Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
44 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
myth of media multitasking |
frequent media multitaskers are cognitively skilled and good at multitasking and often highly confident about their own multitasking ability |
|
reality of media multitasking |
frequent media multitaskers are bad at multitasking and perform poorly on cognitive tasks 1. particularly bad at filtering out irrelevant information 2. lower academic performance (course grades) 3. tend to be impulsive and sensation seeking |
|
is multitasking negative relationship casual in nature? |
we know for sure their is a negative correlation between high media multitasking frequency and poor cognitive performance |
|
casual relationship between media multitasking and cognitive performance |
high media multitasking frequency leads to poor cognitive performance |
|
non casual relationship between media multitasking and cognitive performance |
there is a third variable that connects the corelation of high media multitasking frequency and poor cognitive performance |
|
watson and strayer 2010 study |
procedure was singly task-driving single task-operation span dual task- driving and operation span dependent measures driving--brake speed and following distance operation span--memory and math accuracy only 2% could do the two |
|
automatic processes |
1. involve a minimal amount of mental resources 2. performance of highly familiar/skilled tasks |
|
controlled processes |
require a deliberate allocation of mental resources performance of unfamoiliar tasks or acquisition of new skills |
|
stroop effect |
word reading can interfere with color naming when the color word is incongruent with the ink color a more automatic task (word reading) intereferes with a less automatic task (color naming) |
|
effects of practice on automatization |
practice diminishes demand on mental resources--practice turns controlled into automatic processes (automatization) |
|
macleod and dunbar study |
backed practice of automatization with naming shapes vs naming arbitrary shapes before, colors interere with shape naming (color naing is more automatic than shape naming) after practice, shapes interfere with color naming |
|
are all subprocesses automatic? |
some sub. are more automatic than others and some may never achieve high levels of auomaticity |
|
posner and peterson's attentional network theory |
1. arousal (alerting) system 2. posterior attention (orienting) system 2. anterior attention (executive attention) system |
|
orienting attention key regions |
parietal love and superior colliculus |
|
executive attention key regions |
frontal lobe and the anterior cingulate |
|
alertness key regions |
reticular formation and thalamus |
|
posterior attention system |
for the primarily bottom up orienting of attention |
|
component processes for posterior attention system |
1. disengagin the "spotlight" 2. moving the "spotlight" 3. locking into position (enhacning) |
|
disorder related to the posterior attention system |
unilateral neglect |
|
unilateral neglect |
the lack of attention to one side of space, usually as a result of parietal lobe damage--almost always left side, but some info may get through |
|
anterior attention system |
top down regulation of attention (executive attention). selectively attending to one dimension while ignoring the other (stroop) and coordinating multiple activities or multitasking (divided attention) |
|
anterior attention system related disorder |
ADHD |
|
central symptoms of ADHD |
1. inattentive 2. impulsive 3. hyperactive |
|
some symptoms of inattentive in ADHD |
1. high distractibility 2. dificulty focusing and sustaining attention |
|
definition of impulsive behaviors in ADHD |
behavioral control (inhibition) problems |
|
definition of hyperactive behavior in ADHD |
1. fidgeting 2. always being "on the go" 3. excessive talking |
|
symptoms linked to the anterior attention system |
1. diminished blood flow in the frontal lobe 2. sitmulating frontal lobe function (eg via drugs like ritalin) improves concentration and alleviate hyperactivity |
|
hierarchical network model |
collins and quillian. knowledge is organized in a hierarchical manner and each "node" represents a concept nodes are linked to categorically related concepts each node is also linked to associated properties |
|
principle of cognitive economy |
1. associated properties are stored at the highest [possible level of hierarchy 2. ex "breaths" is stored at the level of "animal" not "bird" or "canary" |
|
problems of the hierarchical network model |
1. typicality effects --"a robin is a bird" verified faster than "a peacock is a bird" 2. prominent feature effect--"a peacock has feathers" is verified as quickly as "a canary can sing" 3. unlikely neat herarchical structures exist for some concepts or categories 4. most things can be classified in more than one way |
|
spreading activation model |
collins and loftus. nodes interconnected by links links are between associated concepts (bread and butter) and have differential strengths (indicated by the distance between nodes activation soreads along the links, making related concepts more accessible related to semantic priming effect |
|
semantic priming effect |
meyer and schwanevelt method: deciding whether each word presented is real of not (lexical decision) results: response was fasater if the target word is preceded by a related word than by an unrelated word |
|
difference between semantic priming and repetition priming |
semantic priming is short lived and does not last multiple days or even minutes |
|
strengths of evaluation of the spreading activation model |
1. can explain the semantic priming effect 2. can epxlin the findings that the hierarchical network model failed to explain (typicality effect) |
|
weaknesses of evaluation of the spreading activation model |
the model may be too flexible and is difficult to falsify (the model can be easily tweaked to fit the data |
|
distributed network approach |
assumes that the brain represents a concept in a distrubuted manner a concept is represented by multiple nodes and similar concepts are associated with similar patterns |
|
difference between semantic knowledge impairment and visual agnosia |
agnosia patients can demonstrate intact semantic knowledge when tested verbally (but not visually) |
|
symptoms or brain damage and impaired semantic knowledge |
dissociation between living things and nonliving things 2. more specific deficits have been reported (eg fruits and vegetables) |
|
multiple semanti memory systems basic assumptions |
farah and mcclelland, 1. each comcept is represented in the brain in a distributed manner 2. there are multiple semantic systems supported by different brain regions |
|
semantic systems in farah and mcclelland |
visual system--representing one's knowledge of visual features function system (representing one's knowledge of functions) |
|
multiple semantic memory systems main proposal |
1. living things are represented more strongly in the visual system than in the functional system 2. nonliving things are represented equally strongly in the two semantic memory systems 3. category specific impairments refelct damage to different parts of the semantic memory system |
|
category specific impairments |
visual system--impairs living things more severely functional system--impairs nonliving things more severely |
|
distributed network approach strengths |
1. can explain category specific impairments 2. idea is tested in neural network simulation models 3. idea of distributed semantic knowledge is consistent with the way information is represented in the brain |
|
distributed network approach weaknesses |
more semantic knowledge systems are probably necessary (eg auditory, motion, etc) |