a contested and unresolved issue. Those who oppose video games argue they increase aggressive behaviour, bring social isolation and teach antisocial values. In addition, excessive video-gaming can adversely affect academic performance and lead to poor health. Others argue video gaming can improve cognitive functions including memory, spatial skills, pattern recognition, analysis and decision-making. No consensus has yet emerged from the psychological research.
The following study investigates video gaming and visual working memory (VWM) and argues that gaming can have positive outcomes. VWM is the ability to hold visual information in mind for a brief period. This information is used to navigate the visual world. The storage capacity of VWM is limited.
Focus on Research
Blacker et al. (2014) theorised that video games could expand the capacity of VWM. Of interest were action video games as they provide the player with a complex and changing visual environment in which accurate visual memories often decide the player’s success or failure in the game. The hypothesis of the experiment was that exposure to games with rich visual environments over an extensive period would enhance VWM performance compared to games that did not involve rich visual environments.
Thirty-nine male undergraduates with a mean age of 20 were randomly assigned to an action game group or control group. The action game group played video games like ‘Call of Duty’, while the control group played games like ‘Sims’. Both groups played their games for one hour per day for 30 days. After training, the participants’ VWM was tested. Individuals who played on an action game showed significant improvement on measures of VWM capacity compared with those who played the control game. The investigators concluded that exposure to rich visual environments over an extensive period is a distinctive form of training that may allow individuals to extend the capacity of VWM.
Ask YourselfWere you surprised by these results? What are the limitations of this experiment?
Focus on Research
Pei-Chi Ho, Szu-Ming Chung and Yi-Hua Lin (2012) investigated how visual cognition could enhance the development of a young child's learning, especially reading and writing. In particular they wanted to determine the extent to which augmented virtual reality technology could enhance creativity and learning.
The investigators developed an enhanced reality teaching tool called GoGoBox. The game was designed to engage a child's interest and stimulate the player's visual abilities, including visual discrimination, visual memory, visual form-constancy and visual closure.
The experimental design involved a pre-test followed by exposure to the GoGoBox followed by a post-test. The investigators used the Motor-Free Visual Perception Test-Revised (MVPT-R) to test the participants before playing the game and then again after 10 hours of playing sessions over five days. Twenty-seven participants were randomly selected from a kindergarten located in Taiwan. Ages ranged from five to six.
The average score on the MVPT-R increased from a pre-test of 59 to a post-test of 64 and was significant at p=<.05. The investigators concluded that digital learning system could enhance young children's cognitive skills.
Source:
https://www.euppublishing.com/doi/pdfplus/10.3366/ijhac.2012.0046
6.1 Assessment Advice: Cognitive Processing in a Technological (Digital/Modern) World
QUESTION | STUDY |
QUESTIONS (ERQs) Discuss/evaluate/contrast/to what extent? | |
Methods used to study Cognitive processing in a technological (digital/modern) world OR the influence of technologies on cognitive processing OR the reliability of cognitive processing or emotions and cognition. | Any two studies listed below. |
Cognitive processing in a technological (digital/modern) world | Sparrow et al. (2011) Blacker, Curby, Klobusicky and Chein (2014) Pei-Chi Ho, Szu-Ming Chung and Yi-Hua Lin (2012) Kaspersky Lab (2015) |
The influence (positive and/or negative) of technologies (digital/modern) on cognitive processing, OR the reliability of cognitive processing OR emotion and cognition. | Sparrow et al. (2011) Blacker, Curby, Klobusicky and Chein (2014) Pei-Chi Ho, Szu-Ming Chung and Yi-Hua Lin (2012) Kaspersky Lab (2015) |
Further Reading
The Pamoja Teachers Articles Collection has a range of articles relevant to your study of the cognitive approach to understanding behaviour.
References
Andrés, P. and Van der Linden, M. (2002). Are central executive functions working in patients with focal frontal lesions? Neuropsychologia, 40, 835–845.
Atkinson, R.C. and Shiffrin, R.M. (1968). Human memory: A proposal system and its control processes. In Spence, K.W. and Spence, J.T. (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation Vol. 2 (pp. 89–195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Baddeley, A.D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423.
Baddeley, A. and Hitch, G.J. (1974). Working memory. In G.A. Bower (Ed.), Recent Advances in Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–90. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Beck, A.T. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York, NY: Guildford Press.
Blacker, K.J., Curby, K.M., Klobusicky, E. and Chein, J.M. (2014). Effects of action video game training on visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 1992–2004.
Brown, R. and Kulik, J. (1977). Flashbulb memories. Cognition, 5, 73–99.
Clark, S.R. (1990). Schema Theory and Reading Comprehension. (ERIC Document Reproduction Center, no. ED 325–802).
Cohen, G. (1993). Everyday memory. In G. Cohen, G. Kiss and M. LeVoi (Eds.), Memory: Current Issues (2nd ed., pp. 13–62). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Craik, F.I.M., & Lockhart, R.S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 11(6), 671-684.
Filmore, C. J. (1975). An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning. From Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 123-131
Fox C. (2006). The availability heuristic in the classroom: How soliciting more criticism can boost your course ratings. Judgment and Decision Making, 1(1), 86–90.
Glanzer, M. and Cunitz, A.R. (1966). Two storage mechanisms in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5(4), 351–360.
Hamilton, D.L. and Rose, T.L. (1980). Illusory correlation and the maintenance of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 832–845.
Hess, T.M., Auman, C., Colcombe, S.J. and Rahhal, T.A. (2003). The impact of stereotype threat on age differences in memory performance. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58, 3–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.1.P3
Hill, C., Memon, A. and McGeorge, P. (2008). The role of confirmation bias in suspect interviews: A systematic evaluation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 357–371.
Hitch, G. J. and Baddeley, A. D. (1976). Verbal reasoning and working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 603–621.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kaspersky Lab (2015). The rise and impact of digital amnesia. Retrieved from https://blog.kaspersky.com/files/2015/06/005-Kaspersky-Digital-Amnesia-19.6.15.pdf
Levinger, G. and Clark, J. (1961). Emotional factors in the forgetting of word associations. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 99–105.
Loftus, E. (2005). A 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learning and Memory, 12, 361–366.
Loftus, E.F. and Palmer, J.C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 585–589.
Loftus, E.F. and Pickrell, J.E. (1995) The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25, 720–725.
Manago, A.M., Taylor, T. and Greenfield, P.M. (2012). Me and my 400 friends: The anatomy of college students’ Facebook networks, their communication patterns, and well-being. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 369–380.
McCloskey, M. and Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading post event information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1–16.
Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven. Psychology Review, 63, 81–97.
Neisser, U. and Harsch, N. (1992). Phantom flashbulbs: False recollections of hearing the news about Challenger. In E. Winograd and U. Neisser (Eds.), Affect and accuracy in recall: Studies of “flashbulb” memories (pp. 9–31). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Nickerson, R.S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.
Nisbett, R.E. and Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Parkin, A.J., Lewinsohn, J. and Folkard, S. (1982). The influence of emotion on immediate and delayed retention: Levinger and Clark reconsidered. British Journal of Psychology, 73(3), 389–393.
Pei-Chi Ho, Szu-Ming Chung and Yi-Hua Lin (2012). Influences on children's visual cognition capabilities through playing ‘intelligent matrix’ developed by the augmented virtual reality technology, International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, Volume 6 Issue 1-2, Page 160-171, ISSN 1753-8548. Available Online Feb 2012].
Risen, J.L., Gilovich, T. and Dunning, D. (2007). One-shot illusory correlations and stereotype formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1492–1502.
Robbins, T.W ., Anderson, E.J., Barker, D.R., Bradley, A.C., Fearneyhough, C., Henson, R. and Hudson, S.R. (1996). Working memory in chess. Memory and Cognition, 24, 83–93.
Ross, M. and Sicoly, F. (1979). Egocentric biases in availability and attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 322–336.
Rumelhart, D.E. and Norman, D.A. (1983). Representation in memory. In R.C. Atkinson, R.J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey and R.D. Luce (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Psychology (pp. 1–110). Chichester, England: Wiley.
Sacks, O. (2007a). The Abyss. The New Yorker, 83, 100–111.
Sacks, O. (2007b). Musicophilia: Tales of music and the brain. New York, NY: Knopf.
Shallice, T. and Warrington, E.K. (1970). Independent functioning of verbal memory stores: A neuropsychological study. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 261–273.
Small, G., Moody, T., Soddartj, P. and Bookheimer, S. (2009). Your brain on Google: Patterns of cerebral activation during internet searching, The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17(2), 116–126.
Sparrow, B., Liu, J. and Wegner, D.M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science, 333, 776–778.
Talarico, J.M. and Rubin, D.C. (2003). Confidence, not consistency, characterizes flashbulb memories. Psychological Science, 14, 455–461.
Tuckey, M.R. and Brewer, N. (2003). The influence of schemas, stimulus ambiguity, and interview schedule on eyewitness memory over time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9(2), 101–118.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
Valkenburg, P. and Peter, J. (2007). Internet communication and its relation to well-being: Identifying some underlying mechanisms. Media Psychology, 9(1), 43–58.
Yuille, J.C., Cutshall, J.L. and King, M.A. (1986). Age-related chances in eyewitness account and photo-identification. Unpublished manuscript: University of British Columbia.
Last updated
