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
JH Action Control
Bristol Social Psychology Second year
| 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. |
Created by:
jh4782
Popular Psychology sets