Term
| Paradigms of Cognitive Psychology (4): |
|
Definition
1) Information processing approach
2) Connectionism Approach
3) Evolutionary Approach
4) Ecological Approach |
|
|
Term
| Information Processing Stages (3) |
|
Definition
• Perception of information about environment
• Central processing or transforming information
• Responding to information |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• Humans have a limited amount of mental energy to devote to task
• Capacity is influenced by:
o Complexity of task
o Experience/Familiarity with task |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• Refers to fact we usually focus attention on 1-2 tasks or events rather than on many
• Driven by:
o Salience (attentional capture)
o Effort
o Expectancy
o Value (cost) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| • ‘pop out’ phenomena where one stimuli seems to jump off page/screen and demands attn. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• AKA perceptual blindness
• Person fails to see stimulus in plain site
o Ex) gorilla in video |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• Very gradual changes over time or rapid changes
o Ex) person swap videos |
|
|
Term
| Boadbent’s Filter Theory (1958) |
|
Definition
| theoretical filter device, which is located in between the incoming sensory register, and the short-term memory storage |
|
|
Term
| Contradictions to Filter Theory (3) |
|
Definition
• Cocktail Party Effect (Moray 1959)
o Shadowing performance disrupted when listener’s name is embedded in attended or unattended message
• Treisman (1960) showed selective attn. based on meaning of message
• Wood & Cowan (1995) showed shadowing performance degraded during disruption by unattended message |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• Unattended message not completely blocked
o Ex) volume turned down
• Information in unattended message still available but hard to recall |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Deutsch and Deutsch 1963)
• All message processed for some aspect of meaning
o Selection of which message to respond to this happens late in the process
•Moves bottleneck proposed in filter theory to the processing stage rather than at sensory
• Importance of message depends on:
1) Content
2) Context
3) Alertness |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• Attention is flexible system that allows selection of one message over others
• More processing requires more capacity |
|
|
Term
| Multi-Mode Theory: 3 Stages of Processing |
|
Definition
1) Sensory representations of stimuli are constructed
2) Semantic representations of stimuli constructed
3) Sensory and semantic representations enter consciousness |
|
|
Term
| Models of Attention and Effort – Kahneman’s Model |
|
Definition
• Allocation of mental resources to various cognitive tasks
• More arousal/alertness = more cognitive resources
• Capactiy = sum total of mental rescoures
• Model predicts: pay more attn. to things we are interested in, in the mood for, or have judged important
• Performance on ‘data limited’ tasks only as good as data input
o Greater concentration does not always equal better performance |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Neisser 1976)
• Don’t filter, attenuate or forget unwanted material
• Instead, we never acquire it in the first place
• Unwanted material is left out of our cognitive processes |
|
|
Term
| Automaticity and the Effect of Practice |
|
Definition
• More familiar a task means less capacity it takes to complete it
o Ex) typing, driving |
|
|
Term
| Criteria for Automatic processing (3) |
|
Definition
1) It must occur without intention
2) It must occur without involving conscious awareness
3) It must not interfere with other mental energy |
|
|
Term
| Automatic vs Attentional Processing - Schmeider and Schiffrin (1977) |
|
Definition
o Automatic (parallel processing) = easy/familiar tasks
o Controlled (serial processing) = difficult/unfamiliar tasks; requires attention; capacity limited under conscious control
• Controlled practice -> automatic practices with practice |
|
|
Term
| Feature Integration Theory |
|
Definition
• Perceive objects in 2 distinct phases:
o 1st Stage: pre-attentive, automatic, register features of object (color/shape)
o 2nd Stage: attention allows us to ‘glue’ the features to into a unifed object |
|
|
Term
| Attention Hypothesis of Automation |
|
Definition
• Attention required during practice phase of task and determines what gets learned
• Learning is side effect of attending
o People learn about thing they attend and do not learn about things they don’t
• Attention determines what info gets encoded into memory |
|
|
Term
| Psychological Refractory Period |
|
Definition
• As time between presentation between two sensory stimuli decreases, the times between responses increase
• Retrieving info from memory cause bottleneck and disrupts attention to 2nd task |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| • Interpreting sensory information to yield meaningful information |
|
|
Term
| Perception - Processes (3) |
|
Definition
o Feature analysis
o Unitization (long-term memory)
o Top-Down Processing (long-term memory) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| • Top down processing can help us overcome degradation of stimulus |
|
|
Term
| Guidelines in Perception (3) |
|
Definition
• Maximize bottom-up processing
o Ex) font size, colors
• Maximize automaticity & unitization using familiar perceptual representations
o Ex) Familiar font types, lower case text, familiar icons
• Maximize top-down processing when bottom-up is degraded
o Ex) smaller vocab, create context, use redundancy |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
o Objective: the message is received as intended
o Subjective: at a ‘deeper’ level relating the stumuli to general knowledge or personal experience |
|
|
Term
| Perception – Situational Awareness |
|
Definition
| • The perception of elements in the environment within a volume of time and space, the comprehension of their meaning, and the projection of their status in the near future |
|
|
Term
| 3 Stages of Situational Awareness |
|
Definition
1) Perception and Selective Attention
2) Understanding (working & long-term memory)
3) Projection and Prediction |
|
|
Term
| Situational Awareness vs. Performance |
|
Definition
o Can have high SA without doing anything
o Can have high performance with low SA
o Not used to describe routine performance, but appropriate and timely response to unexpected events |
|
|
Term
| Situational Awareness: How To Measure |
|
Definition
| o Freeze simulation to ask participants questions about the systems current state |
|
|
Term
| Situational Awareness in HFE Design |
|
Definition
• Design of easy to interpret displays
o Easy to lose SA in complex, automated systems
• Accident analysis
• Training |
|
|
Term
| Disruptions of Perception (3) |
|
Definition
• Visual Agnosias – impairments in the ability to interpret visual information
1) Apperceptive Agnosia
2) Associative Agnoisa
3) Prosopagnosia |
|
|
Term
| Disruptions of Perception - Apperceptive Agnosia |
|
Definition
– very limited in processing visual information
-Can see contrours or outlines of an object but can’t match it to a drawing |
|
|
Term
| Disruptions of Perception - Associative Agnosia |
|
Definition
can match objects to drawings but do so slowly
-Get caught in fine detail
-Cannot names the objects in drawing |
|
|
Term
| Disruptions of Perception - Prosopagnosia |
|
Definition
| can recognize objects but not faces of family, friends |
|
|
