HUMAN NATURE: KEY STUDIES IN PSYCHOLOGY Cognitive psychology Jiří Čeněk CONTENT ¢What is CP? ¢History of CP ¢Key studies in CP: —Pictorial perception and culture —Attention, memory and their nature — COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY ¢CP = study of mental processes such as: ¢ attention, ¢ language use, ¢ memory, ¢ perception, ¢ problem solving, ¢ creativity, ¢ thinking… ¢ COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY •How humans process information COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY ¢Basic assumptions ¢Cognitive psychology is a pure science, based mainly on laboratory experiments. ¢ ¢Behavior can be largely explained in terms of how the mind operates, i.e. the information processing approach. ¢ ¢The mind works in a way similar to a computer: inputting, storing and retrieving data. ¢ ¢Mediational processes occur between stimulus and response. COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY ¢Strenghts: ¢Scientific ¢Highly applicable (e.g. therapy, EWT) ¢Combines easily with other approaches: behaviorism + Cog = Social Learning; Biology + Cog = Evolutionary Psychology ¢Many empirical studies to support theories Limitations: ¢Ignores biology (e.g. testosterone) ¢Experiments - low ecological validity ¢Humanism - rejects scientific method ¢Behaviorism - can’t objectively study unobservable behavior ¢Introspection is subjective ¢Machine reductionism HISTORY OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY HISTORY ¢Until 1950s: —Behaviorism as a dominant approach in US psychology —Black box ¢ ¢1950s: Cognitive revolution: —Better experimental methods —Comparison between human and computer processing of information (terminology) — ¢https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=58&v=AeoyzqmyWug But it was the arrival of the computer that gave cognitive psychology the terminology and metaphor it needed to investigate the human mind. The start of the use of computers allowed psychologists to try to understand the complexities of human cognition by comparing it with something simpler and better understood i.e. an artificial system such as a computer. HISTORY ¢Norbert Wiener (1948) ¢Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine, ¢Introducing terms such as input and output. ¢ ¢Edward Tolman (1948) ¢Cognitive maps ¢Rats in mazes: animals had internal representation of behavior. ¢VIDEO: Maze ¢ HISTORY ¢George A. Miller (1960) ¢Center for Cognitive Studies at Harvard ¢ ¢Ulric Neisser (1967) ¢"Cognitive Psychology„ = official beginning of the cognitive approach. ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢Cognitive approach highly influential in all areas of psychology (e.g. biological, social, behaviorism, development etc.). CULTURE AND PERCEPTION OF PICTURES SENSATION AND PERCEPTION ¢Principles of interpretation: —Principle of efficiency (the simpliest interpretation) —Principle of commonness (interpretation which is in harmony with previous experience) WHY DO WE PERCIEVE DIFFERENTLY? ¢2 groups of factors 1.Experience and environment 2.(Social factors) ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢Role of experience and environment ROLE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND EXPERIENCE WITH IT AS A DETERMINANT OF PERCEPTION ¢ ROLE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND EXPERIENCE WITH IT AS A DETERMINANT OF PERCEPTION ¢Perceptual sets: Blakemore, Cooper (1970) ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzkMo45pcUo ¢ ¢ HOW CULTURE INFLUENCES OUR PERCEPTION? - EXPERIENCE ¢Perceptual set —= perceptual expectations —Dependent on our previous experience with the enviroment. —Some interpretations (memories of previous perceptions + feelings + meanings + behavior) of the reality are more likely to occur. —Some perceptual sets common to people from 1 culture are not necessarily developed in people from other culture. → People from different culture percieve differently. — ROLE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND EXPERIENCE WITH IT AS A DETERMINANT OF PERCEPTION ¢Different environment ¢= ¢Different experience ¢= ¢Different perceptual sets ¢= ¢Differences in perception ¢ RESEARCH FOCUS ¢Civilized vs. „primitive“ cultures PERCEPTION OF PATTERNS AND PICTURES ¢Deregowski et al. (1972). Perceptual recognition in a remote Ethiopian population. —Me`en (Bodi) people in south Ethiopia. —Limited access to formal education, little exposure to pictures. PERCEPTION OF PATTERNS AND PICTURES ¢Deregowski – research design: —Pictures of animals presented —Bodi people were able to distinguish the animal, but after some time and effort. —Involvement of other senses: touch, smell PERCEPTION OF PATTERNS AND PICTURES ¢Deregowski (1980): Experiments on native Africans — Africans were presented black and white photo of cow and dog (animals they are familiar with), they looked puzzled, didnt recognize the animals. They recognized the animals in colored photos. They have never seen black and white photo – no experience in recognizing animals in this format. PERCEPTION AND EVIRONMENT ¢Segall et al (1990): 1.Carpentered world hypothesis 2.(Foreshortening hypothesis) 3.Sophistication hypothesis CARPENTERED WORLD HYPOTHESIS: ¢Seagall (1966): „Carpentered world hypothesis“ —Degree to which visual enviroment is carpentered. ¢Western industialized —Carpentered enviroment —Right angles ¢ ¢Differences in susceptibility to visual illusions, differences in percieving pictures. ¢ ¢Native societies —No right angles —No straight lines CARPENTERED WORLD HYPOTHESIS: ¢The tendency of individuals living in higly recangular enviroments to interpret non-rectangular retinal pictures as rectangular objects ¢Optical illusions ¢Sander paralelogram http://www.psychologycs.com/images/000071.jpg SOPHISTICATION HYPOTHESIS ¢Experience with pictures: determine the ability to interpret perceptual cues ¢Perceptual (depth) cues —Convergence —Binocular disparity —Linear perspective —Interposition —Shape and size constancies, relative size ¢ ¢2D a 3D „percievers“ SOPHISTICATION HYPOTHESIS ¢Hudson (1960). Pictorial depth perception in sub-cultural groups in Africa. —Study of depth cues (relative size, linear perspective, interposition) —Illiterate people in South Africa Respondents presented set of pictures like this. 1st: Asked to identify elements of the picture. 2nd: Asked what the man was doing and whether the elephant or the antelope was closer to him. Answer: Antelope closer, aiming at the antelope – 3D interpretation (school going respondents) Other answers: 2D interpretation (other respondents) SOPHISTICATION HYPOTHESIS ¢Deregowski (1980). Illusions, patterns and pictures a Cross-cultural perspective. Research participants were shown a drawing of two squares, one behind the other and connected with a single rod. They were also given sticks and modelling clay and asked to build a model of what they saw. Almost all the 3-D perceivers built a 3-D object. Participants who did not readily perceive depth in pictures tended to build a flat model. SOPHISTICATION HYPOTHESIS Zambian children classified as 3D/2D perceivers: - copying a drawing - ambiguous trident + control figure (non-ambiguous) - to wiev the figure, the student needed to lift a flap (time measured) + could not write while the flap was open - 3D viewers spend more time opening the flap SOPHISTICATION HYPOTHESIS ¢Conclusion: —Picture perception involves a set of skills —= deal with variety of cues + use these cues appropriately to a given situation —= one has to learn to read the pictures as representations of the real space —Cultures differ in: ¢The cues which are used ¢The relative importance attached to the cues ¢= One culture may not be able to interpret drawings from another culture. ATTENTION, MEMORY AND ITS NATURE ATTENTION ¢Attention as a spotlight SELECTIVE ROLE OF ATTENTION ¢Change-blindness experiments: ¢Video: Count the number of passes! ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb-gT6vDrmU ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ MEMORY ¢ ¢What is the nature of memory? MEMORY AS A CAMERA ¢Extremely emotional experience ¢= „flashes“, eidetic memories ¢(Neisser, Hyman, 1999) ¢Memories on the crash of Challenger space shuttle, 1 day, 2,5 years later MEMORY AS A CAMERA ¢Description 1. “I was in my religion class and some people walked in and started talking about [it]. I didn’t know any details except that it had exploded and the schoolteacher’s students had all been watching which I thought was so sad. Then after class I went to my room and watched the TV program talking about it and I got all the details from that.” ¢ ¢Description 2. “When I first heard about the explosion I was sitting in my freshman dorm room with my roommate and we were watching TV. It came on a news flash and we were both totally shocked. I was really upset and I went upstairs to talk to a friend of mine and then I called my parents.” MEMORY AS A CAMERA ¢Distortions occur even in the case of eidetic memories. ¢Conviction about the high accuracy of the memory ¢Low correlation of the conviction and the factual accuracy ¢ EYE-WITNESSES PHASES OF MEMORY PROCESS PRONE TO DISTORTION: 1.Perception and attention focus 2.Coding in memory 3.Storing in memory – forgetting 4.Recall – tendency to confabulate ¢ ¢Variables: time and duration of the event, gender, age, intelligence, „face memory“, emotions, personality,… CAUSES OF DISTORTION: ¢Nature of memory: ¢ ¢ ¢NOT reproductive – doesnt copy, what we have experienced ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢BUT reconstructive – memories + convictions, needs, emotions CREATION OF FALSE MEMORIES ¢Loftus (1993): Lost in a shopping mall ¢https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQr_IJvYzbA ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢Chris had to state everything he remembered: 1.Few information 2.Reconstruction of elaborate memory ¢Similar experiments: aminal attack, injury, medical intervention, bullying,… THE HUMAN CAMERA – STEPHEN WILTSHIRE ¢https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8YXZTlwTAU ¢ THANK YOU!