Summary
2.1 All Problems Summary
- Course
- Institution
Summary of all literature, problems 1-8
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
lablyth
Reviews received
Content preview
2.1 Thinking and RememberingProblem 1
Learning Goals:
A. Why can we sometimes pay attention to different things at once, and sometimes
not?
Key words: Selective and divided attention
B. To what extent is it possible to attend to 2 stimuli simultaneously?
Can this be trained? (Divided attention)
What theories are there and how do they differ from each other?
C. Are external stimuli always distracting/inhibiting?
How is divided attention measured?
Problem A
Inattentional bias- failure to notice unexpected objects or events when attention is
focused elsewhere
Eg. monkey business video
Perception of world is limited- process only 1 stream of info at once > receives attention
Dichotic listening- phenomenon where 2 speech streams are heard by listener, asked
to repeat stream heard by one ear, won’t notice changes to speech in other ear such as
language chance
Form of cognitive deafness due to selective attention (selective listening)
Don’t notice events happening outside of focus, even when looking at them
Neisser & Co Experiment
Method: Viewed video of 2 distinct but partially transparent/overlapping events, asked to
monitor one stream of video (eg. white people passing ball)
Results: often failed to notice unexpected events in ignored video stream
Chabris & Simons Experiment “Monkey Business”
Built on Neisser Et Al. Changes:
Filmed with single camera
Players fully visible
Gorilla walked across stage and thumped chest
Results: Half of observers missed the gorilla when counting team passing in white
More likely to notice unexpected objects if share features with attended items in
display
Even unique items can be unnoticed
More effort put into attention-demanding task, less likely to notice other events
eg. gorilla
o Limits not just visual, eg. also limited cognitive resources
Auditory distractions induce real-world failures to see eg. driving while on phone,
decreases situation awareness and increases chances of missing something
important
Greater demands on attention, less like to notice objects outside of attention
Under conditions of distraction, develop tunnel vision
Individual Differences in Noticing
Study 1: greater working memory capacity likely notice unexpected objects
o Have more resources available when focusing attention, likelier spot other
things
Theory: greater working memory capacity, more resource available, likelier to
notice
C Other studies found no differences
Study 2: Ability to perform task doesn’t predict likelihood of noticing
Theory: greater working memory capacity means better focus, so should be less
likely to notice distractions
Mistaken Intuition
,90% of people believe they would notice unexpected items
Reasoning: our experiences mislead us as rarely experience situation where confront
something obvious that we missed
People may text and drive as don’t notice how distracted they are
Inattentional blindness- failure to notice a fully visible, but unexpected object or
event, when attention is devoted to something else
Inattentional deafness- failure to notice an unexpected sound or voice when attention
is devoted to other aspects of a scene
Selective listening- method of focussing attention on one auditory stream of info, while
deliberately ignoring other auditory info
Problem B
Cocktail party problem- process of tracking one conversation in the face of the
distraction of other conversations
Shadowing- listen to two different messages with dichotic presentation (-
presentation of a separate message to each ear)
- Repeat back only 1 message as soon as you hear it
Cherry- shadowing experiment
Results: successfully shadowed distinct messages
Noticed physical, sensory changes to unattended message (eg. male to
female voice)
Did not notice semantic changes in unattended message (eg. language)
1/3rd switched attention to their name if heard
o These people have limited working-memory and are easily
distracted
Three factors in Selective Attention to which speaker:
1. Distinctive sensory characteristics of target’s speech (eg. high pitch)
2. Sound intensity
3. Location of sound source
Least important factor
Theories of Selective Attention
Filter theory- blocks some info going through, selecting only part of total info to
pass through to next stage
Bottleneck theory- slows down info passing through
Broadbent’s Model
Filter stage: As soon as noticed at sensory level
Channels reaching attentional filter: multiple
Distinguished by characteristics eg. accent
Filter: only one channel of sensory info can proceed and reach processes of
perception
Assign meaning to sensations
Other stimuli filtered out at sensory level, may not reach level of
perception
Supported by Cherry
o Sensory info sometimes may be noticed by unattended ear if doesn’t
need to process elaborately
o Info requiring higher perceptual process not noticed if not attended to
C Evidence found suggesting model incorrect
Selective Filter Model (Moray)
Based on Broadbent
Found people frequently still recognise names in unattended ear even if
ignore other high-level aspects of message
Selective filter blocks out most info at sensory level
, o Some personally important messages so powerful they burst through
filter
Attenuation Model (Treisman)
Method: participants shadow coherent message, switch remainder of this message
from attended to unattended ear
Results: got first few words of message shadowed in unattended ear
If one message slightly out of temporal synchronisation with other, noticed
Bilingual noticed if unattended was translated attended text
Significance: unattended message somehow processed
Theory: some info about unattended signals is analysed
Filter just weakens strength of stimuli that aren’t target stimuli
When stimuli reach us, analyse them for target properties
o If don’t have properties, pass on weakened signal
Then process if stimuli have personal meaning for us
Even message from unattended ear can be brought into
consciousness
Late-Filter Model (Deutsch & Deutsch)
Stimuli filtered out only after analysation for physical properties and meaning
o Allows people to recognise info entering unattended ear
Different from other model only in where bottleneck positioned
Synthesis Model (Neisser)
Two processes governing attention
o Preattentive process- automatic processes used to notice only
physical sensory characteristics of unattended message: don’t discern
meaning or relationships
o Attention, controlled processes- serially executed processes, that
consume time and attention, observe relationship among features to
synthesise fragments into mental representation of object
Problem C
Attentional Blink- impaired ability to identify second of 2 visual targets presented
in close succession
One type of mental activity distracts/takes attentional capacity away from others
Exceptions noted when primary task generally involves highly practiced skills,
where attentional control is unnecessary
Experiment (Olivers and Nieuwenhuis)
Method: series of letters presented rapidly on display, including two target digits (T1,
T2). Must report these at end of trial (usually, detection of T2 impacted
significantly if presented within short lag of T1). Guess whenever failed to indicate
correctly
Four groups: Standard control group- told to concentrate and report targets as
correctly as possible
Free-association group- while doing task, think about most recent
holiday: not told to concentrate or do as well as possible
Listen-to-music group (B1)- listened to rhythmic tune
(B2)- listen to rhythmic tune and detect occasional yell as part of
the tune
Reward condition- participants paid according to performance
To test if funny instructions would improve performance by
making less boring
, Results: Standard group- T2 suffered considerably at most lags (typical for
attentional blink)
Reward group- same as standard group
Increased motivation not a reason for improved performance in Free-A
and Listen groups
Free association- T2 detection significantly better
Listen-to-music group- T2 detection so high, attentional blink disappeared
Significance: performance on attentionally demanding visual detection task may
improve if task accompanied by task-irrelevant mental activity, as diffusion of
attention
Potential explanations:
1. Arousal- modulates attentional focussing
2. Positive affection state induced with music or holiday thoughts -> improves
cognitive task performance
3. Additional task itself induces more distributed state of attention -> attention
widened to incorporate extra task, may have widened to include other target.
Problem 2
Problem A
Miller- basic unit in short-term memory= chunk- memory unit consisting of several
components that are strongly associated with one another
Short term memory can hold 7 chunks
Can organise adjacent numbers or letters to form single chunk
People engage in internal mental processes to convert stimuli to manageable
number of chunks
Brown/Peterson and Peterson: the Serial-Position Effect
Gave much of the first info about short-term memory
Demonstrated material held in memory for less than 1 minute is frequently
forgotten
Method: present participants with items, instruct them to remember. Given a distracting
task before asked to recall original items
Significance: memory is fragile for material stored only a few seconds
Serial position effect- U-shaped relationship between word’s position in a list and its
probability of recall
Recency effect- better recall for items at the end of the list
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller lablyth. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $9.31. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
79789 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now