Final Cog Psyc Exam

Front 1

How does the spider web analogy for memory help us understand how episodes may become confused with each other

Back 1

if there are many connections between two episodes you're fusing the two episodes together, and you may ventually lose the boundary between them, and so you will lse track of which info is from which event (transplant errors)

Front 2

transplant error

Back 2

when a bit of information encountered in one context is transplanted into another context (you confuse it, applying it to another situation instead of the actual one)

Front 3

you find that a part of your thinking process in a past episode was misremembered as if it was an actual part of the original experience! What kind of errors could this be?

Back 3

transplant error, intrusion error

Front 4

how can more connections help memory? hurt it?

Back 4

helps retrieval of the memory

hurt it in that it's difficult to see where the remembered episode stops and other, related knowledge begins

Front 5

what occurs with intrusion errors?

Back 5

when other knowledge intrudes into the remembered event

Front 6

participants are asked to recall a story. their recall is quite good, but they have made some mistakes, such as including parts that were only implied (but not actually a part of it). what kind of error is this?

Back 6

intrusion error

Front 7

What's the DRM procedure? Results?

Back 7

participants are given a list of words all with a common theme (like sleep) but the theme word is not actually there.

when people recall the list, they confidently put in the theme word despite it not actually being present (even if they were put on their guard before the experiment began)

Front 8

what does the DRM procedure seem to say about the mechanisms that lead to memory errors?

Back 8

they're quite automatic and not somehting that people can just inhibit

Front 9

schema(ta)

Back 9

summarize the broad pattern of what's normal in a situation

Front 10

how can schemata help your recall of an event?

Back 10

there are often gaps in your recollection, but schemata tell you what was probably there (eg there were menus in the restraunt, even if you remember nothing about the menus)

Front 11

can you plant false memories?

Back 11

yes

(misinformation effect)

Front 12

define misinformation effect

Back 12

an effect in which reports about an earlier event are influenced by misinformation someone received after experiencing the event.

can be used to make false memories

Front 13

what causes the misinformation effect?

Back 13

when someone is given misinformation after an episode. Influences people's memory of it

Front 14

the relationship between memory confidence and memory accuracy?

Back 14

basically none

Front 15

remember/know distinction

Back 15

remember is when you can recall the memory for sure

know is when you kind of remember information

Front 16

remember/know with correct vs false memories

Back 16

correct tends to have remember

false tends to have know

Front 17

family resemblance

Back 17

the notion that all members of a category resemble each other. generally relies on some number of shared features of the members. Each one doesn't need all features

Front 18

which theory about definitions of things deals with boundaries (if it has certain attributes then it's inside the boundaries. if it doesn't, then it's outside and not considered a part of this category)

Back 18

family resemblance

Front 19

how does prototype theory feel about "boundaries"?

Back 19

wants to deal with the center of a category, rather than the boundaries

Front 20

prototype theory

Back 20

the claim that mental categories are represented by means of a single "best example" which identifies the center of the category

Front 21

graded membership

Back 21

when objects are closer to the prototype they're considered to be "better" than ones that are farther away

Front 22

sentence verification task

Back 22

an experimental procedure used for studying memory in which participants are given simple sentences (eg cats are animals) and must quickly respond whether it's true or false

reaction times are measured

Front 23

findings of sentence verification task vs prototypes

Back 23

things that are closer to the prototypes are quicker to be answered than things that are farther away (eg is an afgand hound a dog vs is a german shepard a dog)

Front 24

rating tasks

Back 24

a task in which research participants must evaluate some item or category with reference to some dimension, usualy expressing their response in terms of some number

Front 25

production task

Back 25

ask people to name as many things in a category as they can (eg dogs) and they will probably start at the prototype and work their way out from there

Front 26

basic level categorization

Back 26

a level of categorization hypothesized as the natural and most informative level neither too specific nor too general. people tend to use basic level terms in their ordinary conversation and in their reasoning

Front 27

exemplar

Back 27

kind of like a prototype but more like an example (this looks like this which is a thing)

Front 28

self repoty data (imagery) findings

Back 28

participants reported that they could inspect their images much as they would inspect a picture

however, descriptions were very varied. some only had sketches, whereas some were very vivid and bright, according to reports

Front 29

description vs depiction

Back 29

description? the features that are prominent will be those that are distinctive and strongly associated with the object being described. However for depiction, distinction and association won't matter - instead, size and position will determine what's prominent and what's not

Front 30

image scanning procedure suggests...

Back 30

participants scan across their images at a constant rate, so that doubling the scanning "distance" doubles the time required for the can and tripling the distance triples the time required

Front 31

mental rotation task findings...

Back 31

the amount of time it takes to rotate something directly depends on how much rotation is needed

Front 32

demand character

Back 32

participants may do what they think the researcher wants them to do/give results tailored to this

Front 33

brain vs imagery activity

Back 33

the same areas responsible for seeing are involved in imagininy stuff

Front 34

brain vs imagery damage results

Back 34

if they suffer brain damage that affects perception in a visual way, then they have trouble imagining these things (eg cerebral achromatopsia results in them also no longer being able to imagine colour as well as not see it)

THIS IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE

Front 35

functional equivalence

Back 35

a series of close paralels in how two systems work - how they respond to inputs, what errors they make, and so on

Front 36

visual acuity

Back 36

the ability to see fine detail

Front 37

eidetic imagery

Back 37

can glance at a complex scne and then draw incredibly detailed reproductions of the scene

very rare but mostly in people diagnosed with autism

Front 38

percepts

Back 38

out mental representations of the stimuli we're perceiving

Front 39

image files

Back 39

things in LTM

visual info stored specifying what a particular object or shape looks like/ info within the image file can then be used as a recipe or set of instructions for how to construct an active image of this object or shape

Front 40

attribute substitution

Back 40

a commonly used strategy in which someone needs one type of info but relies instead on a more accessile form of info

(eg how many of my friends did well in this course instead of actual grade averages of the class)

Front 41

availability heuristic

Back 41

a strategy used to judge the frequency of a certain type of object or the likelihood of a certain type of event. the first step is to assess the ease with which examples of the object or event come to mind (this availability of examples is then used as an index of frequency or likelihood)

Front 42

representativeness heuristic

Back 42

a strategy often used in making judgements about categories. This is broadly equivalent to making the assumption that in general the instances of a category will resemble the prototype for that category and likewise that the prototype resembles in each instance

Front 43

covariation

Back 43

a relationship between two variables such that the presence/magnitude of one variable can be predicted from the presence/magnitude of the other. covatiation can be positive or negative. if positive then increases in one variable occur when increses in the other occur. if negative, then decreases in one variable occur when decreases in the other occur

Front 44

confirmation bias

Back 44

a tendency to be more responsive to evidence that confirms your bliefs rahter than to evidence that might challenge your beliefs

Front 45

base rate information

Back 45

information about how frequently something occurs in general

Front 46

dual process model

Back 46

any model of thinking that claims people have two distinct means of making judgements - one of which is fast, efficient, but prone to error, and one that is slower, more effortful, but also more accurate

Front 47

induction

Back 47

the procss through which you make forecasts about new cases based on ones you've previously seen

Front 48

deduction

Back 48

cases in which you start with claims or asssertions that you count as given and ask what follows from the premises

Front 49

belief perserverance

Back 49

a tendency to continue endorsing some assertion or claim, even when the clearly available evidence completely undermines that claim

Front 50

categorical syllogisms

Back 50

a type of logical argument that begins with two asserions (each containing a statement about a category)

Front 51

premise

Back 51

proposition that is assumed to be true in a logic problem

the problem asks what conclusion follows from its premises

Front 52

valid syllogisms

Back 52

a syllogism for which the conclusion follows from the premise in accord with the rules of logic

Front 53

invalid syllogism

Back 53

a syllogism in which the conclusion is not logically demanded by the premises

Front 54

belief bias

Back 54

a tendency (within logical reasoning) to endorse a conclusion if the conclusion happens to be something one believes is true anyhow. in displaying this tendency people seem to ignore both the premises of the logical argument and the logic itself and they rely instead on their broader pattern of beliefs about what is true and what is not

Front 55

conditional statements

Back 55

statements with the first statement providing a condition under which the second statement is guarenteed to be true

Front 56

selection task

Back 56

an experimental procedure commonly used to study reasoning in which a person is presented with four cards with certain info on either side of the card. the person is also given a rule that may describe the cards and the person's task is to decide which cards must be turned over to find out if the rule descibes the cards or not

Front 57

four card task

Back 57

an experimental procedure commonly used to study reasoning in which a person is presented with four cards with certain info on either side of the card. the person is also given a rule that may describe the cards and the person's task is to decide which cards must be turned over to find out if the rule descibes the cards or not

Front 58

subjective utility of a factor

Back 58

the value of that factor for you

Front 59

expected value

Back 59

= (probability of a particular outcome) x (utility of the outcome)

Front 60

risk seeking

Back 60

a tendency towards seeking out risk. people tend to be risk seeking when contemplating losses because they are willing to gample in hopes of avoiding/diminishing their losses

Front 61

risk aversion

Back 61

a tendency towards avoiding risk. people tend to be averse when contemplating gains, choosing instead to hold tight to what they already have