Set the Language

We weren't able to detect the audio language on your flashcards. Please select the correct language below.

Front

Back

Related Flashcards

Flashcards
»
Final Exam

Final Exam

by JinnySeo, Jun. 2016

Subjects: Cognition

Favorite

Add to folder

Flag

Shuffle
Toggle On

Toggle Off
Alphabetize
Toggle On

Toggle Off
Front First
Toggle On

Toggle Off
Both Sides
Toggle On

Toggle Off
Read
Toggle On

Toggle Off

Reading...

Front

Card Range To Study

through

Play button

Progress

1/116

Click to flip

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;

116 Cards in this Set

Front
Back

	concept identification	process by which a concept is learnt, usually through exposure to items that belong and don't belong to a category set of logical rules that determine whether an item/concept falls in the category
	logical rules (4)	rule based on logical relations such as conjunctive, disjunctive, conditional, and biconditional rules deal with boundaries of a category (boundary-driven) not how we think about real-world things—they vary on a continuum
	conjunctive rule	Beach ball is round AND hollow
	disjunctive rule	John loves Mary OR Jane
	conditional rule	IF man, THEN tie.
	biconditional rule	bi-directional—IF red, THEN must be a square. IF a square, THEN must be red
	Which logical rule is hardest to learn? Why?	Biconditional (20%) > Conditional (29%) > Disjunction (60%) > Conjunction (100%) due to frequency theory rule (ease of learning the attributes depends on how often the relevant attributes appear in the positive examples)
	rule learning	concept identification task in which people are told the attributes (e.g. striped, square) and have to figure out the rule easiest to figure out conjunctive and hardest for biconditional this ordering occurs because of frequency theory
	attribute learning	Reverse of rule leaning—given the rule, you need to derive the attributes
	frequency theory	ease of learning the attributes depends on how often the relevant attributes appear in the positive examples e.g. for conjunctive, the only thing that shows up are the features and they show up 100% of the time features are represented less frequently in more complicated rules
	continuous dimension	real world categories often have continuous dimensions (e.g. color range along a continuum) rather than discrete dimensions
	typicality	Measure of how well a category member represents that category
	superordinate category	large category at top of hierarchy a less specific description of a member of a category members have a few common attributes if shown a picture of a chair, you are more likely to describe it by its basic level category (chair) than by its superordinate category (furniture)
	basic-level category	"natural" level of categorization, neither too specific nor too general; we tend to use this in our conversations and reasoning category members share attributes, but also have attributes that differ from those of items in other basic-level categories categorization is fastest at this level (exception of expertise)
	subordinate category	more specific description of an item members share very many attributes e.g. when shown a chair, one could label it "lawn chair" or "kitchen chair" if it belongs to either of these categories
	prototype	the "center" or "ideal" or "average" member/concept of a category
	family resemblance	identify "characteristic features" for each category; some features are common for a family but this doesn't mean everyone in the family has these features useful for predicting typicality of common taxonomic categories NOT useful for predicting typicality in goal-deriven categories (e.g. birthday present)
	exemplar	a specific remembered instance, like YOUR dog
	Why do we categorize?	means by which objects of the word are identified reduces the complexity of the environment (e.g. we can discriminate millions of colors, but we don't have names for all those colors) reduces the need for constant learning (we can classify new objects based on our categorical knowledge)
	What are the problems in applying these logical rules to real world concept identification tasks?	real world categories do not have to share identical attributes categories often have continuous dimensions rather than discrete dimensions logical rule assumes that all members of a category are equally good members real world categories have exemplars that differ in their typicality
	Which category is the easiest for us? (superordinate, basic, subordinate)	Basic < Superordinate < Subordinate (easiest to hardest)
	prototype model	prototypical member of a category will serve as the anchor, the benchmark, for our conceptual knowledge instead having of boundaries for categories Membership depends on how close something is to a prototype. When we reason about a concept or use our conceptual knowledge, our reasoning is done with reference to the prototype
	fuzzy boundary	part of the prototype model no clear specification of category membership and nonmembership
	graded membership	part of the prototype model categories that depend on a prototype have graded membership, with some dogs being "doggier" than others, some books "bookier" than others, and so on
	How can we test the prototype theory?	sentence verification task: participants are presented with a succession of sentences, their job is to indicate whether each sentence is true or false—how quickly do participants do this task? e.g. quicker to say a robin is a bird than to say a penguin is a bird, means robin is more prototypical Make up a sentence about birds. Then replace "birds" with "robin" and then "penguin." Which makes more sense? production task: participants are asked to name as many items of a category as they can; this shows that when people think about a category they are in fact thinking about the prototype for the category picture-identification task: "Does the next picture show you a bird?"
	Is there an alternative to the prototype theory?	exemplar-based reasoning: the idea that in some cases categorization can draw on knowledge about specific category members rather than on more general information about the overall category e.g. your dog is the first dog you think of when someone says dog some evidence that we use both prototypes and exemplars
	Selective loss of categorical knowledge following brain damage	Certain types of temporal lobe damage can produce seemingly bizarre deficits in one's ability to categorize, e.g. patients can categorize non-living things but not living things hypothesis is that visual features predominant role in our knowledge of living things and non-living objects tend to be categorized more along functional attributes.
	language	method of human communication, either spoken or written consists of the use of words in a structured and conventional way can be understood as having a hierarchical structure with units at each level being assembled to form the larger units at the next level
	grammar	the rules that governs the sequence of words acceptable within the language
	morpheme	smallest language units that carry meaning content morphemes—carriers of meaning function morphemes—specifies the relations among words
	phoneme	smallest unit of sound that serve to distinguish words in language e.g. "peg" and "beg" differ in initial phoneme
	generativity	capacity to create an endless series of new combinations, all built from the same set of fundamental units idea that one can combine and recombine basic units to create new and more complex entities someone who "knows English" has not just memorized the vocabulary of the language and some set of phrases, but knows how to create new forms within the language—knows how to combine morphemes to create new words, knows how to "adjust" phonemes when they're put together into novel combinations, etc.
	macroplanning	part of first step of speech production figuring out what message you want to convey through language
	microplanning	fiuring out how to express a message and not sound like a caveman while doing it part of first step of speech production
	Differences between spoken and written language?	time to process—you read at your own pace with written language you can see where words and sentences begin and end in written language (orthographic analysis) boundaries are murky with spoken language
	co-articulation	one does not utter one phoneme at a time; phonemes overlap shows segmented boundaries must not be how we recognize words in speech
	Broca's aphasia	damage to the area in the left frontal lobe of the brain causes nonfluent aphasia patients can comprehend spoken language (unless grammatically complex) but are unable to produce fluent language spontaneously speaking but telegraphic language; is a output problem can't pronounce hard words
	Wernicke's aphasia	damage to left frontal lobe of the brain causes fluent aphasia afflicted individuals are able to produce speech but the speech is not meaningful the individuals are not able to understand what is said to them.
	How does the brain recognize words?	left extrastriate visual cortex becomes active when the cortex processed word forms Damage to this brain region can give rise to pure alexia—patients cannot read words even though other aspects of language are normal.
	syntactic analysis	process of figuring out a sentence's meaning using both semantic meaning and grammatical structure highlights role of context in word recognition—semantic info alone is not sufficient to understand the message we pay attention to syntax even if the sentence doesn't make sense—it is an automatic process takes place through the garden path model when asked to detect a particular sound, you are fastest when the sentence makes sense, slower when sentence doesn't make sense, and slower still when the sentence is grammatically incorrect
	garden path model	assumes we process syntactic information in a way that minimizes what we have to do to meet the demanding time pressure of normal comprehension—we are lazy you start processing the meaning of a sentence before it is finished by whatever is the most grammatically easy to do
	How do infants learn to discriminate spoken sounds? What is the evidence?	they are incredibly good at discriminating between the basic phonemes of a language infants use a prototype classification pattern—categorize similar sounds into phonemic categories "perceptual magnet" makes variations sound more like the prototype; this makes it possible to recognize speech
	word errors	exchanged words are members of the same syntactic category "...and I remembered this while I was writing a mother to my letter."
	morpheme errors	stems are interchanged with other stems "a peanut butter and jelly sandwich on slicely thinned bread."
	phoneme errors	initial consonants exchanged " to the Lork Yibrary to do some reading."
	lexical ambiguity	word has more than one meaning people are fastest to complete this type of ambiguity "Although he was continuously bothered by the cold..."
	surface/structural ambiguity	concerns grouping of words "Although Hannibal sent troops [over a week ago" vs. "Although Hannibal [sent troops over] a week ago"
	underlying ambiguity	can only be resolved if we know the underlying meaning/context of the sentence people are slowest to complete this types of ambiguity "Knowing that visiting relatives could be bothersome"
	error recovery heuristic	strategy for correcting comprehension errors people with small working memory capacities use this after a sentence is completed because their integration was unsuccessful
	How does frequency interact with content in resolving ambiguity?	In resolving ambiguity, people will first assume that the word or sentence has meaning that is most frequently used in the langauge
	induction	a pattern of reasoning in which one seeks to draw general claims from specific bits of evidence trying to go beyond the available information are not guaranteed to be true may be a decoy
	frequency estimates	an availability effect people's assessment of how often they have encountered examples of a particular category and how likely they are to encounter new examples of that category
	availability heuristic	estimating the likelihood of events based on their availability in memory if instances come readily to mind, we presume such events are common the ease to which things come to mind serves as an index to judge frequency we tend to overestimate accidents, pregnancy/childbirth, fire, botulism, etc... because of this and underestimate smallpox vaccination, diabetes, stomach cancer, TB, asthma, etc.
	representativeness heuristic	judging the likelihood of things in terms of how well they seem to represent particular prototypes may lead one to ignore other relevant information assumes categories are homogenous (stereotypic) says things we know about the member of a category are true for all members if an uncategorized member is similar to our stereotype it is likely a member of the category we extrapolate from a small sample (seen one, seen 'em all way we stereotype and think about the world by having an explanation of the way the world works Gambler's fallacy ("it's due time that heads come up after all these tails) Law of large numbers (failure to understand large numbers)
	anchoring	tendency of people to make decisions based on reference points, or standards used to make judgements when you don't know you guess by picking a starting point and basing your guess off it you guess towards the anchor
	base rate	general rate or frequency at which something occurs information about the broad likelihood of a particular type of event ignored when there is no perceived cause-effect relation if we have knowledge of base rate, we will use that info, but if it's not the only thing we have, we won't use it when both base-rate and descriptive information are presented, people rely on the descriptive information (engineer vs. lawyer)
	utility maximization	proposal that people make decisions by selecting the option that has the greatest utility but evidence suggests decisions are powerfully influenced by emotion, especially regret
	covariation	..
	somatic markers	states if the body used in decision-making e.g. a tight stomach and accelerated heart rate when someone's thinking about an option can signal to the person that the option has risk associated with it way emotions influence decisions
	confirmation bias	specific case of selective perception. Information we gather is typically biased toward supporting views we already hold. We seek out information that reaffirms our past choices, and we discount information that contradicts them. We also tend to accept at face value information that confirms our preconceived views, while we are critical and skeptical of information that challenges these views. We want to have our idea confirmed so we disproportionally outweigh info that supports us, even though contrary information can be most useful and help us to make a more informed decision
	base-rate neglect	when we have a representativeness heuristic to draw upon, we neglect the based rate in favor of the stereotype base rates are ignored when there is no perceived cause-effect relation you make mistakes and incorrectly assume things because you don't look at what is actually happening.
	dual process model of decision making	any model of thinking that claims we have two distinct means of making judgments: one of which is fast, efficient, but prone to error, and one that is slower, more effortful, but also more accurate automatic: fast, use your gut, more efficient, but prone to error; heuristics fall into this category; more likely to use if decision is made under time pressure controlled: thoughtful, slower, but more accurate, more likely if a person can focus attention on judgment being made or when data is presented in a frequency-format or if the role of chance is more conspicuous in the problem, i.e. if the data is more codeable
	which model do people use?	both system's use can be promoted by change features of the environment (use frequencies) training can improve judgment and increase awareness of sample bias
	difference between availability and representative heurisitics	availability: making a decision based on the answer that most easily comes to mind; whatever comes to mind must be more common representative: having a stereotypic idea of what a member of a category should be like; a rule for categorization based on how similar the person or object is to our prototypes for that category
	expected value	the expected payoff as a computer role calculate calculated as multiplied by the probability of gaining that value you might still do things that have a negative payoff because the negative payoff is so small it doesn't matter to you there's also subjective utility, which you change values to what you feel like so you agree to pay with—pay a dollar to possibly win million dollars
	expected utility	a cost-benefit calculation people make when the outcome of a choice is uncertainty gives people an expectation of what they will get from a possible choice
	What factors influence what we should do?	way the question is framed way the question is framed instability of values values and goals weighing benefits and costs utility maximization reason-based choice
	How does framing effect what we actually do relative what we should do?	people's outcomes drastically change based on the phrasing of a question framed as a win: risk averse and want to protect our winning framed as a loss: risk-taking and willing to gamble a little more
	instability of values	the amount of value you place on certain things varies from person to person, e.g. objects that have sentimental value the amount of value you place on certain things varies from person to person, e.g. objects that have sentimental value we change our mind about value of things these changes based on situation and within a person over time
	loss aversion	tendency to be far more sensitive to losses than gains something that makes us not utility maximizer—you wouldn't take a coin flip where you could gain $20 or lost $10, but a computer would especially true with things that are yours; ownership drives loss-aversion (endowment effect)
	sunk cost	doing something that you do not want to in order to avoid losing money, e.g. non-refundable deposit to resort, but you get sick on the way there something you won't get no matter what; you should make your decision without thinking about this cost, but we're still influenced
	perceived justification	used to make decisions we feel like becase we need a reason to make it buy vacation package, don't buy package, or pay a non-refundable fee to reserve the fare rate based on how you do on a final
	Three main categories of problems. Be able to identify examples.	Arrangement: a problem which requires rearranging its parts to satisfy a specific criterion—e.g. anagrams, holding two pieces of rope at once; can be solved by insight Inducing structure: a problem that requires finding a pattern among a fixed set of relations—e.g. analogies, series extrapolation, we're pretty good at this; not as good when trying to figure out the reverse, because we are confirmation-seeking—once we get an idea in our head we seek out things that makes us want to confirm it Transformation: a problem that requires changing the initial state through a sequence of operations until it matches the goal state; you don't have to generate the solution, you just have to get there; e.g. chess, Rubix cubes, Tower of Hanoi, Hobbits and the Orcs problem
	insight	sudden discovery of a solution following unsuccessful attempts to solve a problem
	evidence we use insight	every 10 seconds subjects heard a tap, rated (1-10) how close they felt they were to solving the puzzle ratings remained low until the discovery of the solution, implying that the correct answer suddenly appeared
	functional fixedness	tendency to perceive an object only in terms of its most common use e.g. using a hammer as a pendulum, candle problem—ability to solve this problem depends on its presentation; people solve worse when boxes are presented as containers because it's hard to overcome functional fixedness
	means-end analysis	strategy used in problem solving in which the person is guided, step by step, by a comparison of the difference, at the moment, between the current state and the goal state, and a consideration of the operators available will this lead me where I want to go? one of the ways we think we solve problems
	confirmation bias	strong tendency to seek out confirming evidence and to rely on that evidence in drawing their conclusions
	problem space	set if all states that can be reached in solving a problem, as one moves, by means of the problem's operators, from the problem's initial state toward the problem's goal state the Orcs and Hobbits problem has a problem space, as does chess going through all the options guarantees you'll find the best ones, but it can be super inefficient
	subgoals	Steps that make achieving a goal simpler transformation problems are hard because they often involve subgoals
	heuristics	strategy that is reasonably efficient and works most of the time you're choosing to accept some risk of error to gain efficiency in problem solving, heuristics are strategies that narrow your search through the problem space
	Who is the Star Wars kid? What does he tell us about problem solving?	overcame functional fixedness (using object for most common uses) because he used a golf thingy as a lightsaber
	What happened to Phineas Gage?	physically: a rail went through this brain, taking out his OFC and medial FC → all of his behavior was driven by his reward system and emotions; motor cortex spared mentally: lost his control system for regulating motivations, desires and emotions; became an ******* essentially
	working memory task used in monkeys	dissociation depending on what you leasion: hippocampus is important for declarative long-term memory while PFC is important for working memory (debateable) Delayed-Response Task: Monkey sees two wells, one with food in it and one without and must be able to remember which well has the food when it can no longer see it. Monkeys w/ lesions to the lateral PFC does poorly on this test. Associative Memory Task: Monkeys learn an association with a picture and which well has food in it and can remember the symbol that locates where the food is. Monkeys with hippocampal damage fails at this task (if association learned before lesion, can continue to maintain the association but it cannot make new associations); PFC lesion monkeys do fine
	Wisconsin Card Sorting task	Cards have 3 attributes: can differ by color, quantity of items, and by shape. Subjects have to match their card with the key card. The experimenter will not tell them what they are supposed to be matching by, the subject learns by trial and error Perseveration: Patients w/ lateral PFC will do poorly on this task, meaning they will keep sorting by the first rule that they learn, unable to overwrite that rule and adapt a new strategy. (They perseverate on the first rule they came up with, and can't let go/inhibit the rule they learned.)
	Does prefrontal damage impair temporal ordering? What is the evidence?	lateral prefrontal cortex lesion Recency memory involves organizing and segregating events in memory Given a series of items, they can't tell which one they had seen most recently but they could tell you if they had seen an item or not.
	Does prefrontal damage impair source memory? What is the evidence?	patients can't put things in context to remember a learning episode is to remember details about time and place, and the episode itself source memory depends on the integrity of the frontal lobes reason we think they struggle is bc usually on memory test content is most impt and to do well on either of these you have to inhibit primary memory for secondary memory of source or memory
	source memory	refers to knowledge concerning the source of the information or the context in which the information was learned
	common processing deficit	professor argues for this theory: brain does a particular function that is shared in all these tests that PFC patients are bad at PFC function is to filter out distracting information so that you can allocate your attention properly evidence filtering as an inhibitory process: frontal patients display heightened interference on the stroop task (saying the color of the ink, not the word)
	heterogeneity of function	one part of brain does multiple things
	What does GSR measure? What is that an index of?	GSR: Galvanic skin response a method of measuring the electrical conductance of the skin, which varies with its moisture level things that are arousing will cause a GSR
	Be able to describe how a PFC patient's GSR would look in response to viewing neutral pictures, affective pictures, and while receiving electrical stimulation.	PFC patients will have no GSR while either looking at neutral pictures or at effective pictures They will have a GSR while receiving electrical stimulation PFC patients understand how someone should feel in a situation but they don't feel that way—they haven't lost their ability to feel, they just don't apply it correctly With PF lesions, representations and associations are stripped of emotional content
	What other behaviors do PFC patients exhibit?	they are aware that their behavior is inappropriate failure of inhibition in social domain problems with source and recency memory about as good as normal in terms of content memory perseverate struggle with working memory but not because can't hold things online but because they are more susceptible to interference bc can't inhibit (monkey task) common processing deficit: filtering as an inhibitory mechanism if of or vm lesion → imitation and utilization
	Which pile do PFC patients draw from on the Iowa Gambling task?	in the Iowa Gambling Task there are two piles: one with small wins and small losses, and one with slightly bigger wins but huge losses- we figure this out (partially because we're loss averse) and we have a GSR when we lose PFC patients also have a GSR when they lose but they don't seem to learn from that and therefore chose from the risky pile If we get daring and pick from pile B, we will have a GSR when we go to pick from pile B but PF patients don't? Reward system is an approach learning system PFC patients choose more from risky pile because there are bigger winnings We would chose from safe pile and if we didn't would have a GSR (arousal response that 's trying to teach you) PF patients don't get this response when they go to pick from the risky pile Get the GSR response when they lose (still care about losing) Don't integrate emotional response into DM process for future choices)
	How is reward represented in the brain?	reward value indicates adaptiveness increases activity in the nucleus accumbens (in the ventral striatum) codes for activation of brain reward systems while other brain regions, like the orbitofrontal cortex, are involved in the evaluation of pleasantness bottom up process, automatic response
	Is there a common mechanism for representing different kinds of reward?	dopamine reward system starts in VTA and projects to nucleus accumbens primary reinforcers and drugs of abuse are associated with dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens dopamine neurons respond to unexpected rewards and learn to predict rewards
	cue-reactivity	the stereotyped set of physiologic responses to a stimulus that has been learned to predict some type of reward nucleus accumbens and OFC turn on (reward system) includes increased heart rate, galvanic skin response (indirect measure of arousal), mesolimbic dopaminergic activity, subjective craving, consumption
	Why might the nucleus accumbens be better considered as the wanting region rather than the liking region?	in a learned state, when reward matches expectations, the system is silent at the time when the reward is received
	Understand how repeated cue-reward pairings lead to increased nucleus accumbens responsivity to cues.	when you first experience reward, it is unexpected and you get activity at time of reward however your reward system learns what predicts reward and comes to respond to that (system silent when anticipated reward is received) but when a reward is better than anticipated, you get activity both at predictor and at time of reward, indicating there was an error in your prediction. Next time, there will be more responsivity to the cue and you will be more motivated to get that reward the opposite is true when the expected reward isn't received
	How does this differ for addictive drugs?	the difference with addictive drugs is that they all pharmacologically increase dopamine neuron firing and trick the brain into thinking the reward is just got was larger than anticipated this leads to massive overvaluation of drug-seeking and trains in lots of drug cues which trigger craving basically there is both a primary effect (drunk, high, etc.) and a bonus effect of forcing dopamine system to turn on so it thinks you got a bigger reward than you did (why cues are so powerful) you responsivity to cue continues to increase—even when your reward system gets the prediction right - you will never get the prediction right this is not tolerance—the signal does not tell you how much of a drug to do but how motivation you should be to do it note: there are some drugs you can get addicted to that don't play this trick on the brain (LSD, ecstasy)
	What is the "What the Hell" effect	..
	Describe the ice cream taste test study.	..
	differences between reward and self-regulation	reward is a bottom up process while self-regulation is a top-down process reward is considered the easy problem bc it's easy for us to study while self-regulation is considered the hard problem why reward? Because it indicates adaptiveness Why self-regulate? Because we must regulate ourselves by ourselves to achieve goals, including our fundamental goals to survive and reproduce reward is an automatic response while self-regulation acts on parts of the brain and tells them to be less motivated in this moment to at least not to act on a motivation/desire
	Delayed gratification task and why kids suck at this	..
	self-regulation as a resource	some have bigger buckets of self-regulation than others (takes more to be depleted) and are better self-regulators it's a open question but according to the strength model of self-regulation, it can be strengthened through training self-regulation can be momentarily depleted by over-exertion have to effortfully self-regulate in one domain makes it harder to in another disrupting self regulation and decreasing it increases cue-reactivity
	Different definitions of consciousness	definition 1: state of arousal (wakefulness, sleep, coma, etc.) definition 2: mental experience (contents of that experience = qualia); more relevant to psychology
	Which definition of consciousness is more relevant to psychology?	definition 2: mental experience (contents of that experience = qualia)
	qualia	qualia are mental experiences associated with the physical properties of things out there in the world they are fundamental to consciousness experience include: smells, warmth, bitterness, your internal monologue, memories, daydreams, etc.
	achromatopsia	Acquired cortical color blindness damage to V4 color insensitive (can no longer appreciate qualia of blue or red)
	akinotopsia	motion blindness (things blip around the world for you) damage of V5 (area MT)
	binocular rivalry task	demonstrates qualia are conscious contructions of physical world and consciousness is not in any one place in brain our percepts are changing, not the physical properties only perceive house or face when the physical stimulus is not changing task takes advantage of the fact that FFA processes faces and PPA processes places; we can dissociate the brain areas that respond to faces and houses found that as activity in the face area got bigger was when you tended to switch on binocular rivalry task and vice versa continuous flash suppression: if you're perceiving something and flash something in other eye, it will cause you to stop perceiving what's in good eye seeing something in one eye and you perceive that; flash something to other eye and what you seeing in good eye you don't see for a minute Qualia are conscious contructions of physical world and consciousness is not in any one place in brain—what binocular rivalry task is a demonstration of
	what we need/do not need consciousness for	NOT necessary for: Learning /Memory: Pavlov's dog and conditioning studies where you can train behavior in the absence of consciousness, HM can learn new skills even though he can't remember Visual awareness: blindsight; in animals we know there's another pathway by which visual information gets processed (superior colliculus to amyg) Attention: If you're viewing something and a pop-out display is shown unconsciously, you're more accurate to detect a target if it comes up in cued location; you get cued but you're not consciously aware (as you are in Posner or exogenous) but you can unconsciously be aware and that can affect attention Interacting with sensory stimuli (complex behaviors) possible there are some cognitive tasks that can't be done without consciousness we just don't have clear evidence for what they are Speculations: Consciousness is a memory buffer that allows us to integrate information flexibly across time and modality; Allows us to have justification for action; May make us better at things its not strictly required for
	blindsight	patients have no experience of vision, but they can act of information coming from their "blind" visual field they can perceive better than chance the emotion that was presented to the blind cortex they can avoid things they are not consciously aware of
	mind-body problem	how do the physical interactions between neurons give rise to nonphysical mental experiences? no one knows
	free will	..
	naming disorders	functional organization of mental lexicon: Blue region: trouble with people (59.8% correct) Red region: trouble with animals (80.1%) Green region: trouble with tools (78.5%)

Share This Flashcard Set

Set the Language

Related Flashcards

Final Exam

Add to Folders

Upgrade to Cram Premium

Card Range To Study

116 Cards in this Set