| Question |
Answer |
Flap 3 |
| Bargh 4 horsemen of automaticity |
awareness, intention, efficiency, control |
(blank) |
| Awareness |
Unaware of stimulus/effects on processing or behaviour |
(blank) |
| Intentionality |
Do you want to start a process |
(blank) |
| Control |
if aware of stimulus can you STOP its effects? |
(blank) |
| Efficiency |
Cognitively demanding = might not occur under cognitive strain |
(blank) |
| 3 levels of automatic behaviour |
preconscious, postconscious & goal-directed |
pre = notice stimulus but not effects, post = results from previous concious processing, goal = intent + consent, considering the self) |
| Automaticity good? |
Auto responses can be more accurate (Wilson & Schooler, 1991), frees up cog space |
(blank) |
| Bargh (1989) |
recons we're always on auto pilot, with "if X then Y" |
where X is environment cue and Y is behaviour |
| James (1890) |
thinking conciously about an action activates action tendancies associated with that action making them more accessible |
Guiding behaviour in that particular direction |
| Carver et al (1983) |
Perception-action interface |
Shocking the confederate. Ppts primed w hostility gave longer shocks to others when they answered questions wrongly |
| Bargh, Chen & Burrows (1996) |
Perception-behaviour interface, |
Prime with politeness/rudeness. Wait for experimenter to finish a concersation. Ppl primed with rude far more likely to interrupt |
| Dijksterhuis & Van Knippenberg (1998) |
Percept-behaviour interface |
ppts primed with professor do better than control in trivia persuit questions, those primed with secretary do worse than control. |
| Dijksterhuis & Van Knippenberg (1998) 2 |
prime with elderly coridoor (Bargh?!?!) |
(blank) |
| Bargh (1993) |
Perception-behaviour interface |
Subliminaly prime with black v white faces, do boring dot task then "oh no i've lost the data, will you do it again?", black primed = more aggressive facial gestures & rude towards experimenter |
| If everything is automatic, why don't we act on all our ideas? |
boundary effect |
eg Kissing experiment - we don't do it for many reasons eg. tendancy, current environment, morals etc |
| William James (1890) |
boundary effect |
we don't do it cos other ideas rob them of their power. |
| Norman and Shallice (1986) |
Boundary effect, accesibility & activation of schema |
behaviour controlled by automatic activation of schemas when everything is going to plan, but then change to supervisory attentional system when something novel happens. A schema will be selected if it reaches activation threshold and isn't inhibited. |
Biology Lab Midterm
