Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Cognitive Psychology
Week 6
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Decision making | Person has to assess info and choose the outcome |
| Type 1 thinking | Intuitive |
| Type 2 thinking | More reasoning based & complex |
| Influence of emotion in decision making | People tend to overestimate the intensity of their feelings. |
| Somatic marker hypothesis | Emotion related signals bias certain choices and that the entromedial and orbitofrontal regions int he prefrontal lobe are believed to trigger these somatic markers from memories and existing knowledge. |
| Incidental emotion | Not caused by having to make decisions but general dispositions |
| Integral emotion | Having to make this decision causes these emotions. |
| Sadder-but-wiser hypothesis | The finding that nondepressed individual are less accurate in their assessments |
| Myopic misery hypothesis | Sadness increases impatience and creates a myopic focus on obtaining money immediately instead of later |
| What is the finding about depression & decision making? | People with depression are worse at making decisions |
| Expected emotions & prospect theory | People's choices are better predicted by the values that they assign to gains & losses as opposed to the values they assign to certain outcomes. So people and prospect theory predict risk aversion behaviour. People are also bad at predicting their feeling |
| Framing effect | Decisions are influenced by how the choices are stated, or framed. When a choice is framed in terms of gains (saving lives) people use a risk aversion strategy, when choice is framed in terms of losses, people use risk-taking strategy. |
| Status quo bias | Tendency to do nothing when faced with making a decision. |
| Choice overload | Having more choice leads to less purchasing & less satisfaction |
| Influence of prior experience on decision making | People are affected by the decisions they had to make before (cesarean sections example) |
| Availability heuristic | Events that are more easily remembered are judged as beign more probable than events that are less easily remembered |
| What is the availability heuristic influenced by? | Familiarity, Recency, Large number of errors, Illusory correlations |
| Illusory correation | When a correlation between two events appears to exist, but in reality there is no correlation, or it is weaker, than it is assumed to be |
| Recognition heuristic | A type of availability heuristic. Recognizing something influences you to think it is more likely; yo uignroe strong contradicting cues. |
| Representativeness heuristic | the idea that people often make judgements based on how much one event resembles anohter event |
| back fire effect | facts that contradict their belief enhances their belief |
| conjunction rule | probability of a conjunction of two events cannot be higher than the probability of the single constituents |
| Anchoring/adjustment heuristic | a person uses a specific target number or value as starting point (anchor) and adjusts that information until an acceptable value is reached over time. We |
| Law of large numbers | the larger the n, the more representative of the population |
| Hindsight bias | Our tendency to look back at an event that we couldn't predict and then now think it was easy to predict |
| Myside bias | Tendency for people to generate and evaluate evidence and test their hypotheses in a way that is biased toward their own opinions and attitudes. Is an example of a confirmation bias. |
| onfirmation bias | Selectively looking for information that conforms to a hypothesis and overlooking information that argues against it. |
| Base rate | Relative proportions of different classes in the population. The base rate information is not taken into account. |
| 2 types of decision makers | Satisficers & maximizers |
| Satisficers | Aiming for satisfactory or adequate result, rather than optimal solution |
| Maximizers | Putting maximum exertion toward attaining the ideal outcome |
| Mental model approach | A specific situation is represented in a person's mind that can be used to help determine the validity of syllogisms in deductive reasoning. |
| Wason-four card problem | A type of problem used to test reasoning |
| Falsification principle | To test a rule, it is necessary to look for situations that would falsify the rule |
| Somatic marker hypothesis | Suggests that emotion-relation signals may bias certain choices, either consciously or unconsciously |
| Expected utility theory | Assumes that people are basically rational. |
| Belief bias | People have tendency to think a syllogism is valid if its conclusion is believable. |
| Deductive reasoning | Determine whether a conclusion logically follows statements called premises. |
| Top-down reasoning (deductive reasoning) | Going from more general to more specific reasoning |
| Syllogism (introduced by Aristotle) | A form of deductive reasoning that consists of two premises followed by a conclusion. |
| Categorical syllogism | Premises and conclusions start with ''all, no, some'' |
| 3 steps in the mental model of reasoning | 1. Create a model/repreesentation 2. Generate a conclusion based on this model and look for exceptions 3. Modify the model if exception is found |
| Conditional syllogisms | ''If...then'' syllogism |
| What did the wason four-card vs drinking beer problem show? | People are better at judging validity of syllogisms when real-world examples are used instead of abstract symbols. |
| Evolutionary perspective on cognition | We can trace many properties of our minds to the evolutionary principles of natural selection |
| Social exchange theory | An important aspect of human behaviour is the ability for two people to coopearte in a way that is beneficial for both |
| Inductive reasoning | Using evidence to reach a conclusion |
| Bottom-up reasoning (inductive reasoning) | Goes from specific observations to broader generalizations. Basis for most scientific reasoning. |
| Factors contributing to strength of an inductive argument (3) | 1. Representativeness of observations 2. Number of observations 3. Quality of the evidence |
Created by:
DoorBella
Popular Psychology sets