Introduction:
When a behavior or skill seems to no longer require direct
interaction, cognitive psychologists say it is automatized. Many
behaviors can become automatized: typing, reading, writing, bicycling,
piano playing, driving, etc. Automatization is interesting because it
is an important part of daily life. We perform a variety of
automatized behaviors quickly and effortlessly. In some cases people
report that they do not consciously know how the behavior is
performed, they just will it to happen, and it does happen. To explore
properties of automatized behaviors cognitive psychologists often put
observers in a situation where an automatized response is in conflict
with the desired behavior. This allows researchers to test the
behind-the-scenes properties of automatized behaviors by noting their
influence on more easily measured behaviors. This demonstration
explores a well-known example of this type of influence, the Stroop
effect.
Stroop (1935) noted that observers were slower to properly identify
the color of ink when the ink was used to produce color names
different from the ink. That is, observers were slower to identify red
ink when it spelled the word blue. This is an interesting finding
because observers are told to not pay any attention to the word names
and simply report the color of the ink. However, this seems to be a
nearly impossible task, as the name of the word seems to interfere
with the observer's ability to report the color of the ink.
A common explanation for the Stroop effect is that observers have
automatized the process of reading. Thus, the color names of the words
are always processed very quickly, regardless of the color of the ink.
On the other hand, identifying colors is not a task that observers
have to report on very often, and because it is not automatized it is
slower. The fast and automatic processing of the color name of the
word interferes with the reporting of the ink color.
The Stroop task, and its many variations, are a commonly used tool in
cognitive psychology to explore how different types of behaviors
The nature of the Stroop effect results as a consequence of automaticity. People have difficulty ignoring the meaning of a word because, through practice, reading has become an automatic process. The two main explanations accounting for the Stroop effect in the past have been cognitive attentional processes involved in learning, controlled and automatic. As previously mentioned, when a process is automatic (for example reading), it is not only faster; it also does not rely on other cognitive resources. Controlled processes, for example color naming, are slow and demand more attentional resources. The theory is that an automatic process cannot successfully suppressed without causing interference of a controlled process. The second explanation, relative speed of processing, argues that the two processes involved in color naming and word reading are accomplished in parallel, but that word reading is carried out faster, assuming that the faster process will then interfere with the slower ones such as color naming (Dunbar and McLeod, 1984 as cited in Mel, 1997)
The results showed that the naming number tasks had the smallest reaction time compared to all the other. The incongruent counting task had the longest reaction time out of the other three tasks. The incongruence in the stimulus in the incongruent counting task created similar effects as the Stroop phenomenon. The hypothesis that the reaction time would be larger in the incongruent counting task was supported in this experiment, as well as the prediction that the congruent counting task will in fact have a lower reaction time than the incongruent; due to the fact of having no interference.
In a real life situation one may subconsciously use perceptual choice when seeing and meeting other people, such as, “through the process of selective attention, the brain picks out the information that is important to us and discards the rest” (Folk & Remington, 1998; Kramer et al., 2000). For a better understanding of how the mind works, an experiment was done to confirm the perceptions that people create. Three subjects were chosen to prove that people are mindlessly creating judgment and generalizat...
The human mind is viewed as a symbol-manipulating system through which information flow. According to information processing theory, the information that comes from the environment is subject to mental processes beyond a simple stimulus-response pattern. The input from the environment passes through the cognitive systems which are then measured by the output. The information that is received may take several pathways depending on attention, encoding, recognition, and storage. The theory focuses on actual time responses to stimuli presented and how the mind transforms that information. Most important in this theory is that humans process information rather than perceive
The study uses over 200 undergraduate students to focus in on the task at hand. Some participants were volunteers, whilst others were paid a fee. The experiments conducted on the 200+ participants observing a basketball activity for short periods of time. The studies begin in short intervals of approximately one minute, or a few seconds more. The conducted experiment of the basketball activity showed multiple players moving in an irregular pattern while passing a basketball in a relatively organized pattern. The players were on teams and wore different colored shirts while doing so, and the players only passed the ball to members of their same team. Participants of the experiment were asked to count the number of times in which the ball was passed, but after the test had finished, the participant was asked if they saw either the gorilla come through the elevator, or the tall woman with the umbrella. During this test, the majority of participants did not recognize the object that came into the room. This proved their theory of inattentional blindness, observers were so focused on counting the number of times the ball was passed between players, that they seemingly had tunnel vision, and completely missed the gorilla in the room. When asked about if they had seen the obscure factor, few responded with a “yes,” but most did not notice. After multiple experimenters questioned the
Fetters, Nyswonger and Arduser are all former members of the Raisins, a Cincinnati-based band that was a local success in the early 1980s. In 1983, the Raisins, who then consisted of Fetters, Nyswonger, Rick Neiheisel (keyboards, vocals) and Rick "Bam" Powell (drums, vocals), recorded an eponymous album, produced by Adrian Belew. Adrian's friendship with the Raisins dated back to the mid-'70s, when he crossed paths with them as a member of a band named Sweetheart before being discovered by Frank Zappa. The Raisins album, which was released on the small Cincinnati-based label Strugglebaby, produced a local No. 1 hit, "Fear is Never Boring" (later re-recorded for the Bears' first album), on popular Cincinnati radio stations. Clive Davis, then head of Arista Records, considered signing the band, but the Raisins didn't break through nationally.
The procedure is simple. On the computer screen, twelve words are revealed one word at a time in the form of a list. After the last word, a matrix of twelve words is shown. The matrix is a table of twelve words, some of which were on the list, some of which were not. Participants in the task chose which words they believe were on the list, using free recall to select words in any order. A new list begins when participants believe they have all of the correct words from the matrix. The cycle begins again. A list of twelve words are presented, a matrix appears after the twelfth word, and participants select words according to their memory of what was on the list. There are six lists in total, with no practice trials, however there are breaks in between to express the differences in each list.
In this specific “Implicit-association test” white individuals were asked to categorize a word that pops up on a computer screen as either positive or negative after a picture of either a black or white face showed up. The results showed that white individuals allocated negative words much faster to blacks than white faces.
The researchers had the participants’ complete three parts of the experiment: the learning phase, the TNT phase and the final memory phase. In the learning phase, the participants were presented forty eight object image pairs and asked to recall them. The participants were asked to learn a behavioral response for each item. The participants were then shown one of the forty eight objects and asked to press a key indicating left or right depending on the strength of the associated picture. After this, participants were then shown the correct related picture for two seconds as response. ...
Although there was some criticisms about the above experiment, Craik and Tulving performed more experiments each time refining the D.O.P. model. There were thoughts that the structural tasks were easier and not as much time had to be spent on them therefore people did not have as long to look at those words and could not study them like the other tasks. Craik and Tulving then made the structural task take equally as long as the other tasks. The results remand the same as the previous experiments. Craik and Tulving also originally started with five tasks, but then narrowed it down to three to avoid a ceiling effect. The self-referent task was later added to model by Rogers.
An Experiment to Investigate the Effect of Light Intensity on the Rate of Photosynthesis. Introduction Photosynthetics take place in the chloroplasts of green plant cells. It can produce simple sugars using carbon dioxide and water causing the release of sugar and oxygen. The chemical equation of photosynthesis is: [ IMAGE ] 6CO 2 + 6H20 C 6 H12 O 6 + 6O2 It has been proven many times that plants need light to be able to photosynthesize, so you can say that without light the plant would neither photosynthesize nor survive.
The photoelectric effect has a big effect on our daily lives. It is used in several important technological devices, like solar panels and anti-burglary sensors. The effect was discovered over a long period of time and several scientists’ research contributed to it, but Albert Einstein was the scientists who figured out a correct formula to determine the energy of a photoelectron (the electron that is ejected because of the photon that hits the electron in the atom)
Cunillera, Toni, Càmara, Estela, Laine, Matti, & Rodríguez-Fornells, Antoni. (2010). Words as anchors: Known words facilitate statistical learning. Experimental Psychology, 57(2), 134-141. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000017
Weiner, I. Healy, A. Freedheim, D. Proctor,R.W., Schinka,J.A. (2003) Handbook of Psychology: Experimental psychology,18, pp 500
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375.