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;
75 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Broadbent |
Bottleneck, 1958, contains a selective filter |
|
|
|
Treisman |
Attenuator, more flexible than Broadbent 1964 |
|
|
|
Deutsch & Deutsch |
1963 late selection. Top down |
|
|
|
Posner, 1980 attentional spotlight |
Focused visual attention like a spotlight, can see everything under the attentional visual field |
|
|
|
Zoom lens Erikson and St. James, 1996 |
The attended area of focus can be increased or decreased |
|
|
|
Lavie (2000) |
Attention is context dependent, sometimes there is an early selection and sometimes a late selection |
|
|
|
A late process? |
Requires a lot higher brain function so requires a detailed analysis |
|
|
|
Early process |
Automatic and immediate. Like identifying a theme |
|
|
|
Dukas (2004) evolutionary Reasons for limited capacity of attention |
Need bigger brain to sort increased input Need to filter or accommodate more imput May reflect an optimal balance between cost of increasing attentional systems and their significance to lifestyle |
|
|
|
Consequence of divided attention |
Participants slow down on task Errors increase One task may receive more attention than the other |
|
|
|
Allport, Antonis and Reynolds (1972) |
Dual task Play the keyboard and shadowing prose at rate of 150words/minWith practice participants could perform both tasks as well as when done separately minWith practice participants could perform both tasks as well as when done separately With practice participants could perform both tasks as well as when done separately |
|
|
|
What factors affect divided attention? |
Task similarity, (similarity of stimulus), task difficulty, effect of practice |
|
|
|
Why does practicing help ability? |
Develops new strategies to reduce interference Leads to reduced processing demands Leads to more economical mode of functioning which rely on fewer resources |
|
|
|
Schneider and shiffrin 1977 |
Developed a distinction between controlled process- limited capacity, requires attention, and flexible And automatic process- no capacity limitations, no attention and difficult to modify once learnt |
|
|
|
Multiple object tracking |
Limited to no. Of items we can track at once Agreed to be around 4-5 items |
|
|
|
Automaticity Norman and shallice 1986 |
Actions without awareness Initiation of actions without conscious deliberation Automatically drawn to stimulus Combination of tasks without interference or competition for processing resources |
|
|
|
Two process theory of attention Automatic and controlled processes |
•two modes Automatic mode Passive outcome of stimulation, parrallel, does not draw on attentional capacity Conscious control mode Consciously controlled by intentions, DOES draw on attentional capacity |
|
|
|
Action slips |
Performing unintentional actions •Automatic process occurs as triggering stimulus is present even if innapropriate at time |
|
|
|
Change blindness |
Often individuals do not notice obvious changes that occur - Simons and Levin 1988 person asking questions switched, they don't realise |
|
|
|
Inattentional blindness |
Simons and Chabris 1999 Gorilla experiment participants focussed on white shirts didn't see gorilla. |
|
|
|
William James memory |
Made distinction between STM and LTM Also defined primary and secondary memory |
|
|
|
Primary memory - William James |
Related to present space and time, conscious, effortless retrieval |
|
|
|
Secondary memory - William James |
Relates to past, unconscious, permanent and retrieval is effortful |
|
|
|
Milner 1956 |
Limited STM of 7+ or - 2 |
|
|
|
Cowan (2001) memory capacity |
Suggests STM limited capacity of 4 suggests STM a bit like attention |
|
|
|
Sperling (1960) iconic (sensory) memory store |
Information in this store is all attended to, but decays very rapidly. |
|
|
|
Iconic memory eval |
Criticisms over basic assumptions Is relevant to attention Supports millers 7 +/- 2 |
|
|
|
Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) modal model of memory |
Short term store and long term store, sensory information is rehearsed in STS Info rehearsed then transferred to LTS or forgotten by decay |
|
|
|
Bottom up attention |
Passive modes of attention •reflexive attention (towards a bolt of lightning) •Spotlight attention and visual search (only attend to what falls within the fovea) |
|
|
|
Top down attention |
Active modes of attention •Selective attention (you choose to pay attention or not) |
|
|
|
Posner 1980 |
When visual cues were valid, reaction times were faster When visual cues were invalid, reaction times were slower |
|
|
|
Selective/focused attention |
Selectively attend to certain stimuli in our environment while ignoring others Present 2 or more stimuli inputs, instruction to respond to just one |
|
|
|
Divided attention |
Ability to undertake several tasks at once Present at least 2 stimulus inputs, instruction to respond to all |
|
|
|
Vision |
Limit on how much can take in, because things in environment in different spatial location. |
|
|
|
Auditory |
Streams of sound from different locations Can't listen all at once Can selectively listen (cocktail effect |
|
|
|
Cherry's cocktail party effect 1953 |
How can we focus attention onto one conversation in a crowded room |
|
|
|
What physical differences do we pick up on in conversation? |
Gender of speaker Voice intensity Location of speaker Using Cherry's dichotic listening task shadowing experiment |
|
|
|
Cherry's dichotic listening task showed |
We are skilful at using direction from which the conversation is coming from (which ear) We are efficient at selectively attending Filtering occurs early in the attention process (broadbent) |
|
|
|
Broadbent 1958 |
3 digits presented to one ear same time as another 3 presented to other ear Suggests that stimuli are accessed in parallel by a sensory buffer |
|
|
|
Automatic mode |
Passive outcome of stimulation, parallel, does not draw on attentional capacity |
|
|
|
Conscious control mode |
Consciously controlled by intentions, does draw on attentional capacity |
|
|
|
The stroop effect 1935 |
Shows the conflict between automatic attention and controlled attention |
|
|
|
Why does the stroop effect do what it does? |
The ability to respond selectively to 1 aspect interferes with other aspect |
|
|
|
Action slips |
Performing unintentional actions automatic process occurs as triggering stimulus is present even if inappropriate to perform action at that time |
|
|
|
Rensink, O'regan and clark 1997 |
Action is required to perceive change •images presented with an intermittent blank screen •change not detected •However if a verbal clue is given change identified rapidly •therefore the information is there but requires attention to be observed |
|
|
|
Difference between STS and LTS |
Capacity. Forgetting. STS forgotten by trace decay LTS by interference Encoding. STS uses sensory info, LTS uses semantic information
|
|
|
|
Baddeley and Hitch 1974 memory |
Central executive Visio-spatial sketchpad Phonological loop |
|
|
|
Phonological loop Conrad and Hull 1966 |
Phonological similarity effect Based upon phonological loop Similar sounding words/syllables/letters can be confused while being mentally rehearsed in short term memory |
|
|
|
Visio-spatial sketchpad |
How much can you attend to in a visual scene? |
|
|
|
Consciousness |
When we hold something in mind is holding or a sensation in mind working memory. |
|
|
|
Global workspace theory (Baars 1997) |
A working memory for consciousness Distinguishes between WM consciousness in terms of duration GWT lasts only a few seconds Bit like iconic memory |
|
|
|
Long term memory LTM |
Unlimited capacity Information lost by interference (more than decay) These types of memory can be for recalling facts and information |
|
|
|
Levels of processing Craik & Lockhart 1972 |
No. of different levels of processing. Shallow/physical. E.g. detecting specific letters in words deep/semantic Key assumptions Info memorable based on how deep the level of processing is Elaborate, long-lasting & strong memory traces are produced by deeper levels of analysis |
|
|
|
Craik and tulving (1975) distinction between maintenance rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal |
Elaboration of processing more elaboration = better LTM •recall was improved for those words that had been associated with complex sentences Distinctiveness of processing •More distinctive/unique = more readily retrieved |
|
|
|
Eysenck and Eysenck 1980 |
Using words with irregular phoneme-grapheme conversion: scissors or gnome. Cond 1 non-distinctive pronouced normally Cond 2 distinctive, pronounced as sound. Words in distinctive condition were recalled better. |
|
|
|
Humour and novelty |
Words associated with humour are preferentially retrieved Schmidt 2002 The amygdala is suggested as being used in laying down memories and is associated coated with the detection of emotion |
|
|
|
Explicit memory Graf & Schacter 1985 |
"Is revealed when performance on a task requires conscious recollection of previous experiences" E.g. recalling words from a list or recalling facts |
|
|
|
Implicit memory Graf & Schacter 1985 |
"Is revealed when performance on a task is facilitated in the absence of conscious recollection" E.g. identify whether a sentence is grammatically correct, or knowing how to ride a bike |
|
|
|
Declarative |
Refers to semantic and episodic memories explicit memory (can be verbalised. |
|
|
|
Tulving 1972 |
Argued declarative memory can be divided into 2 types Episodic and semantic memory |
|
|
|
Semantic memory |
Do not relate to a particular time and place General knowledge of the world Meanings, relationships, rules |
|
|
|
Episodic memory |
Memories for episodes/events in our lives Occur at a particular place. Autobiographical memories |
|
|
|
Semantic vs. Episodic Tulving 1989 |
Different systems involved 1972 Episodic and semantic memories activated different areas of the brain |
|
|
|
Procedural memory |
Refers to learned skills Implicit memory (cannot be verbalised) |
|
|
|
Encoding specificity principle |
If something is learnt in a specific location or environment it is preferentially recalled in the same conditions Tulving 1970 underwater study. |
|
|
|
Why do we forget? |
Poor consolidation Trace decay Interference |
|
|
|
Proactive interference Proactive interference Proactive interference Proactive interference Proactive interference |
Previous Learning interferes with later learning |
|
|
|
Retroactive interference |
Later learning interferes with previous learning |
|
|
|
Output interference |
When the act of recalling a memory interferes with the retrieval of the actual information needed in the first place. |
|
|
|
Amnesic patients as evidence |
Have declarative memory decifit Can acquire new motor skills (new sports skills) Therefore procedural memories are relatively intact There is a dissociation between declarative and procedural memories |
|
|
|
Retrograde amnesia |
Loss of memory information acquired prior to the onset of amnesia Effects episodic memories Usually associated with damage to cortical and neocortical structures Cause can be variable (mates 2002) |
|
|
|
Anterograde amnesia |
Loss of memory information acquired after the onset of amnesia Problem with consolidation of memories Could be caused by damage to subcortical areas. |
|
|
|
Amnesia case studies |
H.M. - epileptic had operation on medial temporal to stop seizures Caused retrograde amnesia for events 3 years prior to operation Impaired memory for events subsequent to operation (anterograde amnesia) |
|
|
|
Prospective memory |
Remembering to do something Leads to the idea of mental time travel (Suddendorf 1997) |
|
|
|
Mental time travel Suddendorf (1997) |
Episodic, prospective and autobiographical memories example of this. |
|
