psych 380 Upadhyay final exam

Common online measurements

(*Last two, losing validity of data) *Reading times: what is causing people to slow down-maybe it's confusing?-this is online but then off-line is what happened after and ask questions, RT *Eyetracking: RT, how fast and slow reader by looking at eye movements *Probe questions: as you're reading you ask questions-online but disrupting natural reading process-reading but then thinking about what you're reading which is different processes *Think-aloud verbal protocol: articulate about thought process as you're reading-describe what you're thinking about and people aren't accurate about talking about what they're reading about, people think they're more accurate then they already are

Theories of Mind for conversation + audience design

+Theories of Mind (know something about this info it can help what they're trying to say) *We are always mentally marking when rules are violated -Taking into consideration the beliefs of another person -Direct Theory: thinking about things that are about the other person-framing conversation. Ex: as you frame request-think of a way to frame it in a requestful cuz talking to a professor to get what you want -We do not talk inour college classes the way we would to a group of second graders, nor do we launch into conversations with bank tellers about our research. This is "audience design," which is awareness of the need to design our speech to the characteristics of our audience. Alternatively, if we donot know much about another, we may assume that person knows what we know and then revise our direct theory as we observe how well that person follows our remarks. Audience design has implications beyond conversations. When we tell stories, we modify what we tell our listeners based on who they are and our social relationship to them. This retelling is not the same as recall. We modify the information we report to fit the social situation. In retelling stories, weoften exaggerate some parts, minimize others, add information that was not there originally, and leave some bits out, all to suit our audience and the broader message we are trying to convey

Types of inferences for comprehension & examples

- Inferencing: we make connections when reading or listening to help us understand, We rely on people to know the meaning of words and about syntactic devices that structure our discourse, and to share our general conceptual knowledge of the world. Inferences help us construct situation models for narrative events -Bridging Inferences-connect 2 ideas: *Casual (backward) +Mary poured the water on the bonfire +The fire went out +Gotta look at it backwards and be like woah the bonfire went out cuz she poured water on it-cause and effect: water will cause this *NECESSARY inference for comprehension: gotta make this connection to know that this happened in the text or someone said it to you, need to know the relationship, developing reader needs to understand this casual reference, is this necessary for the text or for your own comprehension -Elaborative Inference: add to our mental representation: *Predictive (Forward) +The crew was ready to shoot close ups when suddenly the actress fell from the 14th tory of the building *readers infer the actress died, but this wasn't stated! Based on real word knowledge you draw that conclusion but the text didn't say this and it's not necessary for you to think that *UNNECESSARY inference: adding to our interruption-add to our own understanding but isn't necessary that we think this since the text didn't say this "Good-enough reading" we inference efficiently -Bridging Inferences: *Sam is going to Cognitive Psych. He thinks that class is awesome -Do you NEED To know He=SA, or does the sentence still make sense without it? (Local vs GLobal coherence, it there was another "he" then readers make the inference) -Anaphoric=UNNECESSARY inference -Don't need to know who he is, doesn't indicate your lower skill if you don't connect things-more about efficiency-don't need to have the cognitive processing to think this, If someone else was in it then it would be necessary to know who He is, only do this when it becomes necessary, not something about skill-not enough good or bad as a reader-text doesn't push u to do that then u don't -The gist of this work is that the greater your working memory capacity and vocabulary size, the greater the likelihood that information necessary for an inference will still be in working memory and can be used

Fast & Frugal Heuristics + example

-. Instead, it is important to assess how well people's heuristics actually do in guiding behavior. People use heuristics not just because of memory limitations, incomplete algorithm knowledge, and so forth, but because they work; because they are adaptive in the sense of leading to successful behavior. People use heuristics because they are tractable and robust. Tractable means that people can mentally track everything they need to use the heuristic, in contrast to algorithms that require people to track (often) much larger amounts of information. Calling heuristics robust means that they provide reasonable answers under a wide range of circumstances. Fast and Frugal Heuristics (a collection of heuristics in whcih people are using basic rules of thumb to quickly make decisions) -Satisficing: "good enough" processing again, what satisfies your minimum criteria? We like to preserve our processing. EX: eating at mcdonalds while traveling. -Recognition: recognition/familiarity influences decision. Things that feel familiar to you will influence ur decision making, even if it's not logical will go for it because its more familiar and will be persuaded by the decision. Ex: "Which city is larger, Kansas City or Junction City?" you might choose Kansas City because you have never heard of the alternative. -Take the Best: compare and pick based on specific criterion. Your specific criterion of the thing, weighing the pros and cons. Ex: So if I ask which is larger, Kansas City or Wichita, simple recognition will not work, because you have probably heard of both. You then try to retrieve a cue to help you decide, a cue that correlates with city populations—maybe something like "Does the city have a major-league sports team?" If you know that Kansas City does but Wichita doesn't, you decide Kansas City is larger based on that bit of positive evidence.

Situation Model Creation -bridging inference

-A process of constructing a connection between concepts. Binds two units of language together For example, determining that a reference like the epithet the stupid thing refers to the same entity as a computer is a bridging inference. It builds a connection between these two forms of reference, indicating that they refer to the same discourse entity. In bridging inference, the language producer uses reference to indicate the intended kinds of implications. For their part, comprehenders interpret the statement in the same fashion, computing the references and drawing the inferences needed - When the implication and inferences are intended, they are called authorized inferences. Alternatively, unintended implications and inferences are called unauthorized inferences, as when I say, "Your hair looks pretty today," and you respond, "So you think it was ugly yesterday?"

Simulation Heuristic

-A variation on the availbility heuristic, Here people predict future events or are asked to imagine a different outcome of an event or action. The simulation involves a mental construction or imagining of outcomes, a forecasting of how some event will turn out or how it might have turned out under other circumstances. -Easy to imagine outcomes-> seen as more likely -Difficult to imagine -> seen as less likely -You are delayed getting to the airport and arrive 30 min after scheduled departure *Which frustrates you more? Knowing the flight left on time, and you are 30 mins late Knowing departure was also delayed and left only 5 min ago! *Outcome is the same but what sways us is bc of the simulation heuristic, "if i only arrived 5 mins earlier I would have made it" so the second outcome wud b more frustrating -96% of the subjs said #2 is upsetting *However both outcomes are the same-you were late and wouldn't make the flight *But easier to stimulate that you could have made it, if the plan left only 5 min ago -Making overly confident types of estimates

advantages and limitations of offline measurements of comprehension

-Advantages of offline: test memory for the text-face validity -Limitations of offline: mesaures only what people remember after reading, there's more going on.

advantages and limitations of online measurements of comprehension

-Advantages of online: provide evidence at two levels of comprehension-first there are word-level processes operating at the surface form level. These are crucial to an understanding of reading. Second, reading time measures can be used to examine larger, macroscopic processes, such at the textbase and situation model levels. -Limitations of online: An analysis of reading times needs to account for several surface form and text base factors that are tied to the text itself. Reading time is strongly influenced by word length, with words that are composed of more letters or syllables taking longer to read than shorter words. Also, word frequency plays a vital role, with infrequent words resulting in longer reading times as the reader needs to engage in extra mental effort to retrieve this lexical information from memory. Decrease reading time: surface form effects: familiar word, higher word frequency, repetition of infrequent word Textbase effects: appropriate title, supportive context, semantic-based expectation (if confirmed)

Differences between algorithms & heuristics

-Algorithms: specific rule of solution, detailed and complex (normative model) GUARANTEED CORRECT ANSWER. -Heuristics: informal strategy or approach, not systematic or orderly, works under some circumstances (descriptive model) NOT GUARANTEED CORRECT ANSWER. Can be fooled that they're working

Insight Learning vs. Analogy

-Although insight involves the seemingly sudden awareness of the solution to a problem, often as a result of unconscious processes, analogy involves the use of the solutions to prior problems that have a similar, underlying, abstract structure. This use of analogy can be conscious and explicit or, like insight, unconscious and implicit. Although people can certainly use analogies, especially when they are explicitly pointed out, they do not use them as often as would benefit them. -Sometimes, the necessary insight for solving a problem comes from an analogy: An already-solved problem is similar to a current one, so the old solution can be adapted to the new situation. -Insight is a deep, useful understanding of the nature of a problem that occurs abruptly, aha moment *Creative thinking: a novel approach, or novel interpretation *Analogy: sudden realization that prior knowledge is relevant to the solution *Top-down connection between things, correlated with divergent thinking-creative out of the box thinking-out of the ways, deep understanding, won't get the right solution-unpredictable, can't really train it, not really a strategic source, can be part of an analogy (which is bottom up) Analogical Problem Solving (Gick and Holyoak, 1980) -Interested in understanding how individuals use analogy to solve insight problems -Basic experimental approach Study a base passage or analog that contains a problem with corresponding solution Attempt to solve a target insight problem -Critical question: do participants use knowledge of the base to find a solution? (a little top-down (focusing on features-semantic features what makes up a category) bc you're using top-down for initial base problem but then the rest is bottom-up) If base prob helps u with everything then u use top-down. Look at feature levels-what parts of paper i would write for a english class vs psych class -Metaphors can help -Knowing whats different and what's common can help, bottom-up processing Explaining Analogy: Multiconstraint theory (Holyoak and Thagard, 1997) -Problem similarly *Similarity b/w source and target domains. How close base domain and target makes it easier to solve it. -Problem structure: *Establish parallel structures b/w the source and target problems. Structure can help you use your prior experience, if problem has the same structure. -Purpose of the analogy *Problem solver's goals vs goal of the problem Why don't people rely on/use analogy-even if it aids problem-solving? -Analogies are more abstract and difficult to come up with -Takes more time to do this and more background and domain knowledge/learning to inform your schemas, and better enable you to map relations -Same with algorithms-take more time and involves lots of steps even tho its thorough-like to preserve our resources and not use more than necessary -Sometime needs to change based on what analogy is set up for you Conclusions on analogy -People are better at creating analogies when: *They are given an explicit hint about what prior knowledge is relevant *Encouraged to develop an abstract representation of their knowledge *The analogy is between highly similar domains-easier to make connections -Analogical problem solving is involved in insight problems and well-defined problems (easier to measure and study, have a set formula/order of operations, as long as u apply sets correctly you can see how you got there) -Heuristics relate to analogy-figure out the analogy b/w 2 situations-can help u see the real world How do we improve insight? -Overcoming functional fixedness or negative set, taking a different perspective... -Easier to see if insight is helpful-see what prior knowledge is important-overcoming functional fixedness-see different approaches and think divergently

Negative set bias & examples

-Approaching or thinking about a problem in same way and not changing the way-makes it harder to recognize/generate alternative approaches -Can involve functional fixedness-but doesn't always have to! -Stuck in same pattern of doing something -Insight-incubation: step away from prob and be able to then think of right solution -Ex: tying a shoe the same way all the time when theres a better way to do it

How can metaphor be a tool used in many branches of psychology?

-Cognitive: analogical reasoning, problem solving, metaphors and communication -Clinical: metaphors in psychotherapy and as predictors of client-therapist relationships -Social: how the use of metaphors impacts romantic and platonic relationships -Developmental: when we learn to use/comprehend metaphors and how use changes with age, brain development and analogical reasoning -Cultural: metaphor use between groups and how cultural norms change what is appropriate or what is compared

Simple Reference types of references

-Direct Reference: Identity. Michelle bought a computer. The computer was on sale. EX: In sentence 9 ((9) I saw a convertible yesterday. The convertible was red) the reference is so direct that it requires no inference on the part of the listener; this is identity reference, using the definite article the to refer back to a previously introduced concept, a convertible. Synonym. Michelle bought a computer. The machine was on sale. Synonym reference requires that you consider whether the second word is an adequate synonym for the first, as in sentence 10 ((10) I saw a convertible yesterday. The car was red); can a convertible also be referred to as the car? Pronoun. Michelle bought a computer. It was on sale for 20% off. Pronoun reference requires similar reference and inference steps. In sentence 11, pronoun reference can refer only to the convertible, because it is the only concept in the earlier phrase that can be equated with it. ((11) I saw a convertible yesterday. It was red.) Set membership. I talked to two people today. Michelle said she had just bought a computer. Epithet. Michelle bought a computer. The stupid thing doesn't work. -Indirect Reference by Association: Necessary parts. Eric bought a used car. The tires were badly worn. Probable parts. Eric bought a used car. The radio doesn't work. Inducible parts. Eric bought a used car. The salesperson gave him a good price. -Indirect Reference by Characterization: Necessary roles. I taught my class yesterday. The time I started was 1:30. Optional roles. I taught my class yesterday. The chalk tray was empty. -Other: Reasons. Rick asked a question in class. He hoped to impress the professor. Causes. Rick answered a question in class. The professor had called on him. Consequences. Rick asked a question in class. The professor was impressed. Concurrences. Rick asked a question in class. Vicki tried to impress the professor too.

Grammatical aspect of inferences

-Grammatical aspect: which is how an event action or state is conveyed by a verb, as in the idea of a verb tense. For example, the sentence "Sam walked to the store" conveys the perfective aspect, and the sentence "Sam was walking to the store" contains an imperfective aspect. For the perfective aspect, the action walk is described as having already been completed. For the imperfective aspect, the action is described as ongoing. As such, you would create two different situation models for these two sentences. For the first, you might create a situation model in which Sam is in the store;for the second, you would create a situation model in which Sam is walking along a sidewalk on his way to the store

Indirect Language

-Holtgraves study: *People expected indirect language in negative situations *Ex: Horrible presentation in class-no prob processing indirect language (hard to give a presentation)-that's what we all do in this situation, indirect language in a positive situation that will be looked at since we normally don't do that Indirect Requests-Language, power and privilege: Plausible Deniability and Passive Aggressiveness -People expected indirect language from bosses/people of higher status -Don't have same level of familiarly with them so you don't speak so directly with them, more careful way you do conversation so there's more indirect conversation Indirect Language: Why is it important? -Saying something with an underlying meaning, power dynamic, calling somebody articulate whose in a minority, person doesn't realize it's happening-sets up lots of dynamics when person who is using the language can walk away and not have any consequences since they don't realize what was being said to them

Ways to increase problem-solving skills

-Increase domain knowledge -Automate some components of the problem solving solution -Follow a systematic plan -Draw inferences (Ch.10 Comprehension!) -Develop subgoals -Work backward -Search for contradictions -Search for relations b/w problems -Find a different problem representation -Stay calm -If all else fails, try practice

Metaphor & Analogy - what's the connection?

-It can help understand the prior knowledge relevant to a solution by thinking about how things work -So, when you hear people say, "My job is my jail," they typically do no literally mean that they are physically imprisoned by their employment. Instead, they are comparing their job to the confining, restrictive, and inescapable experience of being in jail. This is using language to make an analogy, much as we have seen analogical thinking with other types of cognition. It is just much more explicit and out in the open here.

Representative Heuristic

-It embodies a bias of insensitivity to sample size. When people reason, they fail to account for the size of the sample or group on which the event is based. They seem to believe that both small and large samples should be equally similar to the population from which they were drawn. In other words, people believe in the law of small numbers. Now the law of large numbers—that a large sample is more representative of its population—is true. But people erroneously believe that there is also a law of small numbers, but that is not the case. -Stereotype Bias- Instead, they assumed that the personality descriptions contained relevant information and adjusted their estimates accordingly. -Belief Bias -Confirmation Bias -Why do we rely on heuristics if imprecise: quicker and easier than algotherims Representativeness: Misconceptions of chance -After 6 coin tosses: *Outcome 1: H T H T T H *Outcome 2: H H H T T T *Outcome 1 SEEMS RANDOM, so we estimate it as more probable Representativeness: Stereotypes and Base-Rate Neglect -100 people are in a room, 70 of them are lawyers, 30 of them are engineers -What is the likelihood Bill is a lawyer? 70% -People ignore information when they are given more descriptors in the sentence, people are influenced by descriptive info and ignore numbers and go with what feels right -Stereotypes are playing into what the likelihood is -Still go with intuition -People ignored base rates (Second, we fail to consider base rates, that is, the relative frequencies of the two professions. In other words, there are far more businessmen than librarians, a base rate that tends to be ignored because of the stereotype "match.") and were influenced by if the description was representative of their stereotype for an engineer

Limitations in our reasoning & decision making: human error

-Limited Domain Knowledge: top down knowledge that you have to help you make a decision, don't have that domain can't make the decision -Bounded Rationality: limited information processing capacity -Naive Physics: misunderstanding physical world and motion, ignoring logic for personal experience *using past experience of things dropping -All leads to human error -Real-world feedback: people tell u -Structure and complexity of problem: harder for u to understand -Instruction, training: limited domain knowledge-don't have background/not taught something Waltz et al. on limitations in reasoning -Patients with frontal lobe dropped from more than 80% correct on Level 1 problems to around 20% correct on Level 2 problems(had multi propositions, Level 1 didn't have multi propositions)-unable to consider and integrate multiple propositions at the same time. Frontal lobe patients unable to maintain two relational changes at the same time, their performance dropping from about 80% down to around 10% at level 2. -The temporal lobe patients were very close in performance to the normal controls-despite this very poor performance by prefrontal patients, their accuracy on memory tests was v high about 96% correct, about 10% higher than the normal controls. Here it was the temporal lobe patients whose declarative memory for the takes was poor; their name performance was at 56%. Thus, declarative memory for the tasks was damaged selectively for the temporal lobe patients, but reasoning performance was selective damage for the prefrontal lobe patients. -Limited working memory compromises reasoning and decision making in difficult situations -Frontal lobe critical in reasoning and decision-making and maintaining information-maintaining relational information in working memory while the reasoning task was being done -One of the reasons why there are lots of research about frontal lobe function, all related for research about how it takes long for your frontal lobe to develop and make decisions-into adulthood it's still maturing

Explain the NPS model. how does this help us figure out the likelihood of swearing, and how people rely on top-down context/situational cues to know when to use such language?

-N state + P state + S context= X taboo word *IF they are in a certain state of mind in a particular context, then they will say the taboo word. This lets us predict when people will swear and in what situations *Neurological state (ex: autonomic arousal), psychological status (ex: agreeableness), and social sensitivity (ex: impulsiveness) *At present, NPS stands more as a starting point than a finished theory of swearing: What about different groups, communities, bilinguals?-found that native speakers are more sensitive than bilinguals to how differences in speaker status and differences in taboo word choice affect overall offensiveness of taboo expressions -Another way you're adding emphasis to your language phonetically b. How does this relate to top-down processing? Based on people's experiences with swearing in the past, you say it depending on the situation.

On-line & Off-line measures of comprehension: what are they, what kinds of information do we get from using them?

-Online: comprehension as it happens, Find a dynamic, time- or action-based task that yields measurements of the underlying mental processes as they occur. Contrast performance in a variety of conditions, pitting factors against each other to see how they affect comprehension speed or difficulty. Then draw conclusions about the underlying mental processes, based on the performance measures. -Offline: comprehension after it occurs, provides more specific info and can get more detailed responses-don't know if people are accurately monitoring what they're doing but missing out on what people are thinking about (online) *Best design has online and offline measures-can get a mixture of both

Speech Act (Inferences)

-People are also aware of the inetnded consequences of someone saying something, call this -For example, if you ask your roommate to turn down the stereo, the speech itself is the set of words you say, but the speech act is your intention, getting your roommate to let you study for an upcoming exam. Not only do people spontaneously derive the implied speech acts of what other people say, but they may misremember what was said in terms of the speech act itself. -Most of the inferences you make are backward inferences. You are trying to understand what has already been described and how it all goes together. You make forward inferences—trying to predict what will happen next—under much rarer circumstances

Incubation - how is it helpful?

-People often take a break from difficult problems before returning to them -This release from irrelevant modes of thinking, seen in the neuroimaging data, can be extended to a process called incubation. With incubation, when people have difficulty solving a problem, they may stop working on it for a while. Then at some point, the solution or key to a solution may present itself to them -Although this can work at times, it appears that incubation is most useful when people have originally been provided with misleading information, by either others or themselves, that steers them away from the correct solution. During incubation, the representations for these misleading ideas lose strength, so that later the more successful alternatives can then present themselves -Interestingly, insight is more likely to occur when people are mind wandering while doing relatively undemanding tasks, as compared to doing a demanding task, simply resting, or not taking a break at all -Anecdotally, when we return to a problem with fresh eyes we are often able to solve it -Does incubation actually help problem solving and creative insight? *Ambiguous results for whether incubation is effective from prior studies *Does incubation help creative insight or not?-generally helps unlock something -improves insight

Good & Poor reader differences on eyetracking measures

-Poor Readers: *Longer fixations and gaze duration *More regressions -Could mean: *Smaller vocabulary-lower frequency words have longer times *Less prior/domain knowledge -Other factors, regardless of skill: *Fatigue *Attention-mind wandering *Cognitive overload

Types of references for comprehension & examples

-Referencing: in written and spoken language, Reference is the linguistic process of alluding to a concept by using another name. Need to understand a reference to comprehend language -involves finding the connections between elements in a passage of text, finding the words that refer to other concepts in the sentence. Antecedents and Anaphoric Reference Mike went to the pool to swim laps. After his workout, he went to his class... Mike went to the pool to swim laps. After Mike swam laps, Mike went to Mike's class... Mike=Antecedent (comes first); his=Anaphor Demonstrates repeated name/proper noun penalty Cataphoric Reference In his confusion, Mike went to Miller for class instead of Carrier Mike=noun; his=Cataphor (forward reference) Simple Reference: Simple reference picks out an entity or entities in a more or less direct manner. -I saw a cat this morning. It was grey. Cat=noun; It=anaphor (simple reference) Referring to this single specific cat (help u figure out a single entity) More on Reference and Memory Representation/Situation Model -Another important idea is that there is some evidence that the order in which antecedents are encountered influences the likelihood that they will be linked to later reference. -Advantage of First mention: -Clause recency: -What does this remind you of memory: primacy and recency effects-doesn't only work with words lists but when you're processing things in real life -This repetition of identity reference can be detrimental to comprehension. Research has shown a repeated name penalty, an increase in reading times when a direct reference is used again compared to when a pronoun is used

Types of references for comprehension & examples Anaphoric reference

-The act of using a pronoun or possessive (or synonym) to refer back to a previously mentioned concept) -And the act of using a pronoun or possessive later -Ex: "Dave was studying hard for his statistics midterm" his is referring to Dave which was mentioned at beginning of the sentence

Types of references for comprehension & examples. Antecedent

-The if clause in standard conditional reasoning (if-then) tasks. In the statement "If it rains, then the picnic will be cancelled," the antecedent is "If it rains" -Example: "Dave was studying hard for his statistics midterm". The word his refers to Dave. In this situation Dave is the antecedent of his because Dave comes before the pronoun

Types of references for comprehension & examples. Reference

-The linguistic process of alluding to a concept by using another name

Situation Model for References

-a person combines information that is available from the text, along with prior semantic and episodic knowledge, to create a mental simulation of the events being described. This is a situation model, a mental representation that serves as a simulation of a real or possible world as described by a text. -The important idea is that comprehension is a search after meaning. Although comprehension does use some passive activation of semantic and episodic memories, we also actively build situation models that elaborate on the causal structure of the event a person is trying to understand. To improve our understanding of situation models, we examine three processes in the use of situation models in comprehension: The use of inferences to elaborate on the information provided by a text The influence of language structure, namely grammatical aspects, on situation model construction The updating of the situation model as shifts in the described events are encountered

Grice's Maxims

-quantity:As needed, provide as much information as is necessary (e.g., don't give too much information; don't go beyond or give short shrift to what you know; don't give too much information). -quality:Have what you say be truthful (e.g., don't give misleading information; don't lie; don't exaggerate). -relevance: Your utterances should be relevant to the discourse (e.g., stay on topic; don't make statements about things that others are not interested in) -manner and tone: Aim for clarity (e.g., avoid saying things that are unnecessarily ambiguous or obscure); keep it brief, but polite, and don't interrupt someone else. -two more: -relations with conversational partner: Infer and respond to partner's knowledge and beliefs (e.g., tailor contributions to partner's level; correct misunderstandings). -rule violations: Signal or mark intentional violations of rules (e.g., use linguistic or pragmatic markers [stress, gestures]; use blatant violations; signal the reason for the violation).

Metaphor defined from the textbook & from Moser's article

-textbook: comparing two domains, language can evolve to better reflect the alignment of two situations, a form of analogy -article: metaphor involves mapping one experience using the terms of another experience in order to understand a new or complex situation, Different from textbook's emphasis on prior knowledge

elimination by aspects

A decision-making approach in which alternatives are evaluated against criteria that have been ranked according to importance -another important heuristic -A rational way to approach these sorts of situations would be to look at all the relevant features for all the options, tally up their various values, and then select the option that provides the best fit for the person across all available features. This approach is problematic because there often is a large number of options and features to consider. -To short-circuit this process, people can use the elimination by aspects heuristic. Basically, people go through the various features, one at a time, starting with those of most importance to them. Each option that does not meet some criterion for a given feature is then dropped from consideration. This process is repeated feature by feature until the number of options is drawn down to a manageable size or leads to a single option.

undoing heuristic

A more complete example of the simulation heuristic, including the undoing of an outcome by changing what led up to it. This is called counterfactual reasoning (a line of reasoning that deliberately contradicts the facts in a "what if" kind of way; in the simulation heuristic, the changing of details or events in a story to alter the (unfortunate or undesirable) outcome)

Cataphoric reference

A word or expression in a text that refers forward to another part of the text.

Anaphoric Inference

An inference that connects an object or person in one sentence to an object or person in another sentence

Assumptions of eyetracking research

Assumptions of EyeTracking-What does it measure/tell us? -Immediacy Assumption: *Readers try to interpret each content word (not articles, or frequently skipped words) as it is encountered w/o taking in sentence context (phrases) -Eye-Mind Assumption: *The eye fixates on a word as long as it's being actively processed *Can interpret this as: fixation time=mental processing -BUT there are limitations to this assumption Limitations of Eye Tracking -As we read, we often process more than one word -Gaze duration reflects spillover processing of prior words and anticipatory processing of upcoming words -Perceptual span: 3-4 characters to the left of fixation, 14-15 characters to the right of fixation -Fixating on one point but focusing on other things -Why do you think we have a greater visual span for characters to the right? Language specific-we read left to right, top-down processing-in English language we are trained that we r going to get more useful info looking to the right, experience driving your sensorium Reading Beh & Eye Tracking movements are language specific! -Asymmetry to the right=anticipatory processing/attention for upcoming words *English based to the right; we read from left to right *Hebrew biased on the left;read right to left The clock in the kitchen was broken (blue fixation point) (colors are perceptual span) Factors that affect reading time and eye tracking measures of comprehension -Word Frequency-high frequency words are skipped -Syntactic Structure-more regressions, longer fixations, Longer fixations when trying to figure out phrase structure groupings -Sentence Context- Longer fixations-gaze duration -Syntactic/Sentence Ambiguity- Longer fixations-gaze duration

Types of heuristics, biases, fallacies & examples

Availability Heuristic -Familiarity Bias -Salience/Vividness Bias -Recency Bias -Other Biases that influence the availability heuristic -Overestimating likelihood of events because of... *Famility: more familiar occurrences *Salience/Vividness: more media attention/stronger impression *Recency: more recent occurrences Representative Heuristic -Stereotype Bias -Belief Bias -Confirmation Bias -Why do we rely on heuristics if imprecise: quicker and easier than algotherims -Stereotypes and Base-Rate Neglect Simulation Heuristic -Easy to imagine outcomes-> seen as more likely -Difficult to imagine -> seen as less likely

adjacency pair

Conversation is a linear series of turn-taking -a pair of turns that sets the stage for another part of the conversation.

Grice's Maxims + examples & Cooperative Principle

Conversational cues and rules: *The Cooperative Principle and Grice's Maxims *We know to follow these and expect others to know that and do that too -Cooperative Principle: we implicitly know conversation rules and we expect others to know/the most basic conversational postulate, stating that participants cooperate by sharing info in an honest, sincere and appropriate fashion-they are influenced by Grice's Maxims What happens if we violate one of Grice's Maxims? -Someone enters a messy room and says, "What a beautiful room this is!" *What maxim does this violate?-You're not saying a truthful statement-violating the rule of Quality maxim (this maxim is about truth) *How do we know how to interpret this? We assume they're saying it in a fake way +Assume Cooperative Principle +Top-Down sources of information +Theories of Mind (know something about this info it can help what they're trying to say) *We are always mentally marking when rules are violated

Availability Heuristic

Event frequency is coded in memory, perhaps automatically. If the retrieval of examples is easy, we infer that the event must be frequent or common. If the retrieval is difficult, then we estimate that it must not be frequent. Interestingly, frequency estimates affect your eventual judgments about the information: If it is repeated often enough, even false statements become "truer". Frequency is related to the second heuristic-the availability heuristic in which people estimate the likelihood of events based on how easily examples come to mind. "Ease of retrieval" is what the term availability means here. -things that are dramatized in media that happens more since its more salient and familiar and more recent -Familiarity Bias:this unwarranted influence of how much you have experienced something is called a familiarity bias. Familiarity influences decision making beyond just how frequent something is. For example, food additives with unfamiliar, low-frequency, hard-to-pronounce names are rated as being riskier than additives whose names are more familiarly structured and easier to pronounce -Salience/Vividness Bias;This bias can be attributed to the factor of salience or vividness. News accounts of an airline accident are far more vivid and given far more attention than those of car accidents. -Recency Bias -Why do we rely on heuristics if imprecise: quicker and easier than algotherims Availability Heuristic -Is it safer to fly in a plane or drive a car in the US *Estimates influenced by ease of retrieval -How we are accustomed to think about things Other Biases that influence the availability heuristic -Overestimating likelihood of events because of... *Famility: more familiar occurrences *Salience/Vividness: more media attention/stronger impression *Recency: more recent occurrences

Risk Aversion for Gains

Focus on gains-> avoid risk="Play it safe" *Motivation-driven ->Avoid risk by studying in advance=sound decision/reasoning

Risk Seeking for Losses

Focus on loss-> seek risk= "Go big or go home" *Desperation-driven ->Cheat, plagiarize=risky decision/reasoning

Framing, Risk, Anchoring

Framing and decision making: What you say it and how you say it + laying out the options Risk assessment can be influenced by the way the problem is presented Framing presents an anchor for people to root their estimates to Decisions can be influenced by what other options there are to compare Framing and anchoring of the same $20 savings $80 jacket in Store A -> $60 in Store B Would you drive to Store B? Yes, frame differently, seems more palpable (depends on individual differences and what item is) because of framing though the initial price is set at an anchor of $80 then $60 seems like a better deal. From anchors based on initial information we get, $500 vs $480 isn't that big of an anchor 2. $500 in Store A -> $480 in Store B Would you drive to Store B? Anchoring -How the deal is framed influences our decision to buy or not, also comparing options -Companies and sales -People decisions and estimates are estimated by the original information they receive

Functional fixedness & examples

Functional Fixedness-is a tendency to use objects and concepts in the problem environment in only their customary and usual ways -Maier (1931): Pliers typically used for applying force to objects, not as a pendulum -Duncker (1945): Boxes typically used as containers, not as a shelf -Fixed on same function

typical bias

Other factors have also been implicated in counterfactual reasoning. people focus on actions, not failures to act, when they undo events.

How do we determine whether it's appropriate to use taboo language in a situation?

Pragmatic Info and Top-Down Expectations -We learn about taboos thru the socialization of speech practices -The ultimate offensives of words is determined entirely by pragmatic variables, such as speaker-listener relationship and social=physical setting, as as as the words used and tone of voice -Children and adults perceive different words to be offensive -As people age and mature, their sense of offensiveness and taboo increases and previously-offensive words no longer seem as out of the ordinary -For example, being called a "wimp" is more offensive to a 7 year old than too a middle-age person a. What factors do we consider? One's group identity and personality factors. c. Who uses taboo words the most? Men swear more frequently in public than women, men say more offensive words more frequently than women do. b. Even after people learn that a word/phrase is taboo, they continue to use it - why? For personal and interpersonal expressions of anger and frustration. Also, positive social outcomes can be achieved by using taboo words in joke and humor, social commentary, sex talk, storytelling, in-group slang, and self-deprecation or ironic sarcasm in order to promote social harmony or cohesion.

How did Gestalt psychologists influence problem-solving

Role of context Decompose a problem into subparts to help solve -Perceive light and shadow and objects -See it as a complete shape-mind fills in the gasps because that's most efficient, play around with spacing, foreground and background -All about relationship of parts and whole→ problem solving: using parts to figure out how we get to the whole, most focuses on insight types (ill-defined problems) of problem-less well with well defined problems Gestalt Problem Solving in Humans -Only 39% got correct solution after 10 min! *Tie pliers to one string *Swing pliers as a pendulum *Go to other string, grab it and catch pliers *Tie strings together -Why is this a difficult problem? -Difficult because it requires divergent thinking-have to see pliers in a different way-a different typical use-people have functional fixedness with the pliers -Example of Gestalt problem solving -Duncker (1945) *Solution: +Empty box of tacks +Use a single tack to attach box to wall +Place candle in box +Don't need to use all objs (matchbox) -Candles and boxes of takes-people focus on matchbox and candle -Make shelf out of box and attach candle to the way-so candle can stand up -Breaking things down -Example of Gestalt problem solving -Negative set is related bc after struggling with prob u approach it the same way and don't change the way-can happen with lots of probs

hindsight bias

The simulation heuristic provides a nice explanation of hindsight bias the after-the-fact judgment that some event was very predictable, even though it wasn't. -Such thinking often is the reason we decide to do one thing versus another; we think through the possible outcomes of different actions, then base our decision on the most favorable one. Thus, mental simulation, taking certain input conditions then forecasting possible outcomes, is an important way to understand cognitive processes related to planning.

More on Reference and Memory Representation/Situation Model -Advantage of First mention:

characters and ideas mentioned first are remembered better. (after reading a sentence such as "Tina gathered the kindling as Lisa set up the tent," people responded faster to Tina than to Lisa)

What determines whether an expression is metaphorical?

comparing one concept to another unrelated concept: *Life compared to theater *Have to determine relationship of real life experience to on stage -A metaphor can evolve over time to reflect the relationship b/w 2 ideas, something better can reflect the relationship-there can be a better way of drawing the relationship Metaphor puts two situations in alignment=comparing features -Can be bottom-up if used for analogical reasoning where the emphasis is comparison, and focusing on and abstracting structural similarities and differences=feature-based, bottom-up processes of these two situations-digest it down to lower level processes Understanding and learning figurative language thru experience -Top-down processing: context and prior knowledge needed to interpret idioms and metaphors

turn-yielding signal

move forward based on pauses and indicate when you're done talking - a long pause at the end of a sentence is a turn-yielding signal, as are a comment directed at another participant, a drop in the pitch or loudness of the utterance, and establishing direct eye contact with another person; the latter is often merely a nonverbal way of selecting the next speaker.

More on Reference and Memory Representation/Situation Model -Advantage of Clause Recency

remember the last character best -the speedup of RT to information in the most recently processed clause -"Tina gathered the kindling as Lisa set up the tent," if you are probed immediately after it, Lisa has a slight advantage due to recency, but this advantage is shortlived, showing an advantage at about 50 ms to 60 ms, but disappearing by 150 ms

What is analogy?

sudden realization that prior knowledge is relevant to the solution -a relationship between two similar situations, problems, or concepts. Understanding an analogy means putting the two situations into some kind of alignment so that the similarities and differences are made apparent

Topic Maintenance

understanding and expanding on topic -making our contributions relevant to the topic and sticking to it -depends on two processes: comprehension of the speaker's remark and expansion, contributing something new to the topic.