Participants were then asked to name the ink color and their response times for each list were measured in seconds. The results showed that the stroop effect interference extended to color-related words, providing further evidence for the interference and costs of the automatic processes of attention.8/8 Introduction Although we are able to sense a huge amount of information, not all of it is processed. Through a process of selection known as attention, only some pieces of information are selected for further processing by cognitive resources. The reason why we need to reduce incoming information may be due to a limited capacity to process information. Kahneman (as cited in Edgar, 2007) explains it in the limited capacity theory of attention.
Automatic processes vs Controlled processes The aim of this experiment was to test the Stroop effect and the effects automatic and controlled processes have on the test. The hypothesis is that people when performing the stroop effect will have less time and fewer errors with automatic processes, the time and errors would increase with the controlled processes. The participants were chosen by convenience and the selected participant in this case was a female, aged 52. The participant was first given a list of words that corresponded with the colour, using an automatic process, these are read aloud and the errors and the time taken to read the list is recorded. Then the second list of words, which are words not corresponded with the colour and is the controlled process, these are read aloud with the errors and the time taken recorded and compared to the first set of data.
Solomon Asch Conformity experiment Solomon Asch in 1951 In 1931 Sherif conducted an experiment in which subjects were asked to make a judgement based on an ambiguous task. This experiment was for example being asked how many paper clips are in a clear plastic cup and without counting them to prove otherwise there can’t be a right or wrong answer. Sherif found that when the participants could hear each others answers they tended to converge on a particular answer which was considered as a group average. However Solomon Asch (1951) believed that this conformity was due to the fact that the task was ambiguous so he devised a more strategic experiment in which participants were asked to identify a line which was identical in length to a standard line they were shown on different occasions amongst 3 other lines. The participants were told this was an experiment into aspects of visual perception.
Primary findings showed that subjects in the induced hypocrisy group responded more positively to condom purchase than the other 3 groups. The researchers interpreted that subjects have taken action to follow safer sex practices in order to reduce the dissonance created when realizing their own hypocrisy. No significant differences were found between the groups in estimating past risky sexual behaviour, while slight differences were found in future estimates of condoms use. However, follow-up interviews did not indicate a significant difference in condom usage three months after the experiment. The authors concluded that the technique of
The results suggest that participants took shorter time to read the nonsense words than that of reading the incongruent words. These findings maintain the hypothesis for the Stroop colour word task. Comparison of Reaction Times for the Stroop Colour Word Task The Stroop effect was discovered by John Ridley Stroop (1935), involving cognitive interference in colour-word processing tasks and continues to captivate experimenting in psychology to this day. Cattell in 1886 was doing his own dissertation under Whundt, and this influenced Stroop's research some 50 years earlier by reporting
The two IVs will be introduced in the research. First IV is job types: Sales assistant/ care worker; Second IV is tattoo/ no tattoo. And, finally, DV is suitability for a job. The results of the experiment showed that the suitability of candidates without tattoo is much higher for both types of job, then suitability of models with tattoo. Introduction Recent work by Sherif Sherif cited in Miller and McGlashan Nicols (1953) has shown that with the regard to group norms theory (GNT) it can be explained “how individuals acquire belief systems and ideologies that support the prescription of prejudice” (Miller et el., 2008).
Thus, coding of an odor takes longer than other modalities (Engen, Kuisma & Eimas (1973)). In addition, a visual identification of an object has to be processed before the process of identification of odor can occur. Therefore, to better understand this concept of olfactory stimulus playing a role in improving short-term memory even though it is the slowest of the nervous system, we decided to examine the effect of olfactory stimulus on short-term memory. In our experiment, we will compare the short-term memory of participants that will be exposed to an odor against other participants that will not be exposed to an odor based off a memorization task.
Reading rate for transposed letters at the beginning, middle, and end were closer to the normal than needed to draw a proper conclusion. Comprehension scores for the three were lower than the normal. Our hypothesis was supported in terms of comprehension scores but not for reading rate. Introduction As we read our eyes make small movements along 6 to 8 letters long and tend to skip over filler words which are high in frequency. When words are less frequent we tend to go back to read the word again; we do this automatically.
White et al. (2008) conducted another study to see major effect of graph warning label itself without text. They suggest that the graphic warning labels will decrease smoking habits in adolescence due to cognitive processing of those messages. Majority of the adolescence had low intention to smoke among those who talked about those labels. Our findings suggest that different warning labels, graphic or text-only, could significantly effective to prevent smoking among adolescences.
A limitation using a longitudinal study is that participants might withdraw from the study which might be an under representative of how criminality is measured. Also another limitation is that its time consuming compared to laboratory which might last for only two days. However, using longitudinal studies means that behaviour can be observed and measured more accurately than if the study was carried out for less than a week. Compared to the behaviourist approach, the social learning theory is seen as a stronger approach in explaining human behaviour as it taken into account mediating cognitive factors; these factors include attention, retention, motor reproduction and motivation. This is apparent is Bandura’s bobbo doll experiment