Cognitive Approach: Memory, Decision-Making, and Reliability

Cognitive approach
By John Crane
1
2
Cognitive approach
The cognitive approach is one of the units in the core. The unit focuses on two different
cognitive processes - memory and decision making.
There are clear links between the memory aspect of the unit and Theory of Knowledge.
This unit provides a lot of good research that can be replicated in order to meet the requirements
for the internal assessment. I
This section contains activities and curriculum tips, teaching ideas, revision strategies, key
studies, a question bank and writing samples for different SAQs and ERQs.
3
Learning objectives
The curriculum does not have clearly defined learning objectives, but the questions are
set by using the first two columns of the grid in the curriculum guide. Below you will find
the key areas of understanding that students must address for the unit.
General
• Ethical considerations related to research studies in the cognitive approach to studying

behaviour.
• How and why particular research methods are used at the cognitive approach.
• Evaluation of research methods used to study cognitive processes.
Cognitive processing
• Schema theory
• Multi-store model of memory
• Thinking and decision making (The concepts of thinking and decision making will be
interchangeable.)
• Working memory model
Reliability of cognitive processes
• Reconstructive memory
• Cognitive biases (Candidates should be able to discuss two biases).
Emotion and cognition
• One theory of how emotion affects a cognitive process - e.g. flashbulb memory theory
HL extension: Cognitive processing in a digital world
• The influence of digital technology on cognitive processes and human interaction.

• Positive and negative effects of modern technology on cognitive processes.
• Research methods used to study the interaction between digital technology and cognitive
processes.
4
Helpful websites
• Digital Nation https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/digitalnation/

• Growing up online https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kidsonline/
• HM obituary http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/us/05hm.html?_r=2&em
• How can musicians keep playing in spite of amnesia?
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-15791973
• The Innocence project https://www.innocenceproject.org/causes/eyewitness-
misidentification/
• Loftus - the fiction of memory
https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory/up-
next?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2013-09-
28&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the
_week_image
• Maguire taxi cab study (National Geographic video)
https://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/london-taxi-sci
• The memory exhibition http://www.exploratorium.edu/memory/
• Psychology Today: Cognition https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/cognition
• Theories about decision making
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/a_decision.htm
Unit planning: Cognitive
This section of the site has two purposes. First, it is here that
you will find curriculum related material - particularly, the unit planners and advice on how to
address the ATL planners on Managebac if your school is using that program.
Secondly, this section replaces "teacher notes." For the different components of the curriculum
you will find lesson plans, with links to activities on the site that you may find helpful for
students to develop understanding of key concepts as well as critical thinking skills.
5
Cognitive approach
The IB Psychology course looks at behaviour through three different

approaches: biological, cognitive and sociocultural. In modern psychology it is understood that
these three approaches interact rather than compete to explain behaviour.
This chapter looks at cognitive explanations of behaviour. There are two cognitive processes
that are studied in this unit: memory and thinking. The HL extension looks into the question of
how modern use of technology may be changing the way we think and remember.
Each chapter is divided into smaller sections with quizzes to test for mastery of key vocabulary
and "checking for understanding" questions with sample answers to check for broader conceptual
understanding.
I would like to thank Aidan Carr from St Joseph's Institution International in Singapore for his
assistance in writing the sections on thinking and decision making - and cognitive processing in
the digital world.
6
Chapter 3.1 Cognitive processing
This chapter looks at models of cognitive processing. The key theories and models of study are:
• Schema theory
• Memory models
• Thinking and decision making
Chapter 3.2 The reliability of cognitive processes
This chapter examines the extent to which we can trust the accuracy of our cognitive processes.
The key topics of study are:
• Reconstructive memory
• Biases in thinking and decision making
• ThE influence of emotion on memo
HL Extension: Cognitive processing in the digital world
HL students are asked to delve a bit deeper into how modern use of technology may have an
effect on memory, thinking and decision m. The key topics of study are
• The effect of technology on memory processing

• The effect of technology on decision making
7
Writing samples: Cognitive
The following section includes annotated samples of

responses to exam questions - as well as strategies for answering questions based on the
command terms. The responses are not from the IB. They are based on work done in-class by
students, or they are created specifically for the site. Often the sample is designed to provide
examples of common mistakes or in order to show something that should be done for higher
marks.
There is no definitive list of questions for this curriculum - so the list of potential questions
below is not exhaustive. However, I do believe that most of the questions will fall within the list
that has been provided below. The questions are grouped by topic and include both SAQ and
ERQ (essay) questions.
For the ERQ responses, students will need to include two or more pieces of research. In most
cases, a single example will be asked for the SAQ questions.
Potential exam questions: Generic
SAQs
1. Explain the use of one research method in one study using the cognitive approach to
understand cognitive processing.
understand the reliability of cognitive processes.
understand the effect of emotion on cognition.
4. Explain one ethical consideration relevant to one study using a cognitive approach to
understand cognitive processes.
understand the reliability of cognitive processes.
understand the effect of emotion on cognition.
8
ERQs
Each of the questions above may be asked as an ERQ by removing "one study" and replacing the
command term. For example,
1. Discuss the use of one or more research method using the cognitive approach to
understand cognitive processing.
2. Evaluate the use of one research method using the cognitive approach to understand the
effect of emotion on cognition.
3. Discuss ethical considerations relevant to using a cognitive approach to understand the
reliability of cognitive processes.
Potential exam questions: Cognitive processes
SAQs
• Explain one study related to schema theory.

• Explain one model of memory.
• Explain one study that supports one model of memory.
• Explain one study of thinking and decision making.
• Explain one theory of thinking and decision making.
ERQs
Each of the questions above may be asked using the command terms discuss, evaluate, contrast
or "to what extent" as appropriate.
• Evaluate Schema theory.

• Evaluate one model of memory.
• Contrast two models of memory.
• Discuss one theory of thinking and decision making.
Potential exam questions: Reliability of cognitive processes
SAQs
• Explain one study of reconstructive memory.

• Explain one study of one cognitive bias.
• Explain one cognitive bias, making use of one study.
9
ERQs
• Evaluate research on reconstructive memory.

• Discuss research on cognitive biases.
Please note: According to the rules about how questions are set, the question "to what extent is
one cognitive process reliable" may not be asked.
Potential exam questions: Emotion and cognition
SAQs
• Explain one theory of how emotion may affect one cognitive process, using one study.
ERQs
• Evaluate one theory of how emotion may affect one cognitive process.
Potential exam questions: Cognitive processing in the digital world
ERQS only
• Evaluate research on the influence of digital technology on cognitive processing.

• To what extent is modern technology having a positive effect on cognitive processes?
• To what extent is modern technology having a negative effect on cognitive processes?
• Discuss research methods used to study the interaction between digital technology and
cognitive processes.
10
Cognitive processing
ATL: Essential understandings
1. Mental representations guide our behaviour.
2. Models can be used to help us under complex processes such as memory and decision
making.
3. Humans are information processors.
4. The mind, although it cannot be directly observed, can be studied scientifically.
When people are thinking about how best to solve a mathematical

problem, trying to remember the title of a book, planning their next holiday, retelling a joke they
have heard or deciding which car to buy, they are involved in cognitive processing. Cognitive
psychology concerns itself with the structure and functions of the mind. Cognitive psychologists
are involved in finding out how the human mind comes to know things about the world and how
it uses this knowledge.
The cognitive approach to understanding behaviour developed around the 1950’s as a result of an
increasing dissatisfaction with behaviourism, which was the dominant school of scientific
psychology. Behaviourists argued that only behaviour that could be observed should be studied.
B. F. Skinner, the founder of Behaviourism, argued that the mind was a "black box" - that is,
input enters and output exits the mind, but the processes that take place within the mind with
regard to that input cannot be examined.
Cognitive psychologists argued that scientific psychology should include research on mental
processes and how humans process information and create meaning. According to cognitive
psychologists the mind can be conceptualized as a set of mental processes that are carried out by
the brain. These mental processes include perception, thinking, decision making, problem
solving, memory, language and attention. The concept of cognition refers to such processes.
Cognition is also related to one's personal experience. As we interact with the world around us,
we create mental representations - that is, conceptual understandings of how the world works.
Since people have different experiences, they have different mental representations - for
example, of what is right or wrong, or about what boys and girls can and cannot do.
This will influence the way they think about the world and behave. Cognitive psychologists
believe that mental processes can, to some extent, be studied scientifically.
11
Assumptions of the cognitive approach
One assumption of the cognitive approach is that we are

information processors. It was John von Neumann's book The Computer and the Brain that gave
psychologists a metaphor and a set of terminology for explaining cognitive processes.
Psychologists argue that we are not passive responders to the environment, but we actively
organize and manipulate information that we receive. Cognitive psychologists see the mind as an
information-processing machine using hardware (the brain) and software (mental
representations). The "input" is sensory information that comes to us through our interaction
with the enviornment. This is referred to as bottom-up processing. This information is then
processed in the mind by top-down processing via pre-stored information in memory. Finally,
there is some output in the form of behaviour.
A second assumption of the cognitive approach is that cognitive processes can be studied
scientifically by scientific research methods. This is demonstrated in theories and models of
cognitive processes that are continuously tested both in laboratories and in naturalistic settings.
As our understanding of cognition has increased, models have been changed. Early models of
cognition were overly simplistic, but they helped researchers to propose hypotheses and test
different aspects of cognitive processes.
Cognitive psychologists have to a large extent used the experimental method because it was
assumed to be the most scientific method. However, the experimental tasks did not always
resemble what people did in their daily lives. The cognitive psychologist Ulric Neisser was one
of the first to argue that cognitive psychology had become too artificial and that researchers
should not forget that cognition cannot be isolated from our everyday experience. This is why
cognitive psychologists now study cognition in the laboratory as well as in a daily context.
A final assumption is that mental representations guide behaviour. The way that we process and
organize our information determines how we behave. We process new information through the
filter of past experience and understanding. This then determines how we attend to, perceive and
remember new information. This assumption plays a key role in understanding all types of
behavior. For example, a student might keep procrastinating when he should be writing his
extended essay. This could be explained by his past experience. Maybe his past experience has
been a lot of feedback that he is a poor writer. Because of this, he wants to avoid the task in
order to avoid further failure. Maybe his past experience has been that when he has done things
12
last minute, he seems to get better grades. Then his procrastination is seen as a "success
strategy".
Cognitive psychologists also recognize that we are bombarded with information in our
environment every day. If we paid attention to all of the stimulation in our surroundings, we
would be overwhelmed. As a result, Fiske and Taylor (1991) argue that we are cognitive misers
- that is, we often make the choice not to actively process information because we want to save
time and effort. In other wods, we use mental short-cuts to make decisions because of three
factors: knowledge, motivation and economy. To make this clearer you could use the following
mantra:
• I don't know.
• I don't care.
• I don't have time.
For example, we all know that a healthy diet is important. However, when it comes to grocery
shopping, too many shoppers do not read the labels of the food that they buy. Why not? First,
there is the problem of knowledge. Even if you read the labels on many foods, would you be able
to really understand the ingredients? Second, many people don't have the motivation to do so. If
they are young and healthy, then the fact that they like the taste of something is enough to justify
buying it. They don't care about the levels of fat or salt in the product. However, once the
motivation changes, let's say because of a new health problem, then they take the time to read the
labels. Finally, there is the question of economy. Shoppers may make the decision to buy what
they have also bought because they don't have time to spend hours on the Internet doing research
or even reading labels in the grocery store. It could also be that they don't have the financial
resources to afford better quality food, so they rationalize the decision to keep buying the
unhealthy options.
ATL: Conceptual understanding
The above example of shopping is just one application of the concept of cognitive misers. Try to
apply the same explanation to the following examples of human behaviour:
1. Failing to invest money in a retirement plan.

2. The way that people vote in presidential elections.
3. Why it is difficult to get people to exercise.
ATL: Thinking critically
Will it ever be possible to develop robots that can think like humans?
In what ways are the human mind and computers the same? Start off by making a list of what
the human mind can do and what the computer can do. What do you think are the most
significant differences between the human mind and computers?
Now please watch the following video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I43hq13MnYM
13
Based on what you have seen in the video, do you think it will ever be possible to construct a
robot that could process information like we do? Do you think that this would be a good thing -
or a bad thing? Be able to justify your response.
Schema theory
When expert football players like Manchester United's Zlatan

Ibrahimovíc kick the ball directly into the goal during a penalty, it may look like any other goal
to some of us. However, besides a good deal of self-confidence, this particular kick is the result
of many hours of practice and a combination of cognitive processes. Zlatan needs to take into
consideration the position of the goalkeeper and predict possible reactions, as well as determine
how he should kick the ball. All this is done based on his previous experience, which is stored in
his memory as knowledge and skills - but there is even more to it. Players need to modify their
behaviour to fit the particular challenge at hand. His kick must be executed based on visual
information and a prediction of possible consequences. A lot of this is based on recognition of
patterns. This “how-to-score knowledge” will help him decide what aspects of the situation he
needs to pay attention to in order to place the football accurately in the goal.
Schema and scripts - definitions of terms
The human mind is quite sophisticated. It manipulates mental representations of objects in the
real world when we think, make plans, imagine or problem solve. Schemas are mental
representations that are derived from prior experience and knowledge. The bottom-up
information derived from the senses is interpreted by the top-down influence of relevant schemas
in order to determine which behavoiur is most appropriate. Schemas help us to predict what to
expect based on what has happened before. They are used to organize our knowledge, to assist
recall, to guide our behaviour and to help us to make sense of current experiences.
Schema help our minds to simplify the world around us. For example, we all have a schema for
a telephone. If someone hands me their mobile phone and asks me to quickly call a doctor, I
don't look at the phone and go, "I don't know. I have never used THIS phone before!" Instead, I
have a schema for how a phone works that allows me to use the phone, regardless of the
brand. Perhaps this particular phone has features I have never seen before. If that it true, then I
14
will learn about those features by having to use the phone and then those features will be
assimilated into my schema of mobile phones.
Looking at the example of Ibrahimovic, he has to use a number of schema when making his
kick. First, he has a schema for the field on which he is playing. He knows how far he has to
kick the ball, the positions that players will take and he knows what goalies do. In addition, he
will have a schema for the opposing team or maybe specifically, the particularly goalie. He
knows whether they are they top team in the league, very strong on offense, but terrible at
defense, or that the goalie is left-handed. He uses all of this information to make predictions that
help him to decide the best way to deliver the penalty kick.
When we discuss how things work, such as "how to score knowledge", this is referred to as a
script. Scripts are patterns of behaviour that are learned through our interaction with the
environment. We have scripts for what to expect when one goes to the movies, the appropriate
way to eat a plate of spaghetti and what behaviour is expected on a first date. Scripts are
developed within a cultural context - they are not universal. When we travel, we often find that
our scripts don't lead to the predicted outcomes we expect. For example, if your script for stores
involves going into a shop, picking up what you need, standing in line and then paying the price
on the label, you will find that many cultures around the world do not follow this script. In many
places, lines are not part of the culture of shopping and bargaining is the only way to decide how
much you have to pay. If this is not your script for shopping, you may be confused or frustrated
in this situation. But with experience, you will eventually incorporate this knowledge into your
script for how you shop.
Getting back to Ibrahimovic, there are a few scripts that he will follow. First, there is the script
for how to actually kick the ball into the goal. This will be the result of a lot of practice. But he
will also have a script for how to behave if he is successful - maybe tearing off his shirt - or if he
is not - putting his head into his hands and pausing before returning to his teammates.
Schema theory is a theory of how humans process incoming information, relate it to existing
knowledge and use it. The theory is based on the assumption that humans are active processors
of information. People do not passively respond to information. They interpret and integrate it to
make sense of their experiences, but they are not always aware of it. If information is missing,
the brain fills in the blanks based on existing schemas. Obviously this can result in mistakes. In
the later part of this unit we will look at two particular mistakes - memory distortion and errors in
decision making.
Schema theory and memory
The British psychologist Frederic Bartlett was a pioneer in developing schema theory. Bartlett
was one of the first to suggest that cognitive schemas can be seen as specific knowledge
organized and stored in memory that can be accessed and used when it is needed. It is of course
not possible to see a schema inside someone’s head, but using concepts like schemas help
psychologists to understand and discuss how the mind works.
15
TOK: Ways of knowing
In cognitive psychology, schema are one of building blocks of many

theories. However, it is not possible to see schema, even with modern brain imaging
technology. Does this matter?
The early Freudians argued that we could study what was in the unconscious mind.
Behaviourists reacted against this and argued that we should only study that which can be
observed. Cognitive theorists found a middle ground; they argued that we should study what we
cannot directly observe, but we must use scientific approaches.
Consider the following questions:
1. What are some things that we believe to be true, even though we cannot directly see them?
2. How important is it to be able to see something to know that it is true?
3. What type of evidence would you want for something that is not seeable?
In the cognitive approach it is assumed that cognitive processes are influenced by social and
cultural factors. Bartlett was one of the first to show how cultural schema influence
remembering. He found that people had problems remembering a story from another culture, and
that they reconstructed the story to fit in with their own cultural schemas. Bartlett demonstrated
that memory is not like a photograph or an audio recording, but rather that people remember in
terms of what makes sense to them. This is why memory is subject to distortions.
Bartlett used an experiment in order to study the role of schema in recalling a story from an
unfamiliar culture. One of the techniques he used was serial reproduction, where participant A
reads a story and then reproduces it to participant B who then reproduces it to participant C, and
so on, until six or seven reproductions have been created.
A second technique used by Bartlett was repeated reproduction. In repeated reproduction a

participant learns material and then recalls it repeatedly over various testing occasions. It is the
same person who recalls the same story each time.
16
ATL: Inquiry
Ask two people to write down a story. For each story, place 8 -
10 people in a line and ask each of them to whisper the story to the person standing behind them.
The last person in the line has to say the story out loud. Record the final version of the story so
that you can easily compare it so the original, written text.
Questions to consider
1. What is the best way for you to compare the final version to the original?
2. Discuss the changes between the original story and the final story. What kind of changes were
made? Is there a consistent pattern?
Research in psychology: Bartlett (1932)
The aim of Bartlett's classic study was to investigate how memory of

a story is affected by previous knowledge. He wanted to see if cultural background and
unfamiliarity with a text would lead to distortion of memory when the story was recalled.
Bartlett’s hypothesis was that memory is reconstructive and that people store and retrieve
information according to expectations formed by cultural schemas.
Bartlett told participants a Native American legend called The War of the Ghosts. The
participants were British; for them the story was filled with unfamiliar names and concepts, and
the style was foreign to them.
Bartlett allocated the participants to one of two conditions. One group was asked to use repeated
reproduction, where participants heard the story and were told to reproduce it after a short time
and then to do so again repeatedly over a period of days, weeks, months or years. The second
17
group was told to use serial reproduction, in which they had to recall the story and repeat it to
another person.
Bartlett found that there was no significant difference between the way that the groups recalled
the story. Over time the story became shorter; Bartlett found that after six or seven
reproductions, it was reduced to 180 words. The story also became more conventional - that is, it
retained only those details that could be assimilated to the social and cultural background of the
participants. For example, instead of "hunting seals," participants remembered that the men in
the story were fishing; the word "canoe" was changed to the word "boat."
Bartlett found that there were three patterns of distortion that took place. The story became more
consistent with the participants’ own cultural expectations - that is, details were unconsciously
changed to fit the norms of British culture. The story also became shorter with each retelling as
participants omitted information which was seen as not important. Finally, participants also
tended to change the order of the story in order to make sense of it using terms more familiar to
the culture of the participants. They also added detail and/or emotions. The participants overall
remembered the main themes in the story but changed the unfamiliar elements to match their
own cultural expectations so that the story remained a coherent whole although changed.
Bartlett wanted to study memory in a naturalistic setting meaning that he would give participants
some tasks that could be encountered in real life - for example, remembering a story. Bartlett
documented his research procedures but he has been criticized for not being specific enough
which has made it difficult to replicate his findings. For example, he did not standardize the
intervals at which participants reproduced the material they had learned. In addition, no
significant independent variable was manipulated with other factors held constant to observe its
systematic effect on some dependent variable. Psychologists are critical of Bartlett's methods on
the grounds that they were not scientific in a modern sense.
Many researchers have attempted to replicate the findings of Bartlett's original study, but they
have not been successful. This would indicate that the findings have low reliability. This would
make sense since Barltett did not use a standardized procedure. Bergman & Roedeger (1999)
carried out a replication with a slight twist. The independent variable was the amount of delay
before the retelling of the story. They found that when there was a 15 minute delay in the first
retelling of the story, there was a higher rate of distortion than if the story were replicated
immediately. Immediate retelling of the story was often highly accurate and resulted in less
distortion over time.
Bartlett's suggestion that schemas are complex unconscious knowledge structures is one of
Bartlett's major contributions to psychology, in spite of the sloppy nature of his original study.
His research was one of the first to investigate mental processes in a time where psychological
science insisted on studying only behaviours that could be directly observed.
18
Schema theory has been used to explain how memory works. Cognitive psychologists divide
memory processes into three main stages:
• Encoding: transforming sensory information into memory.

• Storage: creating a biological trace of the encoded information in memory, which is
either consolidated or lost
• Retrieval: using the stored information in thinking, problem solving and decision
making.
It is now believed that schema processing can affect memory at all stages. This is shown in the
following research study.
Research in psychology: Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Brewer and Treyens wanted to study the role of schema in the

encoding and retrieval of memory. To do so, they carried out an experiment to see how well
people could recall what was in an office.
The sample was made up of 86 university psychology students. Participants were seated in a
room that was made to look like an office. The room consisted of objects that were typical of
offices: a typewriter, paper and a coffee pot. There was also a table with tools and
electronics. There were shelves along one wall and the other walls were decorated with posters
and a calendar. There were some items in the room that one would not typically find in an office
- for example, a skull or a toy top. Finally, there were items that were omitted - such as books.
Each participant was asked to wait in the professor's office while the researcher "checked to
make sure that the previous participant had completed the experiment." The participant did not
realize that the study had already begun. The participants were asked to have a seat. All of the
chairs except for one had objects on them. In this way, it was guaranteed that all participants
would have the same vantage point in the office. The researcher left the room and said that he
would return shortly.
After 35 seconds the participants were called into another room and then asked what they
remembered from the office. When they finished the experiment, they were given a
questionnaire. The important question was "Did you think that you would be asked to remember
the objects in the room?" 93% said "no."
19
The participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions.
The recall condition: Participants were asked to write down a description of as many objects as
they could remember from the office. They were also asked to state the location, shape, size and
colour of the objects. They were asked to "Write your description as if you were describing the
room for someone who had never seen it." After this, they were given a verbal recognition test in
which they were given a booklet containing a list of objects. They were asked to rate each item
for how sure they were that the object was in the room. "1" meant that they were sure it was not
in the room; "6" meant that they were absolutely sure it was in the room. The questionnaire
consisted of 131 objects: 61 were in the room; 70 were not.
The drawing condition: In this condition participants were given an outline of the room and
asked to draw in the objects they could remember.
The verbal recognition condition: In this condition, the participants were read a list of objects
and simply asked whether they were in the room or not.
The researchers found that when the participants were asked to recall either by writing a
paragraph or by drawing, they were more likely to remember items in the office that were
congruent with their schema of an office - that is, the "expected items" were more often recalled.
The items that were incongruent with their schema of an office - e.g. the skull, a piece of bark or
the screwdriver - were not often recalled. When asked to select items on the list, they were more
likely to identify the incongruent items; for example, they didn't remember the skull when doing
the free recall, but gave it a 6 on the verbal recognition task. However, they also had a higher rate
of identifying objects which were schema congruent but which were actually not in the room.
In the both the drawing and the recall condition, they also tended to change the nature of the
objects to match their schema. For example, the pad of yellow paper that was on a chair was
remembered as being on the desk. The trapezoidal work table was recalled as square.
Thinking critically about research
Read carefully the study by Brewer & Treyens in the box above.
1. The results of the study are a bit complex. Here are the descriptive statistics.
In the written recall condition, the average number of correct objects recalled was 13.5.
The average number of "mistakenly recalled" objects was 1.13. The objects that were
remembered that were not in the room were books (by 9/30), a filing cabinet (3/30), pens
(1/30), a coffee cup (2/30), a telephone (1/30), a lamp (1/30) and curtains (1/30).
20
What can you say about the nature of this data? Although it is statistically significant, how well
do you think that it supports the conclusions drawn by the researchers?
2. What type of data was produced by the researchers? Quantitative or qualitative? Why is this
important?
3. The researchers carried out a pilot study before carrying out this study. Why do you think that
they did that?
4. What are some ethical concerns with his study?
Evaluation of schema theory
A significant amount of research has supported the idea that schemas affect cognitive processes
such as memory. The theory seems quite useful for understanding how people categorize
information, interpret information and make inferences. Schema theory has contributed to our
understanding of memory distortions and false memories.
Some of the limitations of schema theory are that it is not yet entirely clear how schemas are
acquired in the first place or the exact way they influence cognitive processes. It has also been
argued that schema theory cannot account for why schema-inconsistent information is sometimes
recalled. However, in spite of some imperfections of the theory, it seems to be a robust theory
that has generated a lot of research and still does.
TEACUP: Schema Theory
Testable: Schema theory is testable. This is seen in the studies by Bartlett and by Brewer &
Treyens. You will see several more examples throughout the course.
Empirical evidence: There is also biological research to support the way in which the brain
categorizes input. For example, Mahone et al (2009) found that from the visual cortex,
information about living and non-living objects is shuttled to different parts of the brain - even in
blind participants. These findings suggest that our brains automatically sort information and
classify it, in the same manner which schema theory predicts.
21
Applications: Schema theory has been applied to help us understand how memory works. It also
is helps us to understand memory distortion. Schema theory has also been applied in abnormal
psychology (therapy for depression and anxiety), relationships (theories of mate selection) and in
health psychology (health campaigns to change unhealthy behaviours). It is a robust theory that
has many applications across many fields of psychology.
Construct validity: Cohen (1993) argued that the concept of schema is too vague and
hypothetical to be useful. Schema cannot be observed.
Unbiased: Schema theory is applied across cultures. There is no apparent bias in the research,
although most of the early research was done in the West.
Predictive validity: The theory helps to predict behaviour. We can predict, for example, what
types of information will be best recalled when given a list of words. Trends, such as omitting
information that is not of high relevance to the individual, are commonly seen in individuals
recalling a news story. However, we cannot predict exactly what an individual will recall.
22
Models of Memory
1. Multi-store memory model
The concept of memory refers to the process by which information is

encoded, stored, and retrieved. Cognitive psychologists have suggested ways to conceptualize
the architecture and processes of the memory system by making models of memory. In
psychology, a model of memory is a hypothesized representation of memory,. It is more like an
outline of the different stores and processes indicating how memory might work according to
available evidence. Obviously, models change over time as new evidence becomes available. In
order to understand more about the possible structure and function of memory, researchers
within the cognitive approach have suggested models of memory that can be tested to determine
their validity.
Types of memory
Researchers distinguish between different types of memory. This is important because it appears
that different types of memory may be stored in different parts of the brain.
Declarative memory (“knowing what”) is memory of facts and events, and refers to those
memories that can be consciously recalled. There are two subsets of declarativev memory:
Episodic memory contains memory of specific events that have occurred at a given time
and in a given place.
Semantic memory contains general knowledge of facts and people, for example concepts
and schemas and it is not linked to time and place.
Procedural memory (“knowing how”) is the unconscious memory of skills and how to do
things.
23
The multi-store model of memory
Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) were among the first to suggest a basic structure of memory with
their Multi-store Model [MSM] of memory. Although this model seems rather simplistic today,
it sparked much research based on the idea that humans are information processors.
The Multi-store Model was suggested in the 1960’s and is clearly inspired by computer science,.
The model is based on a number of assumptions. First, the model argues that memory consists of
a number of separate locations in which information is stored. Second, that memory processes
are sequential. Third, that each memory store operates in a single, uniform way. In this model,
short-term memory (STM) serves as a gateway by which information can gain access to long-
term memory. The various memory stores are seen as components that operate in conjunction
with the permanent memory store (LTM) through processes such as attention, coding and
rehearsal. You need to pay attention to something in order to remember information. According
to this model, rehearsal is vital to keeping material active in STM by repeating it until it can be
stored in LTM.
The model suggests that sensory information from the world enters sensory memory, which is
modality specific - that is, related to different senses, such as hearing and vision. The most
important stores in the model are the visual store (iconic memory) and the auditory store
(echoic memory). Information in the sensory store stays here for a few seconds and only a very
small amount of the information will continue into the short-term memory (STM) store.
The capacity of STM has traditionally been assumed to be limited to around seven items (7+/-2)
and its duration is normally about 6–12 seconds. Information in STM is quickly lost if not
rehearsed. Information may also be displaced from STM by new information. For example,
when you are rehearsing that phone number for ordering the pizza and then someone calls out
your name. When your attention is taken away from the information in your STM, it is then
displaced and no longer available. Rehearsal of material in STM plays a key role in determining
what is stored in long-term memory in the multi-store model of memory.
24
Research in psychology: Miller's Magic Number 7 (1956)
The Multi Store Model argues that STM is limited in both capacity and duration
- that is, there is a limted amount of information that can be held in STM for a limited amount of
time.
After running tests to see how many numbers an individual can recall in a sequence of numbers,
Miller (1956) proposed the "Magic Number 7" - plus or minus two. According to Miller, the
average memory span is between 5 and 9 items. Think about numbers that we are asked to
remember - zip codes, passport numbers, social security numbers, telephone numbers - and you
will see that they fall between 5 and 9 numbers. There is a psychological reason for this.
Numbers are one thing, but is all information the same? Does it all fit in these 9 "slots?"
Cowan (2010) argues that Miller's magic number 7 may be overly optimistic. In the original
task, Miller's participants were asked to memorize a string of numbers, each time increase by one
digit. So, they were asked to memorize something like this:
• 437
• 6984
• 25851
• 319025
And so on. But Cowan argues that this type of task sets the participant up to employ "processing
strategies" that do not reflect how we actually use our short-term memory on a day to day basis.
Instead, Cowan had participants recall a "running span procedure" - that is, they listened to a list
of numbers but they did not know in advance how long the list would be. He found that
participants recalled a range of 3 - 5 digits, not 5 to 9.
Cowan's findings are supported by biological research. fMRIs have shown that
the parietal cortex of the brain plays a key role in short-term (working) memory. Brain scans
indicate that activity in the parietal cortext correlats with STM capacity - where activity increases
25
with every additional number that needs to be recalled, until four digits. Then activity in this
part of the brain levels out. (Vogel and Machizawa, 2004).
This is a good example of the problem of using artificial procedures in laboratory

experiments. The original research by Miller had low ecological validity - and today research
challenges the belief that STM memory can hold up to 9 digits. How many of you cannot
remember your telephone number?
The long-term memory (LTM) store is conceptualized as a vast storehouse of information. This
storehouse is believed to be of indefinite duration and of potentially unlimited capacity, although
psychologists do not know exactly how much information can be stored there. The material is
not an exact replica of events or facts, but is stored in some outline form. Memories may be
distorted when they are retrieved, because we fill in the gaps to create a meaningful memory.
This is exactly what is predicted by schema theory.
Evidence in support of the model
In the biological chapter, we looked at the case study of HM (Milner,1966). This is just one
example of biological evidence that STM and LTM are located in different stores in the brain. In
Milner's study, HM had anterograde amnesia - that is, he could not transfer new information to
long term memory; however, he still had access to many of his memories prior to his surgery.
However, the fact that he could create new procedural memories shows that memory may be
more complex than the MSM predicts.
Glanzer and Cunitz (1966) used free recall of a list of 15 items combined with an interference task
to show that there are two processes involved in retrieving information. The researchers showed lists
of 15 words one at a time and had subjects recall the words under one of three conditions: recall
with no delay, with a 10 second delay and with a 30 second delay. With no delay the first 5 and last
three words were recalled best but with a 10 or 30 second delay during which the subject counted
backwards there was little effect on the words at the beginning of the list but poor recall of later
items. This suggests that the later words were held in short term storage and were lost due to
interference whereas the earlier words had been passed to long-term storage. The ability to recall
words at the beginning of the list because they had already been transferred to long-term memory is
called primacy effect. The ability to recall words that have just been spoken because they are still in
short-term memory is called recency effect.
Evaluation of the multi-store model of memory
Today the multi-store model is considered to be too simplistic. It reflects the knowledge
available in the 1960s but it is an important model all the same because it has influenced our
understanding of memory. First of all, it present a good account of the basic mechanisms in
memory processes (encoding, storage and retrieval). Secondly, several experiments support the
assumption of multiple memory stores. There is also supporting evidence from case studies of
patients with brain damage, such as HM suffering from amnesia, who have impared long-term
memory but intact short-term memory. This clearly points towards multiple memory stores.
26
The assumption that STM is simply a gateway to LTM has been challenged by Logie (1999). He
argues that information in STM is not simply passed into LTM through rehearsal. Instead, there
must be an interaction between STM and LTM in which the information is interpreted with
regard to previously stored knowledge and past experience. Short-term memory is therefore not
part of a sequential system but rather a 'work station' that handles and computes information
coming from the sensory store together with knowledge already stored in LTM. This also is what
schema theory would predict.
Strengths and limitations of the Multi Store Model

Strengths of the MSM
• There is signficant research to support the theory of separate memory stores - both in
cognitive research and in biological case studies of patients with brain damage.
• The model is of historical importance. It gave psychologists a way to talk about memory
and much of the research which followed was based on this model.
Limitations of the MSM
• The model is over-simplified. It assumes that each of the stores works as an independent
unit.
• The model does not explain memory distortion.
• The model does not explain why some things may be learned with a minimal amount of
rehearsal. For example, once bitten by a dog, that memory is quite vivid in spite of the
lack of rehearsal.
• There are several times that we rehearse a lot to remember material and it is not
transferred to LTM.
27
2. Working memory model
The working memory model can be seen as a development of the multi-store model
of memory. What is called short-term memory in the original model is changed to a more
sophisticated version in the working memory model. This is an example of how theories and
models develop over time as science produce new findings.
Baddeley and Hitch (1974) were among the first to challenge the view that STM is a single store.
Their working memory model suggests that STM is not a single store but rather consists of a
number of different stores. Baddeley and Hitch observed in lab experiments that if participants
perform two tasks simultaneously that both involve listening, they perform them less well than if
they did them separately. They had also noticed that if participants performed two tasks
simultaneously that involved listening and vision, there was no problem. The procedure where
participants carry out two tasks at once is known as a dual task technique.
This suggests that there are different stores for visual and auditory processing. Baddeley and
Hitch suggested that working memory should be seen as a kind of mental workspace, which
provides a temporary platform that holds relevant information for use in any cognitive task. Once
the task is completed, the information can quickly disappear and make space for a new round of
information processing. Baddeley and Hitch have continued to work on the model since it was
devised in 1974 and they have added new features to the model in response to criticism and new
findings.
28
ATL: Inquiry: Can we multi-task?
We wouldn't be able to function as human beings if we couldn't "multi-task." Can you imagine
if we couldn't talk to someone while driving a car? If we couldn't read a sign while walking
down the street? Or if we couldn't play a video game without listening to our favorite tunes?
The Working Memory Model argues that as long as we are using different short-term memory
stores, then there should not be a problem with multi-tasking. However, when we try to do two
things at once which require the same STM store, then we run into problems.
In order to test this, carry out one of Baddeley & Hitch's early dual task techniques. Get together
a group of friends and randomly allocate them into two groups. Have one group read a story of
your choice. It should be 300 - 500 words in length. Give them three minutes to read the story.
At the end of the three minutes, ask them six to ten questions to test their understanding of the
story.
Now do the same with the other half of the group. But this time, ask them to recite a phone
number while reading the text. After three minutes, give them the same six to ten question to test
their understanding of the story.
Compare the results. Is there a significant difference in the data? What does this tell us about
our ability to multi-task?
29
The Working Memory Model is a hypothetical model of STM that includes several components
in contrast to the Multi Store Model's version of STM as one big store. Now we will look at each
of the hypothesized components of working memory
The central executive
The central executive is an attention control system that monitors and coordinates the operations
of the other subordinate components, which are called slave systems. The central executive is
the most important part of the model because it is seen as a kind of CEO of the memory system,
that is, it decides how and when the slave systems are used. The central executive has the
capacity to focus attention, to divide attention between two or more sources and to switch
attention from one task to another. The central executive has limited capacity, which basically
means that you cannot attend to a lot of things at the same time. It is also modality free, which
means that it can process any sensory information, whether it be auditory or visual.
Baddeley suggests that the most important job of the central executive is attention control. This
happens in two ways.
• The automatic level is based on habits that rely on schemas in long-term memory and
controlled more or less automatically by stimuli from the environment. This includes
routine actions such as cycling to school and places only limited demand on attention.
30
• The supervisory attention level deals with planning and decision making. It creates new
strategies when the old ones are no longer sufficient. It is also active in emergency
situations - for example, when a car is suddenly coming at you when you are cycling. The
system is also involved in situations that require self-regulation such as trying to avoid
eating that lovely chocolate dessert when you are trying to eat a more healthy diet. The
supervisory attention system is capable of considering alternative plans of action and
choosing the most favourable.
People rely a great deal on automatic processing in their daily lives. Think about a situation in
which you suddenly find yourself outside your front door, but you cannot really remember how
you got there because you were talking to somebody on your mobile phone. You probably also
know that if something had happened on the way - such as another person talking on a mobile
bumping into you - you would become attentive to make a quick evaluation of the situation.
The phonological loop (verbal STM)
The phonological loop is the auditory component of STM and it is divided into two
components. The first component is the articulatory control system, or inner voice, which can
hold information in a verbal form. This happens when you try to remember a telephone number
and repeat it to yourself. The articulatory loop is also believed to hold words ready for cognitive
tasks, for example as you prepare to speak. The second component is the phonological store, or
inner ear. It holds auditory memory traces. Research shows that a memory trace can only last
from 1.5 to 2 seconds if it is not rehearsed by the articulatory control system. The phonological
store can receive information directly from sensory memory in the form of auditory material,
from LTM in the form of verbal information, and from the articulatory control system. The
phonological loop has significant implications for a wide range of everyday activities.
Actually, any activity that requires retention of a verbal sequence such as remembering a new
telephone number long enough to dial it, repeating a foreign word or counting objects would rely
on the phonological loop.
Research using articulatory suppression lends support to the working memory model.
Articulatory suppression means that participants are asked to repeat a word such as 'the' or a
number such as 'one' while they memorize a list of words. Such studies show that the concurrent
tasks decrease accuracy of recall of the information because the phonological rehearsal system is
overloaded. The same would happen if you were asked to read prose and at the same time repeat
a word or a number as described above because both tasks depend on the phonological loop.
31
Research in psychology: Landry and Bartling (2011)
Landry and Bartling (2011) conducted an experiment using articulatory

suppression to test the Working Memory Model. The aim was to investigate if articulatory
suppression would influence recall of a written list of phonologically dissimilar letters in serial
recall. The experiment used independent designs with two groups: a control group that
performed no concurrent task while memorizing a list and an experimental group, which
performed the concurrent task of articulatory suppression while memorizing a list. The
participants were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions. The hypothesis was that the
accuracy of serial recall would be higher in the control group compared to the experimental
group. The participants consisted of thirty-four undergraduate psychology students.
Procedure
The participants were tested individually. In the experimental group, participants first saw a list
of letters that they had to recall while saying the numbers '1' and '2' at a rate of two numbers per
second (the articulatory suppression task). The control group saw the list of letters but did not
engage in a articulatory suppression task.
There were ten lists each consisting of a series of 7 letters randomly constructed from the letters
F,K,L,M, R, X and Q. These letters were chosen because they don't sound similar. The
experimenter presented one letter series at a time. The participants received an answer sheet with
seven blanks in each row. Before the experiment started, each participant viewed one practice list
in order to become acquainted with the procedure.
In the control group, the experimenter showed participants a printed list for five seconds,
instructed them to wait for another five seconds, and then instructed them to write the correct
order of the letters on the answer sheet as accurately as possible. This was repeated ten times. In
the experimental group, participants received instructions to repeatedly say the numbers '1' and
'2' at a rate of two numbers per second from the time of presentation of the list until the time they
filled the answer sheet. This was also repeated ten times. Each trial was scored for accuracy of
recall. The trial was scored as correct if the letters were in the correct position. The experimenter
then calculated the average percent correct recall for both groups.
Results
The results showed that the scores from the experimental group were much lower than the scores
from the control group. The mean percent of accurate recall in the control group was 76%
compared to a mean of 45% in the experimental group. Although the difference in the means was
large, the standard deviations were nearly identical with SD = 0.13 for the control group and SD
32
= 0.14 for the experimental group. A T-test was calculated and found a significant difference of p
< 0.01.
The results supported the experimental hypothesis as the mean percent of accurate recall in the
control group was higher than the mean percent of accurate recall in the experimental group and
the t-test showed that the results are significant at p < 0.01. The data seems to support the
predicition of the Working Memory Model that disruption of the phonological loop through the
use of articulatory suppression results in less accurate working memory. In line with the model's
prediction, articulatory suppression is preventing rehearsal in the phonological loop because of
overload. This resulted in difficulty in memorizing the letter strings for participants in the
experimental conditions whereas the participants in the control condition did not experience such
overload. This experiment is asking participants to remember strings of random letters in order to
test a specific part of the working memory and it can be argued that although this does not
resemble a task that you would do in your everyday life. However, it could resemble what is
happening during multi-tasking - for example, when you are trying to study for a psychology test
while at the same time talking to a friend on the phone,
The visuospatial sketchpad
The visuospatial sketchpad is the visual component of STM and could be called the inner eye. It
is a temporary store for visual and spatial information from either sensory memory or LTM.
Visual processing includes storage and manipulation of visual patterns and spatial movements in
two or three dimensions. The visuospatial sketchpad helps us remember not only what visual
information is important, but also where it is. This is important when we have to find our way
around the house and in visual imagery, for example, when trying to remember where we left our
mobile phone.
The episodic buffer
If all this information is being processed in separate short-term memory stores, how are we
actually able to understand what is happening in the world around us? For this, Baddeley
proposed the episodic buffer. This buffer temporarily holds several sources of information active
at the same time, while you consider what is needed in the present situation. This means -
auditory and visual information together, as well as information from LTM. Imagine yourself
consciously trying to recall the details of a landscape or the sound of your favourite band while
you are telling somebody else about it. According to Baddeley, they will appear via the episodic
buffer. The role of the buffer is to act as a temporary and passive display store until the
information is needed - much like a television screen - but it has limited capacity. Baddeley
argues that the episodic buffer is responsible for our conscious awareness.
33
Research in psychology: Case studies of brain damage and WMM
The cognitive approach carries out many lab experiments to support their
models. For example, the study by Landry and Bartling (2011) that is described above. But
often they turn to neuroscience to get biological support for their theories.
Warrington and Shallice (1970) carried out a series of tests on patient KF, who had suffered
brain damage as a result of a motorcycle accident. KF's LTM was in tact, but he showed
impairment of his short-term memory.
This sounds like the case of HM, but it is very different. Even though he appeared to have
problems recalling lists of words and numbers - something that is referred to as his "memory
span" - he was able to learn. He was clearly moving information through STM to LTM, but how
was this possible?
Over the course of the case study, Warrington and Shallice (1972) found that although he quickly
forgot numbers and words when they were presented to him orally, he was able to remember
these words or numbers when presented to him visually. KF's impairment was mainly for verbal
information - his memory for visual information was largely unaffected. This supports
Baddeley's theory that there are separate STM components for visual information and verbal
information (the phonological loop).
Since the study was longitudinal, over time Warrington and Shallice (1974) were able to be even
more precise in their findings. Later testing showed that although KF could not recall words or
letters when presented orally, he had no difficulty recalling cats meowing or telephones
ringing. The researchers concluded that his accident had resulted in damage to a short-term
memory store that was auditory and not visual, and also verbal rather than non-verbal. This
research supports the theory that STM is much more complex than suggested by the original
Multi-store model.
ATL: Inquiry
Dig a bit deeper into the biological evidence for the Working Memory Model. See what you can
find out about the following case studies. How do they support the Working Memory Model?
What do they teach us about the STM system?
1. Patient PV (Vallar & Baddeley, 1984). This patient had a left hemisphere stroke which
resulted in brain damage in the left hemisphere, which resulted in extremely poor recall of verbal
material but showed no visual memory impairment.
2. Patient SC (Trojano et al., 1992). Like patient PV he had a left hemisphere stroke, and a poor
verbal STM, although his visual STM was normal.
34
3. Patient ELD (Hanley et al, 1991) who had difficulty recognizing and recalling visuo-spatial
material following a right-hemisphere aneurysm.
4. Patient LH (Farah et al., 1988) was poor at remembering colour and shapes but had a good
memory for spatial information.
Evaluation of the Working Memory Model
Most researchers today accept the idea of working memory. Experiments using dual-task
techniques seem to provide support for the model. In dual-task experiments, a participant might
be asked to tell a story to another person while at the same time performing a second cognitive
task, such as trying to learn a list of numbers. Such concurrent tasks impair overall performance.
If the two tasks interfere with each other so that one or both are impaired, it is believed that both
tasks use the same component in STM.
Working memory has proved quite fruitful as it has generated a lot of research and discussion
concerning the different parts of the model is ongoing. Neuroimaging studies have also been
used to test the possible neurobiological correlates of working memory. Generally, the Working
Memory Model provides a much more satisfactory explanation of storage and processing than
the Multi Store Model. The Working Memory Model can explain why people are able to
perform different cognitive tasks at the same time. At least if the task is not drawing on the same
component of STM.
However, there are some limitations to the model. First of all, the model is oversimplified as it
does not address how other sensory information is processed, and spatial memory within the
model is not fully developed. Second, it has been difficult to identify the nature of the processes
associated within the central executive. Finally, the interaction among the four components is
not well explained in the model, so much more research is needed in this area. For example, it is
not really clear how the episodic buffer actually integrates information from the other
components with long-term memory. At this point, the model just presents a possible role for the
episodic buffer but it is not fully developed.
Summary of strengths and limitations of the Working Memory Model

Strengths of the WMM
• The model is supported by considerable experimental evidence.

• Brain scans have shown that a different area of the brain is active when carrying out verbal
tasks than when carrying out visual tasks. This supports the idea that there are different
parts of memory for visual and verbal tasks.
• Case studies of patients with brain damage support the theory that there is more than one
STM store.
• This model helps us to understand why we are able to multi-task in some situations and not
in others.
35
Limitations of the WMM
• The role of the central executive is unclear, although Baddeley and Hitch said it was the
most important part of the model. For example, they suggested that it has its own limited
capacity, but it is impossible to measure this separately from the capacity of the phonological
loop and the visual spatial sketchpad.
• How the various components of the model interact is not yet clear.
• This model really only explains short term memory and so tells us very little about the
processes involved in long term memory.
• This model does not explain memory distortion or the role of emotion in memory formation.
Thinking and decision making

We are constantly bombarded by information. As we have already learned, to cope with so much
information, we often choose not to process it by not paying attention to it. However, when we
pay attention to the stimuli around us, we engage in a process known as thinking. Thinking is
the process of using knowledge and information to make plans, interpret the world, and and
make predictions about the world in general.
There are several components of thinking - these include problem solving, creativity, reasoning
and decision making. For this chapter we will focus on decision making which is defined as the
process of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the values and preferences of the
decision-maker. Decision making is needed during problem solving to reach the conclusion.
Problem solving is thinking that is directed toward solving specific problems by means of a set
of mental strategies. The concepts of problem solving, decision making and thinking are very
much interconnected. For the IB when discussing either decision making or problem solving,
you are also addressing the goals of understanding "thinking and decision making."
The Dual Process Model of Thinking and Decision Making
The face here on your left demonstrates a clear emotion. Which one is it? When you look at the
photo, you do not have to do a lot of thinking about how this person feels - she is clearly
disgusted.
However, what if I were to ask you the following question:
36
A mountain goat attempts to scale a cliff sixty feet high. Every minute, the goat bounds upward
three feet but slips back two. How long does it take for the goat to reach the top?
This question is not as easy as the first. If you have done problems just like this before, you may
have a quick answer, but for most people, it will take a little bit of time to work out the answer -
which is fifty eight minutes. Although his net progress each minute is one foot, he reaches the
top on the fifty-eighth minute just before he would normally slip back two feet.
The two questions above show that different kinds of problems require different ways of
thinking. The Dual Process Model of thinking and decision making postulates that there are two
basic modes of thinking - what Stanovich and West (2000) refer to as "System 1" and "System
2."
System 1 is an automatic, intuitive and effortless way of thinking. System 1 thinking often
employes heuristics - that is, a ‘rule’ used to make decisions or form judgements. Heuristics are
mental short-cuts that involve focusing on one aspect of a complex problem and ignoring others
(Lewis, 2008). This ‘fast’ mode of thinking allows for efficient processing of the often complex
world around us but may be prone to errors when our assumptions do not match the reality of a
specific situation. These errors may have greater consequence in our day to day lives because
system 1 thinking is expected to create a greater feeling of certitude – certainty that our initial
response is correct.
Gilbert and Gill (2000) have argued that we become more likely to use System 1 thinking when
our cognitive load is high - that is, when we have lots of different things to think about at the
same time, or we have to process information and make a decision quickly.
System 2 is a slower, conscious and rational mode of thinking. This mode of thinking is
assumed to require more effort. System 2 starts by thinking carefully about all of the possible
ways we could interpret a situation and gradually eliminates possibilities based on sensory
evidence until we arrive at a solution. Rational thinking allows us to analyse the world around us
and think carefully about what is happening, why it is happening, what is most likely to happen
next and how we might influence the situation. This mode of thinking is less likely to create
feelings of certitude and confidence.
Characteristics of System 1 and System 2 thinking
System 1 System 2
Context dependent - focuses on existing evidence and
Abstract
ignores absent evidence
Concerns everyday decision making Conscious reasoning
Generates impressions and inclinations. Logical and reliable
Not logic based and prone to error Slow and requiring effort
Operates automatically and quickly with little or no Transfers information from one situation
effort to a new situation.
37
It is important to remember that we often use both of these systems when addressing a
problem. System 1 will reach a quick conclusion and then System 2 will go into further analysis
to hopefully reach a "more correct" conclusion. Because System 1 is activated before System 2
can do its work, often System 1 interferes with the effectiveness of System 2.
Research in psychology: Wason 1968
One example of research that supports the dual process

model is based on the Wason selection task.
The image to the left is an example of the task. Participants would be shown this set of cards and
asked the following question: Which card(s) must be turned over to test the idea that if a card
shows an even number on one face, then its opposite face is red?
If you are like most people you will choose the cards with the number "8" and the "red" card. But
this is incorrect. We make this decision based on what Wason called matching bias - that is, in
an abstract problem, we tend to be overly influenced by the wording (or context) of the
question. In this case, the words "even number" and "red."
First, if you guessed "8" and "red", here is an explanation of why that answer is not correct.
• If the 3 card is red, that doesn't violate the rule. The rule makes no claims about odd
numbers.
• If the 8 card is not red, it violates the rule. So, this card is a correct choice.
• If the red card is odd, that doesn't violate the rule. The rule is not "if the card is red on one
face, then its opposite side is an even number."
• If the brown card is even, it violates the rule.
Evams and Wason (1976) found that when asked why they chose the cards that they did, they
were not able to clearly explain their choices.
The Wason selection task provides important evidence for the dual process model. Most people
make the decision of which cards to choose without any reasoning - but as an automatic response
to the context of the question. Wason (1968) found that even when he trained people how to
answer this question, when he changed the context, the same mistakes were made. For example,
can you solve this one?
38
Which cards would you have to turn over in order to prove if the following statement is true? If
there is a male's name on one side of the card, then there is an IB subject the other side of the
card.
Many people would choose John and Chemistry. But you would need to turn over John and
Football.
If you got this wrong, this shows how powerful System 1 can be. It can interfere with System 2,
even when you have learned the "right way to do things."
Griggs and Cox (1982) found that when the task is not abstract, we do not tend to show the
matching bias. Try to solve this final logic puzzle.
Which cards would you have to turn over in order to prove if the following statement is true? If
a person is drinking beer, then that person must be over 18 years old.
If you chose "drinking beer" and "16 years of age," then you are correct. Researchers have found
that when the task is not abstract, 75% of people are able to correctly answer the question. When
the task is not abstract, System 1 works just fine in solving the problem.
Biological evidence supports what we see in the Wason Selection Task by showing that different
types of processing may be located in different parts of the brain. Goel et al (2000) had
participants carry out a logic task similar to the ones above. In some cases, the task was abstract
in nature (for example, an odd number and a matching colour). In contrast, some of the tasks
were "concrete" in nature (for example, drinking beer and under 18). The researchers had the
participants decide on the correct choices while in an fMRI. Although there were many common
areas of the brain that were active in solving the problems, there was a clear difference. When
the task was abstract, the parietal lobe was active; when the task was concrete, the left
hemisphere temperal lobe was active. The parietal lobe is often associated with spatial
39
processing. This seems to indicate that the brain processes these two types of information
differently - and thus may be seen as support for the model.
ATL: Inquiry
One of the ways that researchers study how people make decisions is to
have them think aloud. This is a special type of interview often called a verbal protocol.
Theoretically, this is an important way for researchers to "see" what people are thinking.
But how easy do you think that it is for people to explain what they are thinking?
To find out, carry out the following verbal protocol on a friend or family member.
Give the participant a piece of paper with the following problem written on it in the following
format.
In addition, give them the following instructions. Please find the numerical
value of each letter in this problem. Each letter is assigned a value from zero to nine. None of
the numbers 0 - 9 may be used for more than one letter. To get your started, D = 5.
Please solve the problem "out loud." Explain your strategy to me so that I can understand how
you are solving this puzzle.
After having completed the puzzle, consider the following questions.
1. How easy was it for your participant to think aloud while solving the problem? Why do you
think that this is true?
2. Do you think that training people to "think aloud" would be helpful to researchers? Why or
why not?
40
Evaluation of the Dual Process Model
Strengths
There is biological evidence that different types of thinking may be processed in different parts
of the brain.
The Wason selection task and other tests for cognitive biases (see next part of this chapter) are
reliable in their results.
Limitations
The model can seem to be overly reductionist as it does not clearly explain how (or even if) these
modes of thinking interact or how our thinking and decision making could be influenced by
emotion.
The definitions of System 1 and System 2 are not always clear. For example, fast processing
indicates the use of System 1 rather than System 2 processes. However, just because a processing
is fast does not mean it is done by System 1. Experience can influence System 2 processing to go
faster.
41
Reliability of cognitive processes
Essential understandings
1. Memory is a reconstructive process and therefore is open to distortion.
2. Emotion may affect cognitive processes - either increasing or decreasing their reliability.
3. Humans are cognitive misers, often seeking shortcuts in thinking and decision making.
4. Biases affect our ability to make rational decisions.
When we discuss the reliability of a cognitive process, we want to know

how consistent is the information over time. So, in the case of memory, are our memories
consistent, and thus accurate, the longer that we have them? We know from the research by
Bartlett and Brewer & Treyens that memory can be influenced at the encoding stage. What about
memories that are more personal? Our first date? Our first day of school? Our wedding day?
How reliable is memory? The legal system uses eyewitness testimony which relies on the
accuracy of human memory to decide whether a person is guilty or not. Normally, juries in
courts of law take eyewitness testimony very seriously, but recently the use of DNA technology
has demonstrated what some psychologists have claimed for years: eyewitnesses can be wrong.
Researchers have demonstrated that memory may not be as reliable as we think.
ATL: Inquiry
Before we look at the research on reliability of cognitive processes, let's do a little of our own
research on just how reliable are memories are. To do this activity, you should have at least three
other students doing the same task.
Take a few minutes to write down a description of one of the following things:
• The first day of this school year.

• A description of a favorite teacher's classroom from elementary school
• A description of a field trip that you went on in the last 12 months.
42
After you have all written your descriptions, swap papers. Do you agree with what your
classmates wrote? Are there errors? What did you realize that you had forgotten when you
wrote your own description? Why do you think that these differences exist between your
descriptions of the same event or place?
From Freud to the 21st century
Sigmund Freud (1875–1935) was convinced that forgetting was caused by

repression. According to Freud, people who experience intense emotional and anxiety-provoking
events may use defence mechanisms, such as repression, to protect their conscious self from
knowing things that they cannot cope with. They send the dangerous memories to the
unconscious, which means that they will deny it ever happened. However, the memory will
continue to haunt them in symbolic forms in their dreams and lead to feelings of anxiety - or, in
German, Angst - until a therapist is able to retrieve the memory using specific techniques.
Some researchers claim that these techniques can create false memories, which people believe to
be true. Victims of child abuse may not want to remember their traumatic experiences, but is it
possible to totally forget these things? This is exactly what the controversy of false memories is
about. The media have described cases where people say they have recovered memories of child
sexual abuse during therapy. The psychotherapist would not be surprised, because the aim of
therapy is to gain access to the unconscious.
The US cognitive psychologist Elizabeth Loftus does not deny that childhood abuse happens, but
she has argued that some of the recovered memories may simply be created by post-event
information during therapy. Her laboratory research has supported the case that it is possible to
manipulate people’s memories - and that memories, even as intense as those related to abuse,
may not always be reliable.
To test this under controlled conditions, Loftus & Pickerell carried out a study to see if they
could get university students to experience a false memory.
43
Research in psychology: Loftus & Pickerell (1995)
Loftus & Pickerell carried out a study on false memories which has come to
be known as the "Lost in the Mall" study. The aim of the study was to determine if false
memories of autobiographical events can be created through the power of suggestion.
Three males and 21 females were the participants. Before the study, a parent or sibling of the
participant was contacted and asked two questions. First, "Could you tell me three childhood
memories of the participant?" Second, "Do you remember a time when the participant was lost
in a mall?" Data was only used if the answer to the second question was "no."
The participants then received a questionnaire in the mail. There were four memories that they
were asked to write about and then mail back the questionnaire to the psychologists. Three
events were real and one was “getting lost in the mall.” They were instructed that if they didn’t
remember the event, they should simply write “I do not remember this.”
The participants were interviewed twice over a period of four weeks. They were asked to recall
as much information as they could about the four events. Then they were asked to rate their
level of confidence about the memories on a scale of 1 - 10. After the second interview, they
were debriefed and asked if they could guess which of the memories was the false memory.
About 25% of the participants “recalled” the false memory. However, they also ranked this
memory as less confident than the other memories and they wrote less about the memory on their
questionnaire.
Although this is often seen as strong evidence of the power of suggestion in creating false
memories, only 25% of the participants had them. The study does not tell us why some
participants were more susceptible to these memories than others, but it does show that the
creation of false memories is possible.
ATL: Thinking critically about research
Answer each of the following questions with regard to the "Lost in the Mall" study.
1. How would you describe the ecological validity of this study?
44
2. What is one ethical concern of this study?
3. What role might demand characteristics have played in the findings?
Reliability and decision making
When discussing thinking and decision making, it is difficult to really talk about
"reliability." Instead, we could talk about how effectively we can actually make
decisions. Remember from the beginning of this chapter that Fiske and Taylor argue that we are
"cognitive misers." We take short-cuts because thinking takes a lot of energy. Often we choose
to take the less difficult road because we don't have the energy or resources to make a more
complex, informed decision. In addition, like with memory, we are influenced by social and
cultural factors. We also have biases that influence our decision making. This chapter will
examine how these cognitive biases influence the way we make decisions.
45
Reconstructive memory
In 2002, Loftus wrote an article on the case of a Washington DC sniper

who killed a number of people. The police asked people to come forward with information on
the murderer and many reported having seen a white van in the vicinity of the shootings. In fact,
the sniper’s van was a blue Chevrolet Caprice. Loftus tried to find out where the myth of the
white van came from. She discovered that a bystander had mentioned a white van in an
interview. After this, other people reported that they had seen a white van.
Loftus supports Bartlett’s idea of memory as reconstructive. Loftus claims that the nature of
questions asked by police or in a courtroom can influence witnesses’ memory. Leading questions
- that is, questions that are suggestive in some way - and post-event information facilitate schema
processing which may influence accuracy of recall. This is called the misinformation effect.
Witnesses are often quite confident of what they remember even though their recollections don’t
fit the actual facts. When witnesses try to retrieve a past event, they may unknowingly fill in the
gaps with information based on other past experience, stereotypes or post-event information.
Post-event information is any information that you are exposed to after you have witnessed
something. This information can come in the form of television or social media reports - or from
listening to other people tell their stories.
When eyewitnesses' memories are distorted, it can have very damaging effects. One of the most
famous cases of the effect of memory distortion on the life of an individual is the story of Ronald
Cotton.
ATL: Reflection
Ronald Cotton was convicted of rape and imprisoned from 1984 to 1995 as a result of the
eyewitness testimony given in court by Jennifer Thompson, the woman who claimed to be his
victim. He was released after 11 years in prison due to a DNA test that showed he could not have
been the rapist. How is it possible that the Jennifer Thompson got it wrong?
The following video is the story of Ronald

Cotton. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbARxiM0W_Q
Questions to consider
1. What factors do you think had the greatest influence on the distortion of Jennifer Thompon's
memory?
46
2. Do you think that the police could have done something differently that would have prevented
Ronald Cotton from going to prison?
3. Based on this story, how do you feel about the use of eyewitness testimony in courtrooms?
Such stories of false identification by eyewitnesses inspired Elisabeth Loftus to carry out a series
of studies that highlighted the problem of leading questions in eyewitness testimony. Leading
questions are questions which either by form or content suggest to a witness which answer is
desired.
Previous research has demonstrated that people’s memory for details after a car accident is
inaccurate. Since previous research had shown that estimation of speed was liable to distortion
Loftus and Palmer hypothesized that people’s memory for details of a an accident could be
distorted if they were asked to estimate how fast the car was going. Therefore, they set up two
experiments where participants were shown videos of traffic accidents and after that they had to
answer questions about the accident. The study demonstrates the role that schema can play on
how we recall an event.
Research in psychology: Loftus and Palmer (1974)
The aim of the research was to investigate whether the use of leading
questions would affect an eyewitness's estimation of speed.
45 students participated in the experiment. They were divided into five groups of seven students.
Seven short films of traffic accidents were shown. These films were taken from driver’s
education films.
When the participants had watched a film they were asked to give an account of the accident
they had seen and then they answered a questionnaire with different questions about the accident.
There was one critical question which was the one asking the participant to estimate the speed of
the cars involved in the accident.
The participants were asked the same question but the critical question included different verbs.
Nine participants were asked “About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?"
The critical word "hit’" was replaced by ‘collided’, ‘bumped’ or ‘smashed’ or’ contacted’ in the
other conditions which each had nine participants answering the question.
The researchers predicted that using the word ‘smashed’ would result in higher estimations of
speed than using the word ‘hit’. The independent variable was the different intensities of the
verbs used in the critical question and the dependent variable was estimation of speed.
47
The mean estimates of speed was highest in the ‘smashed’ condition (40.8 mph) and lowest in
the ‘contacted’ group (31.8 mph). The results were significant at p ≤ 0.005.
Table 1. Speed estimates for the Verbs used in Experiment 1
Verb smashed collided bumped hit contacted

Mean speed estimate (mph) 40.8 39.3 38.1 34.0 31.8
The findings were that the more intense the verb that was used, the higher the average estimate.
A second experiment used 150 students as participants. They were divided into three groups and
they all saw a film of a car accident. Then they were asked questions about the accident,
including the question on estimation of speed, but this time only including “hit” or “smashed” in
two of the groups. The last group - the control group - did not have a question a on speed
estimates.
In a second variation of the study, 150 students were randomly allocated to one of three
conditions. participants were asked only one of two questions: Either how fast the cars were
going when they smashed or when they hit each other. A third group, the control group, was not
asked anything. The participants were asked to come back a week later and without re-watching
the video, they were asked one of the following question: Did you see any broken glass? Yes or
no?
The results showed that those that had originally had the question with the more intense verb
(smashed) were more likely to recall seeing broken glass than those that that had the less intense
verb (hit).
Table 2. Number of participants recalling broken glass in Experiment 2
Did you see broken glass? Smashed Hit Control

Yes 16 7 6
No 34 43 44
Loftus argues that when the different verbs are used, they activate schemas that have a different
sense of meaning. When the question is asked using smashed, the connotation of the verb
influences how the memory is formed.
These two studes were controlled laboratory experiments, so we should question whether there
are problems with ecological validity. The situation is quite artificial which lowers its
external validity. When watching a video of a car crash, one does not experience the
emotions that one would experience when actually seeing a real car accident. Thus,
emotion or stress, which are conditions normal for most eye-witnesses, are absent in
her research.
48
There may also be a problem in using closed questions, where people have to answer yes or no.
In addition, all of the participants were students, which means that the sample is biased. The
research also begs the question of how well people are able to estimate speed. This too may have
had an influence on the results.
The Counterargument - memory is reliable
In response to Loftus's research, Yuille and Cutshall (1986) carried

out a study where they examined whether leading questions would affect memory of
eyewitnesses at a real crime scene. The crime scene was in Vancouver. A thief entered
a gun shop and tied up the owner before stealing money and guns from the shop. The
owner freed himself, and thinking that the thief had escaped, went outside the shop. But
the thief was still there and shot him twice. Police had been called and there was gunfire
- and the thief was eventually killed. As the incident took place in front of the shop, there
were eyewitnesses - 21 were interviewed by the police.
The researchers contacted the eyewitnesses four months after the event. 13 of the
eyewitnesses agreed to be interviewed as part of a study. They gave their account of
the incident, and then they were asked questions. Two leading questions were used.
Half the group was asked if they saw a broken headlight on the getaway car. The other
half was asked if they saw a yellow panel on the car (the panel was actually blue). They
were also asked to rate their stress on a seven point scale.
It was found that eyewitnesses were actually very reliable. They recalled a large amount
of accurate detail that could be confirmed by the original police reports. They also did
not make errors as a result of the leading questions and those who were most distressed by
the situation had the most accurate memories.
What are the key differences between Yuille and Cutshall (1986) study and the Loftus & Palmer
(1974) experiment?
First, Yuille & Cutshall's study was a field study. This has very strong ecological validity in
comparison to Loftus & Palmer's laboratory study. Because they had actually witnessed a crime,
they would have had an emotional response that is very different from what the students felt
watching videos of drivers' education car crashes. In addition, there was archival evidence
(police records of the original testimonies) to confirm the accuracy of the testimonies.
However, Loftus and Palmer's study has a higher level of reliability. Yuille and
Cutshall's study is not replicable and also not generalizable since it was a one-off
incident. There was also no control of variables, so it is difficult to know the level of
49
rehearsal that was used by the different eyewitnesses. It could be that those that agreed
to be in the study had spent the most time thinking and reading about the case.
It may very well be that different types of memory are more reliable than others. As we
saw in the case study of HM, although he had lost his declarative memories, he was still
able to learn procedural memories. This clearly indicates that different memories may
be located in different parts of the brain - and that they also may have different levels of
reliability.
Research in psychology: Bahrick et al (1975)
The aim of the study was to investigate the reliability of

autobiographical memory over time - specifically the names and faces of the people that had
gone to school together.
Nearly 392 participants aged 17 – 74 were tested. Some of the participants had been out of high
school only two weeks. At the other end of the continuum, some of the participants had
graduated 57 years earlier. In order for the participants to be selected there had to be a published
yearbook available for the graduating class.
The participants were asked to do five tests:
A free recall
Name as many people as you can from your graduating class.
test
A photo 10 cards, each with five photos. They were asked which of the five
recognition test
photos were taken from their own yearbook
A name 10 lists of names, each with only one name from the graduating
recognition test
class. Participants were asked to identify the person from their class.
10 cards each with five pictures. A name was written across the top of
Matching tests the page. The participants were asked to identify the correct photo to
match the name.
Picture cueing The participants were presented with 10 portraits one by one and
test asked to write down the name of the person in the photo.
50
The free recall test was always given first and then participants were randomly assigned to the
order of the remaining tests. For each question participants were asked to indicate their degree of
confidence on a three point scale: 3 being certain, 2 being probable and 1 being a guess.
The results of the study showed that participants who were tested within 15 years of graduation
were about 90% accurate in identifying names and faces. After 48 years they were accurate 80%
for identifying names and 70% in identifying faces. Free recall was worse. After 15 years it was
60% and after 48 years it was 30% accurate.
This study is a cross-sectional study - that is, not a longitudinal study. Therefore, we
cannot account for participant variability. However, because of the large sample size,
we are able to establish a trend in the data that demonstrates that facial recognition has
high reliability.
Checking for understanding
1. What do psychologists mean when they say that a memory is reconstructed?
2. Why is Loftus & Palmer's study criticized for lacking ecological validity?
3. Why is it important to know that Bahrick's Yearbook study was cross-sectional in nature?
51
Emotion and memory
Do you remember where you were and what you were doing
when a famous person died? Or when a natural disaster happened somewhere on the globe? Do
you remember your first day of school? Or your first date? Some events are not easily forgotten.
Why do we so clearly remember some events and forget others? The key appears to be that we
remember better those experiences that involve emotions. Emotions are rich and diverse, and
they are often what make the experience something special.
Research seems to show that emotions play a key role in how memory is formed. But as you
will also see, it may not be that emotional memories are special, it is just that we think that they
are. And that feeling that our memories are "special" may lead us to believe that they are more
accurate than they actually are.
Flashbulb memory theory
The theory of Flashbulb memory was first proposed by Brown & Kulik (1977). They defined
flashbulb memory as a highly detailed, exceptionally vivid "snapshot" of the moment when a
surprising and emotionally arousing event happened. They postulated the special-mechanism
hypothesis, which argues for the existence of a special biological memory mechanism that,
when triggered by an event exceeding critical levels of surprise, creates a permanent record of
the details and circumstances surrounding the experience. This implies that flashbulb memories
have different characteristics than "ordinary memories." They also argued that the memories are
resistant to forgetting.
Brown and Kulik suggested that there may be a special neural mechanism which triggers an
emotional arousal because the event is unexpected or extremely important. At the time, it was
only a hypothesis, but it is supported by modern neuroscience: emotional events are better
remembered than less emotional events—perhaps because of the critical role of the amygdala.
Today the most commonly accepted model of flashbulb memory is called the importance-
driven model. This model emphasizes that personal consequences determine intensity of
emotional reactions.
52
Research in psychology: Brown and Kulik (1977)
Brown & Kulik's (1977) original study was based on interviews with 80
participants. The participants were given a series of nine events - for example, the assassination
of President Kennedy - and asked if they "recalled the circumstances in which you first heard
about the event." For those events which they said "yes," they were then asked to write an
account of their memory and rate it on a scale of personal importance.
Brown and Kulik found that people said that they had very clear memories of where they were,
what they did, and what they felt when they first learned about an important public occurrence
such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King. 99% of the participants
recalled the circumstances in which they heard about the assassination of the president - thirteen
years after the event.
People in the study were also asked if they had flashbulb memories of personal events. Of 80
participants, 73 said that they had flashbulb memories associated with a personal shock such as
the sudden death of a close relative.
Brown & Kulik observed a much lower rate of flashbulb memories among white participants
than black participants to the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. This
shows that the link between personal importance and the event is important in the creation of a
flashbulb memory.
There are several rather important limitations of this original study.
First, there is no way to determine whether the memories stated by the participants are accurate.
There was also no way to test the individual's level of surprise upon hearing the event. Although
it can be assumed that the participants would have been surprised to hear about the assassination
of a public official, this emotional response cannot be measured.
Finally, because of the national importance of these events, the probability that demand
characteristics affected the results is very high. Do you remember the assassination of our
president? Of course you do.
53
Biological support for flashbulb memory
The original theory by Brown & Kulik was rather vague about the "biological mechanism" that
plays a role. More recent research has found that the amygdala, a small structure in the temporal
lobe, appears to be critical in the brain’s emotional circuit - and it is believed to play a critical
role in emotional memories.
It makes sense that our brains would make sure to store information about fearful experiences in
good detail.
When we are stressed, afraid or suprrised, we get a rush of adrenaline. In evolutionary terms, the
brain's ability to remember a fear has most likely played a key role in our survival. Research
by Cahill and McGaugh (1995) (see the biological approach - hormones) found that not only did
participants remember the details when they had an emotional response to a story, but they
remembered less when they had an emotional response but adreanline levels were artificially
suppressed.
Sharot et al (2007) carried out a study after 9-11 attacks on the

United States to determine the potential role of biological factors on flashbulb memories. The
study was conducted three years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in Manhattan. There were 24
participants who were in New York City on that day. Participants’ brain activity was observed
using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).
While in the scanner, they were presented with word cues on a screen. In addition, the word
"Summer" or "September" was projected along with this word in order to have the participant
link the word to either summer holidays or to the events of 9-11. Participants’ brain activity was
observed while they recalled the event.
After the brain scanning session, participants were asked to rate their memories for vividness,
detail, confidence in accuracy and arousal. Participants were also asked to write down their
personal memories. Only half of the participants actually reported having what would be called
"flashbulb memories" of the event - that is, a greater sense of detail and a strong confidence in
the accuracy of the memory. Those that did report having flashbulb memories also reported that
they were closer to the World Trade Centre on the day of the terrorist attack. Participants closer
to the World Trade Centre also included more specific details in their written memories.
Sharot and her team found that the activation of the amygdala for the participants who were
downtown was higher when they recalled memories of the terrorist attack than when they
recalled events from the preceding summer, whereas those participants who were further away
from the event had equal levels of response in the amygdala when recalling both events. The
54
strength of amygdala activation at retrieval was shown to correlate with flashbulb memories.
These results suggest that close personal experience may be critical in engaging the neural
mechanisms that produce the vivid memories characteristic of flashbulb memory.
Although this study demonstrates the role of the amygdala as a result of proximity to the event, it
does not explain why someone who simply saw it on television may claim to have a flashbulb
memory. The study is correlational in nature and does not establish a cause and effect
relationship which explains how the memory is actually attributed to activity in the amygdala.
Research in psychology: Could FBM be genetic?
Further research has shown the role of α2b-adrenoceptor, which is found

in the amygdala. The role of the α2b-adrenoceptor is to promote memory formation - but only if
it is stimulated by adrenaline. Since emotionally charged events are often accompanied by
adrenaline secretion, the α2b-adrenoceptor acts as a gatekeeper that decides what will be
remembered and what discarded. This could be the "biological mechanism" that Brown & Kulik
were hoping for.
Research by Quervain et al (2012) argues that there may be genetic roots to one's likelihood of
having a flashbulb memory. The gene for the α2b-adrenoceptor comes in two variations. The
researcher hypothesized that one variation would result in better emotional memories than the
other.
To carry out their research, they went to the Nakivale refugee camp in Uganda, where they were
able to work with refugees from the Rwandan civil war and genocide of 1994. With the help of
specially trained interviewers, they recorded how often people in the camp suffered flashbacks
and nightmares about their wartime experiences. They then compared those results with the α2b-
adrenoceptor genes in their volunteers.
As predicted, those with the less common version had significantly more flashbacks than those
with only the common one.
Criticism of flashbulb memory theory
Neisser (1982) has questioned the idea of flashbulb memories. People do not always know that
an event is important until later, so it is unclear how flashbulb memories could be created at the
moment of the event. He suggests that the memories are so vivid because the event itself is
rehearsed and reconsidered after the event. According to Neisser, what is called a flashbulb
memory may simply be a well rehearsed story. The flashbulb memories are governed by a
storytelling schema following a specific structure, such as place (where were we?), activity (what
were we doing?), informant (who told us?), and affect (how do we feel about it?).
55
On 28 January 1986, the seven astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger were killed in a
tragic accident. It was a shocking experience for those who watched the shuttle launch in person
or on television. Neisser and Harsch (1992) investigated students’ memory accuracy of the
incident 24 hours after the accident, and then again two and a half years later. When filling out
the second questionnaire which asked questions like - where were you when you heard the about
the Challenger disaster? Who were you with? What were you doing? The participants were also
asked how confident they were of these memories.
The participants were very confident that their memories were correct, but the researchers found
that 40 per cent of the participants had distorted memories in the final reports they made.
Possibly, post-event information had influenced their memories. The researchers concluded that
emotional intensity was associated with greater memory confidence, but not with accuracy.
Cultural dimensions also seem to play a role in flashbulb memories. Kulkofsky et al (2011)
looked at the role of culture in flashbulb memory in five cultures: China, Germany, Turkey, the
UK and the USA. Participants were given five minutes to recall as many memories as they could
of public events occurring in their lifetime. They were then asked to complete a "memory
questionnaire" for each event where they were asked if they remembered where they first heard
of the event. If so, then they were asked a series of questions to determine the extent of the FBM.
They were then asked to answer questions about the importance of the event to them personally.
The researchers found that in a collectivistic culture like China, personal importance and
intensity of emotion played less of a role in predicting FBM, compared with more individualistic
cultures that place greater emphasis on an individual's personal involvement and emotional
experiences. Because focusing on the individual's own experiences is often de-emphasized in the
Chinese context, there would be less rehearsal of the triggering event compared with participants
from other cultures - and thus a lower chance of developing a FBM. However, it was found that
national importance were equally linked to FBM formation across culture.
Evaluation of Flashbulb Memory Theory
Strengths
• There is biological evidence that supports the role of emotion on memory formation - for
example, McGaugh & Cahill (1995) and Sharot (2007).
Limitations
• Neisser argues that it is one's level of confidence, not accuracy, which defines FBM.
• There are cultural differences that indicate that rehearsal may play the most important
role in the development of FBM.
• Often with real life research on the topic, it is impossible to verify the accuracy of
memories.
• It is not possible to measure one's emotional state at the time of an event - thus making it
impossible to demonstrate a clear causal explanation.
56
Checking for understanding
1. According to Flashbulb memory theory, which emotion is responsible for the creation of these
memories?
2. What is meant by the importance-driven model?
3. Why might demand characteristics have played a role in Brown & Kulik’s interview study?
4. What did Quervain’s study in Rwanda teach us about Flashbulb memory?
5. What does cultural research seem to indicate about FBM?
57
Biases in thinking and decision making
Although System 1 thinking is an efficient way to process the

information we receive from the world around us (meaning that it is fast and uses minimal effort)
it is also prone to errors because it depends on assumptions about the world which are sensible
but which do not always match the complexities of the real world which are difficult to predict!
These assumptions are often referred to as heuristics – a ‘mental shortcut’; it is usually a simple
rule which is applied with little or no thought and quickly generates a ‘probable’ answer.
Demonstrating the existence of heuristics is a good way to provide empirical support for a
distinct intuitive, fast and effortless system 1 mode of thinking. Understanding common errors in
the way people think about the world can be useful as it helps us to anticipate poor decision
making and take steps to improve it.
Heuristics can result in patterns of thinking and decision making which are consistent, but
inaccurate. These patterns of thought are usually described as cognitive biases. However, it is
important to note that some cognitive biases are not dependent on a heuristic – for example, the
bias may be the result of an individual trying to protect self-esteem or trying to fit into a
group. For this text, the term "cognitive bias" will be used as a general term to include
heuristics.
There are many different examples of cognitive biases which we could discuss. We will look at
three biases: anchoring bias, peak-end rule and framing effect. You do not need to master all
three of these for your exams; you should be able to discuss two of them.
58
Anchoring bias
Anchoring Bias is the tendency to rely too heavily on the first

piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions. During decision making,
anchoring occurs when individuals use an initial piece of information to make subsequent
judgements.
A good example of this is when you go to buy something in the market in Marrakesh, Morocco.
When you walk into the shop and see that beautiful lamp that you never knew you had always
wanted, it is time to start bargaining. When you ask the shop owner for the price, the price he
gives you becomes an anchor for your negotiation.
If he starts off the price at 100 USD, you will then judge the price that you pay based on that first
price. If you end up paying 60 USD for the lamp, you will feel that you were successful in your
bargaining. If he starts off with 250 USD, you will be thrilled if you are able to pay only 140
USD! (Wow, you must be a tough bargainer!) But the reality is that unless you are an avid lamp
collector, you have no personal understanding of the value of the lamp. Your decision to buy
the lamp, and your subsequent sense of satisfaction with the price, all comes down to the first
piece of information you received - the original price quoted by the shop owner.
Anchoring bias is not just about shopping. Englich and Mussweiler (2001) found that anchoring
bias could play a significant role in determining sentencing in courtrooms. For their study they
used 44 senior German law students. They were given a scenario of a rape case, including the
demand from the prosecutor for either a 34 month sentence, or a 12 month sentence. When told
that the prosecutor recommended a sentence of 34 months, participants recommended on average
eight months longer in prison than when told that the sentence should be 12 months – for the
same crime. And remember, these were law students in their last year of school! In a real trial,
the juror would not have a lot of experience in making these decisions, so the maximum sentence
as stated by the judge or prosecutor could heavily influence the decision for how long the
accused should be in prison.
One of the original studies on anchoring bias was done by Tversky & Kahnemann (1974). In
this study, high school students were used as participants. Participants in the “ascending
condition” were asked to quickly estimate the value of 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 X 8. Those in
the “descending condition” were asked to quickly estimate the value of 8 X 7 X 6 X 5 X 4 X 3 X
2 X 1. Since we read from left to right, the researchers assumed that group 1 would use "1" as an
anchor and predict a lower value that the group that started with "8" as the anchor. The
59
expectation was that the first number seen would bias the estimate of the value by the participant.
The researchers found that the median for the ascending group was 512; the median for the
descending group was 2250. The actual value is 40320.
Research in psychology: Strack and Mussweiler (1997)
The aim of Strack and Mussweiler's (1997) study was to test the influence of
anchoring bias on decision making. The researchers used an opportunity sample of 69 German
undergraduates was recruited from the university canteen at lunchtime; they were asked if they
would take part in a general knowledge questionnaire. The participants answered questions on a
computer screen. Each question had two components.
In the first component, participants were asked to make a comparative judgement about
something. This question acted as the anchor. Anchors were either high or low, plausible (likely)
or implausible (unlikely). For example:
• Did Mahatma Gandhi die before or after the age of 9? [low anchor, implausible]
• Did Mahatma Gandhi die before or after the age of 140? [high anchor, implausible]
• Did Mahatma Gandhi die before or after the age of 64? [low anchor, plausible]
• Did Mahatma Gandhi die before or after the age of 79? [high anchor, plausible]
In the second component, participants were then asked to provide an absolute estimate for the
target information.
• How old was Mahatma Gandhi when he died? (The actual answer is 78)
Results were calculated as the mean value offered for the second task. The data below shows the
mean values for the estimated ages in response to the Mahatma Gandhi question:
High Anchor Low Anchor

Plausible Anchor 99.6 67.9
Implausible Anchor 66.7 50.1
The plausible anchor clearly influenced the final value offered. Faced with an unknown,
participants were ‘anchored’ by the most recent, seemingly relevant information. Even the
60
implausible anchor influenced the final value offered. It is interesting to note that the
implausible, low anchor (9) appears to have been more influential than the implausible, high
anchor (140). This could reflect the belief that the high anchor is in fact impossible, rather than
implausible.
Peak-end rule
The peak–end rule is a heuristic in which people judge an experience largely based on how they
felt at its peak (i.e., its most intense point) and at its end, rather than based on the total sum or
average of every moment of the experience. The effect occurs regardless of whether the
experience is pleasant or unpleasant. It is not that other information aside from that of the peak
and end of the experience is forgotten, but rather it is not used in reaching a decision or
judgement.
I caught myself using this heuristic during Prague’s annual restaurant festival. A bunch of
friends and I went to dinner. On the way home we talked about the restaurant and I said, “I
wasn’t very impressed by the meal.” My friends started to laugh. They said, “John! You were
smitten by the soup. You must have said five times how great it was! You were not happy that a
man at the next table lit up a cigar and when you asked him if he could please not smoke, he
yelled at you and told you that he was there first. But, then came the main course. You said that
you thought the main course was perfectly presented and amazing both in texture and taste. You
only complained that the dessert wasn’t what you expected.” Aha. I had employed the peak-end
rule. First, the altercation with the other customer (a peak - or, to be honest, a trough!)
influenced my perception of the evening as a negative one. In addition, the fact that I was
disappointed at the end of the dinner meant that my perception of the whole dinner was rather
negative. The flip side could have been true. A mediocre dinner with a great dessert can be a
really positive memory.
We often use this with movies as well. Think about the films we watch. We are more likely to
recommend a movie that has a slow start but an amazing ending than a movie that has an
amazing start but a rather lame ending.
In one of the original studies on peak-end rule, Kahnemann et al (1993) asked participants to
hold their hand up to the wrist in painfully cold water until they are invited to remove it. With
their free hand, participants recorded how strong the pain was with 1 finger being little to no pain
and 5 fingers being strong pain. The researchers used a repeated measures design. The two
conditions were:
Condition 1: 60 seconds of immersion in water at 14 degrees celsius. End the end of the
60 seconds the experimenter instructed them to take their hand out and gave them a warm
towel.
Condition 2: 90 seconds of immersion. The first 60 seconds the same as Condition 1. At

the end of 60 seconds the researcher opened a valve that allowed slightly warmer water to
flow into the tub. The water temperature rose about 1 degree Celsius.
61
The participants were then told that there would be one more trial - either a repeat of Condition 1
or repeat of Condition 2. Now, if you look at the two conditions, it makes sense that Condition 1
is the smarter choice. Both conditions have the same level of pain for 60 seconds - but after that
time, Condition 1 gets a warm towel while Condition 2 gets a slight decrease in pain for an extra
30 seconds.
80% of the participants chose the second condition! This is a clear example of peak-end
rule. The fact that the second trial was longer was not taken into account by the participants
(something called duration neglect). They were basing their choice on how the condition ended,
rather than making an overall assessment of the pain.
So, how can we use this? This heuristic is particularly problematic in the study of relationships.
Much of the research done is retrospective - for example, research on marriages that fall apart
often is carried out only “after the fact.” This means that the research is open to memory
distortion on the behalf of the participants. In a study of why a relationship ended, the researcher
may ask the participant to rate the level of disclosure in the relationship. If the couple was
estranged during the last year of the relationship, it is very possible that due to peak-end rule, the
perception will be that disclosure was “always a problem” in the relationship, when in fact, the
relationship may have been quite healthy for a significant amount of time that the couple was
together.
Framing effect
Prospect theory (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979) describes the way people choose between
alternatives that involve risk, where the probabilities of outcomes are known. The theory states
that people evaluate these losses and gains using heuristics. One of those heuristics is the
framing effect, in which people react to choices depending on how they are presented or
"framed." People prefer certain outcomes when information is framed in positive language, but
prefer less certain outcomes when the same information is framed in negative language. In
simple terms, when we expect success we prefer a definite win rather than a possible win, but
when things look bad we will gamble on an uncertain defeat rather than a definite loss.
Research in psychology: Tversky and Kahneman (1981)
Tversky & Kahneman, (1981) aimed to test the influence of positive

and negative frames on decision making. The researchers used a self-selected (volunteer) sample
of 307 US undergraduate students.
62
Participants were asked to make a decision between one of two options in a hypothetical scenario
where they were choosing how to respond to the outbreak of a virulent disease. For some of the
participants the information as frame positively while for others it was framed negatively.
The scenario read as follows:
Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is
expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been
proposed. Assume that the exact scientific estimate of the consequences of the programs
are as follows.
In condition 1, the participants were given the "positive frame." Their choices were the
following:
If Program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved.
If Program B is adopted, there is 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved, and 2/3
probability that no people will be saved.
In this condition, 72% of the participants chose Program A, whereas only 28% chose program
B.
In condition 2, the participants were given the "negative frame." Their choices were the
following:
If Program C is adopted 400 people will die.
If Program D is adopted there is 1/3 probability that nobody will die, and 2/3 probability
that 600 people will die.
In this condition, 22% of the participants choice Program C and 78% choice Program D.
It is important to note that all four options, (A, B, C and D) are effectively the same; 200 people
will survive and 400 people will not.
The results clearly demonstrate the influence of the frame. Where information was phrased
positively, (the number of people who would be saved) people took the certain outcome, (option
A) and avoided the possibility of a loss in the less certain option (option B). By contrast, when
information was phrased in terms of people dying (a negative frame) people avoided the certain
loss (option C) and took a chance on the less certain option D.
It is important to consider cultural differences in thinking and decision making. For example, a
recent meta-analysis (Wang et al, 2016) of research on loss aversion tasks like the one above has
63
shown that people from more individualistic cultures are more risk averse than those from a
collectivist culture.
Critical thinking about cognitive biases
A quick Google search will show you that there are many more cognitive biases than the three
that are discussed in this chapter. These show that we often use System 1 thinking that does not
spend the time to examine carefully what our options are in order to make "informed
choices." But it is difficult to measure the actual use of such biases in real life
situations. Remember the example of buying a lamp at the market. It is possible that an anchor
may play a key role in determining how much you are willing to pay for the lamp - but in this
naturalistic situation there are also other factors: how much money I have to spend, the amount
of time I am willing to spend bargaining, my emotional state at the time of the purchase, whether
I like the shop owner or my past experience in buying lamps. And that is not a complete list.
Remember, too, that we are not very good at explaining our thinking processes. Since heuristics
are often used unconsciously, our explanation as to how we decided what was the best price to
pay is most likely a rationalization, rather than a true reflection of our thinking processes.
Much of the research in this chapter is done with Western university student samples under
highly controlled - and rather artificial - conditions. Many of the questions given to the students
would be of little interest to them and were not asked in a way that was natural. The studies lack
ecological validity as well as cross-cultural support - assuming that cognitive biases are
universal.
Reliability of System 1 thinking
System 1 thinking is most often associated with errors – we make intuitive assumptions about the
world which will sometimes be mistaken. However, it has also been argued that System 1 can be
very effective for experts. This process is sometimes called thin slicing and suggests that experts
are sometimes able to know the correct answer to complex questions immediately, often without
knowing why!
Thin slicing is defined as making very quick inferences about the state, characteristics or details
of an individual or situation with minimal amounts of information. One example is the famous
tennis coach Vic Braden who was able to predict when a tennis player was about to double fault
with almost 100% accuracy. Interestingly, Vic was unable to say how he knew even after
viewing hundreds of hours of video footage!
The following study was carried out to test whether psychologists could accurately predict if a
couple in marriage couseling would end up divorced, after only a few minutes of conversation.
The Specific Affect (SPAFF) coding system has been developed and used by John Gottman and
his team to thin slice the way married couples communicate. This system has allowed Gottman
to predict how likely it is that couples will still be together in six years time based after only
three minutes of the first marriage counselling conversation. This then makes it possible to
design effective marriage counselling for these couples.
64
Research in psychology: Carerre & Gottman (1999)
Carerre & Gottman, (1999) wanted to test the usefulness of the SPAFF system to
predict long term relationship success based on thin-slicing of interaction between couples.
In this prospective study 124 newlywed couples were recruited using a purposive sampling
method. Sampling included an attempt to stratify the sample; couples reflected a range of
economic and ethnic demographics in the Seattle area. Each couple completed a survey, (each
husband and wife completed the survey separately) and then discussed the results with a
researcher in order to identify one or two problematic issues in their relationship.
These issues were then used as the basis for a 15 minute discussion which was video recorded
and then coded using SPAFF. Couples were then checked once a year for six years to find out if
they were still married.
SPAFF scores from the original recorded discussion were compared for husbands and wives who
were still married after six years and those who were not. Results below are based entirely on
the first 3 minutes of the 15 minute discussion.
Negative emotions Positive emotions Total

Married husbands -33.5 85.7 52.2
Divorced husbands -59.7 45.9 -13.8
Married wives -39.1 85.0 45.9
Divorced wives -66.9 46 -20.9
The data clearly shows that observers using SPAFF had rated the communication between
couples doomed to divorce as containing far more indications of negative emotions and far fewer
signs of positive emotion. This was true for both husbands and wives although the data suggests
the system is more successful when applied to husbands. This could of course simply reflect a
tendency for men to be less emotionally honest in terms of acknowledging negative aspects of
their relationship.
Gottman’s research with SPAFF suggests that we can learn to improve our intuitive thinking.
What could this mean in terms of the interaction between System 1 and System 2?
ATL: Communication
It is clear that cognitive biases can affect our decision making - sometimes in a negative or
disadvantageous manner.
First, make a list of the key decisions that are made by teenagers in your community.
65
Second, think about how one of the cognitive biases in this chapter may affect one of those
decisions and write a cautionary tale that warns others of the pitfalls of cognitive biases in
decision making.
Emotion and decision making
The Dual Processing Model of thinking and decision making

suggests that we have two distinct modes of thinking: an intuitive, fast mode of thinking (System
1) and a slower, conscious and rational mode of thinking (System 2). However, this model does
not directly address the role of emotion in thinking and decision making.
Emotion is an important factor in decision making, although most models do not address exactly
how and why emotion might influence the way we think and the decisions we make. Many
researchers believe that an increase in emotion will increase our dependence on System 1 as
cognitive load is increased, making cognitive processing by System 2 difficult.
Most people would probably say that their decision making is impaired by emotion; that we
think more clearly and make more logical decisions when our thinking is free of strong emotions.
However, recent neurobiological research has indicated that emotion may be essential to good
decision making.
The somatic marker hypothesis suggests that good decision making depends on an ability to
access appropriate emotional information linked to the situation in which the decision is being
made.
The Somatic Marker Hypothesis (Damasio, 1994)
Neurologist Antonio Damasio noticed that some of the brain damaged patients he was working
with consistently made poor decisions, often doing things which were likely to negatively impact
their welfare. This was even true when they had made the ‘bad’ decision before and suffered the
consequences. Demasion's Somatic Marker Hypothesis argues that emotional processes guide
decision-making.
66
Damasio realised all of these patients had suffered bilateral damage (damage in both
hemispheres of the brain) in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC).
These patients found it hard to plan ahead and would repeatedly make the same ‘bad’ decisions
which caused them to lose money, friends or status. Most mysteriously, when their decision
making was tested in a lab environment there did not seem to be any problem; their intellect and
memory capacity seemed unaffected by the damage to their brains.
Damasio began to wonder if damage to the vmPFC somehow caused patients to lose a
connection between emotional information and their decision making. The vmPFC seems to be
involved in somatic markers of emotions associated with thoughts and memories. Somatic
markers are feelings in the body that are associated with emotions, such as the association of
rapid heartbeat with anxiety or of nausea with disgust. Domasio wondered what would happen if
this layer of information was removed when we try to decide what to do in a difficult situation.
67
ATL: Communication
The somatic marker hypothesis can perhaps be best understood with the diagram below.
Questions
1. This diagram does not explain what the exact somatic markers are that the vmPFC would use
to make this decision. What do you think they might be?
2. Create your own version of a diagram to explain the Somatic Marker Hypothesis with regard
to one of the following decisions:
A. You have already had a lot to drink. Someone offers you

"one more."
B. You are late coming home from a party; someone you meet at the party tells you "let's cut
through this dark alley!"
Bechara et al (1999) developed a game known as the Iowa Gambling Task to test the Somatic
Marker Hypothesis. In this game, participants saw four decks of cards on a computer screen. The
decks were labeled A, B, C, and D at the top end of each deck. Using a mouse, the participant
could click on a card on any of the four decks. Every time the participant chose one of the decks,
the face of the card appeared on top of the deck and a message was displayed on the screen
68
indicating the amount of money the participant had won or lost. Participants were asked to
decide which deck to select on 100 trials, although they were not told in advance how many trials
there would be.
The sample was made up of 13 healthy participants and 5 participants with vmPFC damage.
The decks were not random. Decks A and B would return high rewards initially but would then
deliver larger and larger losses as the game went on. These decks should therefore be identified
as ‘bad’ and participants should learn to avoid them through the experience of the game. Decks
C and D by contrast would deliver small rewards initially but would also have very small losses
as the game continued. These decks should therefore be identified as ‘good’ and participants
should learn to favour them through experience of the game.
The results showed that control participants (with no brain damage) quickly learned the best
strategy while those participants with bilateral damage in the vmPFC did not fare so well.
Not only is emotion an important part of effective decision making, but increased emotion seems
to be one way we can ‘know’ when we are making the right decision - or at least we think we
are!
Research in psychology: De Martino et al (2006)
De Martino et al, (2006) aimed to explore the interaction of emotion in a financial decision
making task.
A volunteer sample of 20 British undergraduates were asked to

complete a simple financial decision-making task while brain activity was measured using an
fMRI scanner. Information was presented to participants in terms of either a loss (negative frame
- you had £50, but have lost £30) or a gain (positive frame –you had £50, and you can keep
£20). The outcome in both frames is in fact the same - you have £20 you didn’t have before.
In the positive frame participants were then offered a chance to gamble (risky option – outcome
is unknown) or keep £20 (sure option – a certain ‘win’). In this positive frame, ‘loss aversion’
predicts that people will prefer the sure option and keep £20 – the risky ‘gamble’ option
represents a possible loss.
69
In the negative frame participants were offered a chance to gamble (risky option – outcome is
unknown) or lose £30 (sure option – a certain ‘loss’). In this negative frame, ‘loss aversion’
predicts that people will prefer the risky ‘gamble’ option as the ‘sure’ option states a certain loss.
As expected, participants were far more likely to choose to gamble in the negative frame
condition, even though the options are in fact exactly the same as in the positive frame.
fMRI results demonstrated an interesting pattern of activity in the amygdala, a part of the brain's
limbic system which is regarded as being central to emotion. Participants recorded a significant
increase in activity whenever they selected the ‘loss averse’ option, regardless of the frame in
use.
A key question for this study is the direction of causality. It is difficult to be sure if the emotion
associated with increased activity in the amygdala is guiding decision making or if it is a
consequence of decision making. Either way, it is clear that emotion and decision making are
interacting.
Evaluation of the somatic marker hypothesis
Most of the research done to support this theory uses the Iowa Gambling Task. This raises the
question of how robust the theory is in explaining decision making behaviour.
In one version of this study, (Bechara et al, 1997) the team demonstrated that vmPFC patients
continued to select cards from decks C and D even though they had told researchers that they
knew these decks were disadvantageous. This may indicate that it is not solely a lack of
emotional feedback that leads to the patients' poor decision making.
Wright and Racow (2017) conducted a computerized test using the wonderfully named Balloon
Analogue Risk Task (BART). In this task, the participant was presented with a balloon and
offered the chance to earn money by pumping the balloon up by clicking a button. Each click
caused the balloon to inflate and money to be added to "the pot", up until some point at which
the balloon was over inflated and exploded. Thus, each pump brought greater risk, but also
greater potential reward. Although they did find that ‘bad’ decisions, (where participants burst
the balloon) did result in increased emotional response - indicated by Galvanic Skin Response
- they did not find any evidence that this somatic marker helped participants avoid bad decisions
in future tasks.
The Somatic Marker Hypothesis may demonstrate that decision making is improved by access to
emotion which is relevant to the specific decision being made, but what about decisions made
during periods of intense emotion not connected to the decision itself? Such an approach may be
a more useful focus for research into emotion and decision making in the real world.
ATL: Reflection
McCormick and Telzer (2017) have provided some fMRI evidence that risky decision making
in teenagers could be related to a developmental process where the medial Prefrontal Cortex
70
(mPFC) is less sensitive to negative feedback – so there is a reduced emotional response to
negative outcomes.
Watch the following video where Sarah-Jayne Blackmore talks about the role of the mPFC in
teenage behaviour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zVS8HIPUng
Think about the risky behaviours that you engage in. Do you think that what you do is
significantly different from what you see adults doing?
What are three things that Blakemore says that you think are important to understanding the role
of the frontal cortext in risk-taking behaviour?
Do you think that Blakemore's arguments explain why teenagers engage in ‘riskier’ behaviour?
If not, how else could we explain this behaviour?
71
Key studies: cognitive
Often in textbooks we find that there is less information about studies than we feel that students
need in order to really understand them and apply critical thinking when discussing them. In
response to this, this section provides a number of "key studies" which are meant to help clarify
the aim, procedure, results and implications of research. The guides also include analysis and
evaluation of the studies.
It is not meant for teachers to cover all of the key studies presented. Instead, teachers should
design a unit using as few key studies as possible in order to answer potential exam questions.
This means that it will be important to choose what you feel confident in teaching and which you
feel students can easily understand.
More key studies will continue to be added over time. Some are highly traditional, whereas
others are rather new and "cutting edge" in psychology. It is my opinion that a mix of traditional
and modern is essential in a modern psychology curriculum.
1. Bahrick et al (1975) study to demonstrate the reliability of memory

2. Bartlett (1932) study for the following content in the cognitive approach: To what extent
is one cognitive process reliable
3. Berntsen & Thomsen (2005) study to test the reliablity of memory.
4. Brown & Kulik (1977) study of flashbulb memory. study for the following content in the
cognitive approach: To what extent is one cognitive process reliable
5. HM: Milner (1966) case study of the role of the hippocampus on memory formation.
6. Kulkofsky et al (2011) study of the role of culture on flashbulb memory. study for the
following content in the cognitive approach: To what extent is one cognitive process
reliable
7. Loftus & Palmer (1974) wanted to see the role of leading questions in influencing the
memories of eyewitnesses.
8. Loftus & Pickrell (1995) classic study on false memories which has come to be known
as the "Lost in the Mall" study
9. Neisser & Harsch (1992) classic study of flashbulb memory
10. Sharot et al (2007) studied the biological basis of flashbulb memory.
11. Yuille & Cutshall (1986) a study to demonstrate the reliability of memory which
challenged the findings of Loftus & Palmer (1974).
72
1. Bahrick et al (1975)
Bahrick et al carried out a study to demonstrate the reliability

of memory. You can use this study in order to address the following content areas:
Discuss how and why particular research methods are used in the cognitive approach.
To what extent is one cognitive process reliable?
The original study is available here.

http://infantlab.fiu.edu/articles/Bahrick%20et%20al._1975_JEP_Fifty%20Years%20of%20Mem
ory.pdf
Aim
To study the reliability of autobiographical memory over time - specifically the names and faces
of the people that went to school with us.
Procedure
Nearly 392 participants aged 17 – 74 were tested. Some of the participants had been out of high
school only two weeks. At the other end of the continuum, some of the participants had
graduated 57 years earlier. In order for the participants to be selected they had to be in a class of
at least 90 graduates and there had to be a published yearbook available for the graduating class.
73
The participants were asked to do five tests:
• A free recall test: Name as many people as you can from your graduating class.
Time limit of eight minutes.
• A photo recognition test: 10 cards, each with five photos. They were asked with
of the five photos was taken from their own yearbook. 8 second limit. If they
didn't know, they were told to guess.
• A name recognition test: 10 lists of names, each with only one name from the
graduating class. Participants were asked to identify the person from their class.
• Matching tests: 10 cards each with five pictures. A name was written across the
top of the page. The participants were asked to identify the correct photo to
match the name.
• Picture cueing test: The participants were presented with 10 portraits one by one
and asked to write down the name of the person in the photo. A 15 second time
limit.
The free recall test was always given first and then participants were randomly assigned to the
order of the remaining tests. For each question participants were asked to indicate their degree of
confidence on a three point scale: 3 being certain, 2 being probable and 1 being a guess.
Results
Results of the study showed that participants who were tested within 15 years of graduation were
about 90% accurate in identifying names and faces. After 48 years they were accurate 80% for
identifying names and 70% in identifying faces. Free recall was worse. After 15 years it was
60% and after 48 years it was 30% accurate.
This demonstrates that memories of the names and faces of people in our past are
highly reliable over time; however, it also shows that recognition is better than recall.
Evaluation
• This study is a cross-sectional study - that is, not a longitudinal study. Therefore, we
cannot account for participant variability. However, because of the large sample size, we
are able to establish a trend in the data that demonstrates that facial and name recognition
has high reliability.
• Bahrick made use of participants' existing memories and the memories could be verified
through the use of the yearbooks.
• Memory of faces and names is a very specific type of LTM and may not generalizable to
other types of memory.
• Since the participants provided their own yearbooks, there may be some contamination,
even though the participants promised not to look through the yearbook prior to the
study.
74
2. Bartlett (1932)
The following summary is for the classic "War of Ghosts" study

by Bartlett (1932). You can use this study for the following content in the cognitive
approach:
Discuss/evaluate schema theory.
In addition, it could be used in the socicultural approach to discuss how sociocultural factors may
affect cognitive processes.

http://www.bartlett.psychol.cam.ac.uk/SomeExperimentsOn.htm
Aim
To investigate how memory of a story is affected by previous knowledge. He wanted to see if

cultural background and unfamiliarity with a text would lead to distortion of memory when the
story was recalled. Bartlett’s hypothesis was that memory is reconstructive and that people store
and retrieve information according to expectations formed by cultural schemas.
Procedure
Bartlett told participants a Native American legend called The War of the Ghosts. The
participants in the study were British; for them the story was filled with unknown names and
concepts, and the manner in which the story was developed was also foreign to them. The story
was therefore ideal to study how memory was reconstructed based on schema processing.
Bartlett allocated the participants to one of two conditions: one group was asked to use repeated
reproduction, where participants heard the story and were told to reproduce it after a short time
and then to do so again repeatedly over a period of days, weeks, months or years. The second
group was told to use serial reproduction, in which they had to recall the story and repeat it to
another person.
75
Results
Bartlett found that there was no significant difference between the way that the groups recalled
the story. Bartlett found that participants in both conditions changed the story as they tried to
remember it - a process called distortion. Bartlett found that there were three patterns of
distortion that took place. Assimilation: The story became more consistent with the participants’
own cultural expectations - that is, details were unconsciously changed to fit the norms of British
culture. Leveling: The story also became shorter with each retelling as participants omitted
information which was seen as not important. Sharpening: Participants also tended to change
the order of the story in order to make sense of it using terms more familiar to the culture of the
participants. They also added detail and/or emotions. The participants overall remembered the
main themes in the story but changed the unfamiliar elements to match their own cultural
expectations so that the story remained a coherent whole although changed.
Discussion
Remembering is not a passive but rather an active process, where information is retrieved and
changed to fit into existing schemas. This is done in order to create meaning in the incoming
information. According to Bartlett, humans constantly search for meaning. Based on his research
Bartlett formulated the theory of reconstructive memory. This means that memories are not
copies of experiences but rather a reconstruction.
Evaluation
Bartlett's theory of reconstructive memory has several applications and explains many real life
situations. Thus, in spite of the fact it was carried out in a laboratory, it has high ecological
validity.
The methodology was not rigorously controlled. Participants did not receive standardized
instructions. There was no standardized time after which participants had to recall the story. He
also did not tell his participants to be as accurate as possible.
Although there were two conditions, there was no difference in the performance of the two
groups - in other words, the IV did not affect the DV. However, it appears that culture did affect
how they recalled the story. But if we focus on how cultural schema affect the participants'
memories, there are several limitations. When we consider culture the IV, then the study is quasi-
experimental - that is, no independent variable was manipulated. Therefore, a cause and effect
relationship cannot be established. Secondly, there was no control group. There was no group
of Native Americans recalling the story to verify that, in fact, this distortion doesn't happen to
people in that cultural group.
76
3. Berntsen & Thomsen (2005)
Berntsen & Thomsen (2005) carried out a study to test the reliablity of
memory. To do so, they wanted to test the accuracy of the memories of Danish World War II
veterans. This study may be used for the following content in the study of the cognitive
approach:
Discuss research methods used in the cognitive approach.
Background
Brown & Kulik (1977) defined flashbulb memories as vivid and detailed memories for the
personal context of the reception of consequential and surprising news, such as the assassination
of President Kennedy in 1963.
To support their claims, Brown & Kulik carried out a series of interviews in which they asked
people about their memories of the days that John F Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr were
assassinated. The researchers concluded that flashbulb memories did exist - and that they were
based on both personal significance of the event and an emotional response of surprise.
However, in the original research, surprise was not measured. In addition, the details about what
the participants were doing on the days of the assassinations could not be verified.
Bernsten and Thomsen (2005) wanted to test the accuracy of flashbulb by using a historical
event for which factual information could be verified. They chose to use Danish veterans from
World War II.
77
Procedure
The sample consisted of 145 Danes between the ages of 72 and 89. They were obtained through
a snowball sampling method. The participants were asked for their memories of first hearing the
news of the Danish occupation (April 1940) and liberation (May 1945). They were also asked to
indicate what their role was in the war. They were also asked for detailed descriptions of their
most positive and most negative memories from the war.
After this information was gathered, the researchers gave them a questionnaire which asked for
specific factual details about the occupation and liberation of Denmark that could be matched to
historical data. A younger control group was given the exact same questions in a short
questionnaire titled “Historical Details From World War II."
For example, participants were asked to describe the weather; they were also asked whether it
was a workday or a Sunday and, if a workday, which day of week it was. For the liberation, they
were also asked for the time of the radio announcement of the German surrender.
Results
Almost all participants in the sample of older Danes reported memories of the invasion and
liberation. Their answers to factual questions - for example, the weather, the day of the week, the
time of the announcement - were compared to historical records as well as the answers from a
younger control group. The older participants were far more accurate; on average, they provided
accurate answers to 55% of the questions versus 11% in the control group.
Participants with reported ties to the resistance movement had more vivid, detailed and accurate
memories than did participants without such ties. Ratings of surprise were unrelated to the
accuracy and clarity of the memories.
Discussion
The results of this study are quite impressive because the participants are recalling memories that
are over 60 years old. It appears to support the theory of flashbulb memories as proposed by
Brown & Kulik. The events that the participants are recalling had deep, personal meaning in
their lives. On the other hand, Brown & Kulik's proposal that surprise is a key element in the
creation of flashbulb memories is not supported. Perhaps the fact that Brown & Kulik chose to
investigate responses to assassinations of public figures, is the reason that they attributed the
creation of these memories to surprise.
78
Another strength of this study is the presence of a control group. Without a control group, it
would not be clear how much of the information offered by the witnesses could be provided by
people who were not present during the event but were simply guessing or making inferences
based on general knowledge. The researchers have provided a control group, although one that is
significantly younger than the participants. But because the researchers are trying to find out
what would happen if people just guessed which day of the week or what type of weather it was
on the day of the event, the age of the control group is not highly relevant.
One general problem with studies of this nature is that it is generally impossible to establish
exactly which details witnesses observed and paid attention to during the event. That is why the
choice of weather and day of the week are good ones for this study - they are factors that most of
us notice on a day-to-day basis.
Lastly, one limitation of this study is the use of a network sample. Since many of the participants
knew each other, it could be that they have spent a lot of time together discussing the past, which
may have had an effect on individual memories.
References
Berntsen, Dorthe and Dorthe K Thomsen (2005). Personal Memories for Remote Historical
Events: Accuracy and clarity of flashbulb memories related to World War II. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 134, No. 2, 242–257.
Brown, R., & Kulik, J. (1977). Flashbulb memories. Cognition, 5, 73–99
79
4. Brown & Kulik (1977)
Brown & Kulik (1977) carried out a classic study of flashbulb

memory. You can use this study for the following content in the cognitive approach:
How and why particular research methods are used in the cognitive approach.
One theory of how emotion may affect one cognitive process.
The abstract of the original study is available here.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/001002777790018X
Aim
Brown & Kulik proposed that some events can be remembered as though our mind had
photographed them - what they called flashbulb memories. They argued that these memories
were caused when the event not only was surprising, but was of personal relevance to the life of
the individual. They also argued that there must be a biological mechanism that led to the
creation of these memories, but the following study did not investigate a biological component.
The aim of their classic 1977 study was to investigate whether surprising and personally
significant events can cause flashbulb memories.
80
Procedure
The researchers asked 40 black and 40 white American male participants to fill out a
questionnaire regarding the death of public figures - such as President John F Kennedy and civil
rights leader Martin Luther King Jr - as well as of someone they personally knew. They were
asked a series of questions about the event including:
• Where were you when you heard about the event?

• Who was with you when you head about the event?
• What were you doing when you heard about the event?
• How did you find out about the event?
• How did you feel when you heard about the event? (to indicate level of emotion)
• How important was this event in your life? (to indicate personal relevance)
• How often have you talked about this event? (to indicate rehearsal)
The study was carried out in 1977. President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963
and Martin Luther King was assassinated on April 4, 1968.
Results
The researchers found that 90% of the participants recalled a significant amount of detail about
the day when these events occurred. Most participants had very detailed memories of the death
of a loved one. However, there was a difference in their memories of teh assassination of public
officials, based on the personal relevance of the event to the participant. 75% of black
participants had flashbulb memories of the murder of Martin Luther King, compared to 33% of
white participants.
Before reading the evaluation of the study below, you may want to watch this video. You will
see here that when people are questioned about an important national event, they may say what
they believe that they are supposed to say - a demand characteristic known as the social
desirability effect.
81
Evaluation
The study was one of the first to attempt to empirically test the existence of flashbulb
memories. It has led to a large amount of further research.
The procedure could be replicated, allowing us to determine if the results are reliable.
The questionnaire was retrospective in nature - that is, it was self-reported data that relied on the
memory of the individual and could not be verified for accuracy by the researchers. Compare tis
to Neisser & Harsch's prospective study.
The actual level of surprise or emotion at the moment of the historical event cannot be measured
or verified.
It is not possible to actually measure the role of rehearsal in the creation of the memories.
Social desirability may have played a role in the responses given by the participants.
The study shows sampling bias; it is difficult to generalize the findings as only American males
were studied. The study had both gender and cultural bias. More recent findings show that
collectivistic societies may have lower rates of FBM.
82
5. HM: Milner (1966)
Milner carried out a classic case study of the role of the hippocampus on
memory formation. You can use this study for the following content in the biological approach:
How and why particular research methods are used in the biological (or cognitive) approach.
Techniques used to study the brain.
Localization of function.
In addition, for the cognitive approach, you can use this study to address models of memory -
particularly, the evaluation of the Multi-Store Model.
Background
HM is perhaps the most famous participant in a psychological study ever. It is a longitudinal

case study and many different data collections methods have been used over the years.
HM was born in Manchester, Connecticut in 1926. HM fell off his bicycle when he was aged 7
and sustained a serious head injury. Epileptic attacks began when he was 10; they were assumed
to be connected to the accident. At the age of 27 he had become so incapacitated by his seizures
that he could not lead a normal life and medication did not help him. With the approval of the
patient and his family, the neurosurgeon William Scoville performed an experimental surgery
where he removed tissue from the medial temporal lobe (including the hippocampus) on both
sides of HM’s brain.
Brenda Milner is a neuropsychologist who studied HM until he died in 2008. The first time
Brenda Miller visited HM after the operation she observed that he forgot daily events nearly as
fast as they occurred, for example, he forgot names of persons to whom he had just been
introduced. He described his own state “like waking from a dream; every day is alone in itself.”
(Milner et al. 1968).
After the operation HM remembered his childhood very well. His personality appeared largely
unchanged. There was no general intellectual impairment but he could recall little of the 12 years
83
before to the operation in the beginning. When some time had passed after the operation, HM’s
retrograde amnesia (i.e. memory for events before the operation) diminished and by 1966 he
only had problems remembering the period of about one year before the operation.
HM suffered from anterograde amnesia. For example, he was unable to remember the faces of
people he met after the operation. A psychologist could spend the morning testing him but in the
afternoon HM would act as if the psychologist were somebody he had never seen before. He
could not recognize people who came to see him regularly for six years.
Procedure
To study the biological reasons for anterograde amnesia in patient HM.
In order to carry out her research, Milner used many different strategies. This is an example of
how method triangulation may be used in a case study:
• Psychometric testing: IQ testing was given to HM. His results were above average.
• Direct observation of his behaviour;
• Interviews with both HM and with family members.
• Cognitive testing: memory recall tests as well as learning tasks - such as reverse mirror
drawing.
• Corkin later did an MRI to determine the extent of the damage done to HM's brain.
Findings
HM could not acquire new episodic knowledge (memory for events) and he could not acquire
new semantic knowledge (general knowledge about the world). This suggests that the brain
structures that were removed from his brain are important for long-term explicit memory.
The researchers also found that he was able to remember his house and could draw a picture of
the floor plan of his new home. This indicates that he was able to form a cognitive map of the
spatial layout of his house.
HM had a capacity for working memory, since he was able to carry on a normal conversation.
This requires a minimal level of retention of what has just been heard and said. On being asked
to recall the number 584, HM was able to do so even 15 minutes later, apparently by means of
constant verbal rehearsal. However, after the task was over, the number and HM’s strategy in
remembering it were lost.
Memories in the form of motor skills, i.e. procedural memories, were well maintained, for
example he knew how to mow a lawn. He also showed improvements on the performance of new
skills such as reverse mirror-drawing in which he had to acquire new eye-hand coordination
(Milner, 1966).
84
An MRI scan of HM’s brain was performed in 1992 and 2003 where Corkin analysed the extent
of the damage. It was possible to see that parts of HM’s temporal lobe including the
hippocampus had the most damage. However, the damage was less extensive than originally
estimated by Scoville. Damage to the hippocampus explains the problem of transferring short-
term memory to long-term memory as this is the area where the neurotransmitter acetylcholine is
believed to play an important role in learning and formation of explicit memories.
The following is a summary of the key findings:
• The memory systems in the brain constitute a highly specialized and complex system.
• The hippocampus plays a critical role in converting memories of experiences from short-
term memory to long-term memory.
• However, researchers found that short-term memory is not stored in the hippocampus as
HM was able to retain information for a while if he rehearsed it.
• Since HM was able to retain some memories for events that happened long before his
surgery it indicates that the medial temporal region is not the site of permanent storage
but rather plays a role in the organization and permanent storage of memories elsewhere
in the brain.
• Implicit memory contains several stores - for example, procedural memory, emotional
memory and skills and habits. Each of these areas is related to different brain areas.
Evaluation
• The study was a case study. The strength of this study is that it was longitudinal - over
50 years! This means that change could be observed over time. In addition, case studies
use method triangulation.
• The limitation of case studies is that they cannot be easily replicated. However, there are
several other case studies of patients like HM - for example, Clive Wearing - which
confirm the findings.
• Some of the study was retrospective in nature. This means that we do not have a lot of
data on HM's actual cognitive abilities before the accident.
• The medication taken to treat the epilepsy may have resulted in some of the damage; but
this is not highly relevant as it is the damage to specific parts of the brain that is
important.
• High ecological validity, no variables were manipulated and HM was observed in his
natural environment.
• Milner's research met high ethical standards of consent, confidentiality and protection
from harm.
85
6. Kulkofsky et al (2011)
Kulkofsky et al (2011) carried out a study of the role of

culture on flashbulb memory. You can use this study for the following content in the cognitive
and sociocultural approaches:
The role of culture on cognitive processes.
The abstract of the original study is available here.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09658211.2010.551132
Aim
The researchers studied five countries - China, Germany, Turkey, the UK and the USA - to see if
there was any difference in the rate of flashbulb memories in collectivistic and individualistic
cultures.
Procedure
The sample was made up of 274 adults from five different countries. All participants were
identified as "middle class."
86
First, the participants were given five minutes to recall as many memories as they could of public
events occurring in their lifetime. The events had to have occurred at least one year ago. The
researchers then used this list of events to create a "memory questionnaire." They were asked
five questions about how they learned about the event that mirrored the original questionnaire
used by Brown & Kulik (1977). The questions were:
1. Where were you when you first learned of the event?

2. What time of day was it?
3. How did you learn about it?
4. What were you doing at the time that you learned about it?
5. Whom were you with?
They were then asked to answer questions about the importance of the event to them
personally. The questions included:
1. How nationally or internationally important was the event?

2. How personally important was the event?
3. How surprising was the event?
4. How many times have you talked about the event since it happened?
The survey and instructions were constructed in English and then translated and back-translated
into Mandarin Chinese, German, and Turkish by bilingual research assistants. For example, that
means that after they were translated into Mandarin Chinese by one of the research assistants, a
different native speaker would be given the questions and ask them to translate them back into
English. In this way we can guarantee that the translation was not a confounding variable. The
importance of having the questionnaires written in their native languages in order to cue memory
is supported by Marian (2000).
Results
The researchers found that in a collectivistic culture like China, personal importance and
intensity of emotion played less of a role in predicting FBM, compared with more individualistic
cultures that place greater emphasis on an individual's personal involvement and emotional
experiences. Because focusing on the individual's own experiences is often de-emphasized in the
Chinese context, there would be less rehearsal of the triggering event compared with participants
from other cultures - and thus a lower chance of developing a FBM. However, it was found that
national importance were equally linked to FBM formation across cultures.
87
Evaluation
• A representative of the culture administered the test and the questionnaires were given in
the native languages of the participants. This avoids interviewer effects. It also meant
that since they were responding in their native language - and the language in which these
memories were mostly created - the participants were more likely to recall these
memories.
• The study used back-translation to make sure that the translation of the questionnaires
was not a confounding variable. This increases the credibility of the study.
• There is the danger of the ecological fallacy - just because the participants come from the
culture being studied, this does not mean that they necessarily share the traits of the
culture's predominant dimensions - that is, just because I am American does not mean
that I process flashbulb memories like other Americans.
• It is an etic approach to researching cultural difference. It is possible that cultural factors
affected how information was self-reported. It cannot be verified in this study whether
those personal memories actually exist but were not reported.
88
7. Loftus & Palmer (1974)
The following experiment by Loftus & Palmer (1974) wanted to see the
role of leading questions in influencing the memories of eyewitnesses. This research can be used
to answer questions for the following content in the cognitive approach:
Discuss research methods used in the cognitive approach.
Discuss the reliability of one cognitive process.
Loftus & Palmer wanted to study the phenomenon known as reconstructive memory. Bartlett
(1932) argued that established knowledge called schemas influence cognitive processing and
demonstrated that cultural schemas could distort memory. He argued that humans try to find
meaning in what they experience and if something seems unfamiliar they will try to fit the
experience into existing schemas.
Loftus & Palmer performed a number of experiments where they demonstrated that people’s
memory can be manipulated by post-event information and wording of a question. Loftus has
also demonstrated that it is possible to plant a false memory in participants’ and that they will
claim that they have actually experienced the event. Loftus’ research has drawn attention to the
problems of eyewitness testimony where people may give false evidence because of leading
questions in the courtroom.
Experiment 1
Aim
The aim of the research was to investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect
estimation of speed.
89
The researchers refer to the problems of leading questions in eyewitness testimony in their
introduction and argue that some questions are more liable than others to influence estimates
than others. Leading questions are defined by Loftus as a question which either by form or
content suggests to a witness which answer is desired. Previous research has demonstrated that
people’s memory for details after a car accident is inaccurate and that there is a tendency to
overestimate the duration of a complex event. It seems that it is particularly difficult to estimate
speed of a moving car (Marshall, 1969). Since previous research had shown that estimation of
speed was liable to distortion Loftus and Palmer hypothesized that people’s memory for details
of a complex event could be distorted if they were asked to estimate how fast the car was going.
Therefore they set up two experiments where participants were shown videos of traffic accidents
and after that they had to answer questions about the accident. The participants were asked about
the speed of the car in different ways. For example, participants were asked:” About how fast
were the cars going when they smashed into each other?” or they were asked: “About how fast
were the cars going when they hit each other?” This was based on the assumption that ‘hit’ and
‘smashed’ have different connotations and activate different cognitive schemas about the
severity of the accident.
The researchers conducted two experiments. Both experiments had student participants.
Procedure
The researchers predicted that using the word ‘smashed’ would result in higher estimation of
speed than using the word ‘hit’. The independent variable was the different words used in the
critical question and the dependent variable was estimation of speed. 45 students participated in
the experiment. They were divided into five groups of seven students. Seven films of traffic
accidents were shown and the length of the films ranged from 5 to 30 seconds. These films were
taken from driver’s education films.
When the participants had watched a film they were asked to give an account of the accident
they and seen and then they answered a questionnaire with different questions on the accident
with one question being the critical question where they were asked to estimate the speed of the
cars involved in the accident. There was one critical question which was the one asking the
participant to estimate the speed of the cars involved in the accident. The participants were asked
to estimate the speed of the cars. They were asked the same question but the critical question
included different words. Nine participants were asked, “About how fast were the cars going
when they hit each other?" The critical word "hit’" was replaced by ‘collided’, ‘bumped’ or
‘smashed’ or’ contacted’ in the other conditions which each had nine participants answering the
question.
90
Results
The mean estimates of speed were highest in the ‘smashed’ condition (40.8 mph) and lowest in
the ‘contacted’ group (31.8 mph). The researchers calculated a statistical test and found that their
results were significant at p ≤ 0.005.
Table 1 Speed estimates for the Verbs used in Experiment 1
Verb Mean speed estimate (mph)
Smashed 40.8
Collided 39.3
Bumped 38.1
Hit 34.0
Contacted 31.8
Discussion
The results indicate that the critical word in the question consistently affected the participants’
answer to the question. The researchers argued that it may be that the different speed estimates is
the result of response-bias, i.e. the participant is uncertain about the exact speed and therefore a
verb like "smashed" biases his or her response towards a higher estimate. It may also be that the
way the question is formed result in a change in the participant’s mental representation of the
accident, i.e. the verb "smashed" activates a cognitive schema of a severe accident that may
change the participant’s memory of the accident. This distortion of memory is based on
reconstruction so that it is not the actual details of the accident that are remembered but rather
what is in line with a cognitive schema of a severe accident. This interpretation is in line with
Bartlett’s suggestion of reconstructive memory due to schema processing.
In conclusion, it seems that participants’ memory of an accident could be changed by using

suggestive questions.
91
Evaluation
The experiment was conducted in a laboratory and the participants were students. Lab
experiments may be problematic in the sense that they do not necessarily reflect how people
remember in real life. There may be a problem of low ecological validity. A support for this
point could be that the films shown in the experiment were made for teaching purposes and
therefore the participants did not experience the same kind of emotion that they would have
experienced if it had been a real accident.
However, a strength of the experimental method is that confounding variables can be controlled
so that it is really the effect of the independent variable that is measured. This was the case in
this experiment and Loftus and Palmer could rightfully claim that they had established a cause-
effect relationship between the independent variable (the intensity of the critical word) and the
dependent variable (estimation of speed). The fact that the experiment used students as
participants has also been criticized because students are not representative of a general
population. In addition, they were most likely young and inexperienced drivers, so this may
have influenced their ability to estimate the speed of the cars. That being said, most people
would have a problem with estimating the speed of a car...
Experiment 2
In order to investigate if the differences in speed estimation in the first experiment could be due
to the form of the question (schema processing) the researchers performed a second experiment.
The aim of the experiment was to investigate if participants who had a high speed estimate in the
first part of an experiment would say that they had seen broken glass in the second part of the
experiment. The researchers hypothesized that this would happen.
Procedure
150 students participated in this experiment. They were divided into groups of different sizes.
They were shown a 1-minute film depicting a multiple car accident lasting around 4 seconds.
After seeing the film the participants answered a questionnaire. First they described the accident
in their own words, and then they had to answer a number of other questions. Fifty participants
were asked:” About how fast were the cars going then they smashed into each other?” Fifty
participants were asked:” About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?” The
remaining fifty participants were not asked to estimate speed.
After one week the participants came back to the laboratory to answer some questions about the
accident. There was one critical question this time in a list of a total of 10 questions and it was
placed randomly in the list in the questionnaire. The critical question was:” Did you see any
broken glass?” The participants simply had to answer “yes” or “no”. In fact there was no broken
glass in the accident the participants had seen but the researchers assumed that broken glass was
associated with high speed.
92
Results
The mean estimate of speed of participants who had the critical question: "About how fast were
the cars going then they smashed into each other?” was 10.46 mph. The mean estimate of speed
of participants who had the critical question:”About how fast were the cars going when they hit
each other?” was 8.00 mph.
Table 2 Speed estimates for the verbs used in the first part of the second experiment
Verb Mean Speed Estimates (mph)
Smashed 10.46
Hit 8.00
In the ‘smashed’ condition 16 participants said yes to having seen broken glass compared to 7 in
the ‘hit’ condition. 6 participants in the control condition answered ‘yes’ to the question. 34
participants in the ‘smashed’ condition answered ‘no’ to the question compared to 43 in the ‘hit’
condition. Although most of the participants accurately reported no broken glass, more of the
participants in the ‘smashed’ condition said they saw broken glass.
Table 3 ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ answers related to the critical question: Did you see any broken
glass?
Response Smashed Hit Control
Yes 16 7 6
No 34 43 44
A Chi-square test was calculated because the data was nominal. It was significant at p ≤ 0.025.
Therefore, it was concluded that smashed leads to more ‘yes’ responses as well as higher speed
estimates.
Discussion
The researchers argued that the results of the second experiment provided further support for the
theory of reconstructive memory and schema processing. The wording of the critical question led
to higher speed estimates in the first part of the experiment and this also had consequences for
how participants answered in the second part of the experiment. Loftus and Palmer suggest that
participants are influenced by the perception of the event but also of the post-event information
93
provided by the critical question. The researchers argue that this information may be integrated
in such a way that it is difficult to say where it came from when the participants try to recall the
event. The verb used in the critical question provides further information to the participant about
the accident. The word ‘smashed’ gives the participant the idea of an accident that is severe and
therefore he or she is more likely to think that there was broken glass.
The results of this experiment can be interpreted in terms of Bartlett’s theory of reconstructive
memory, i.e. people tend to change details of an event when they try to remember it. This is
probably also what happened when the participants in Loftus and Palmer’s study tried to
remember the original information when they were given information about the speed of the cars
through the use of the either ‘hit’ or ‘smashed’. The participants may have used their past
knowledge of serious car accidents to make the decision of whether or not they had seen broken
glass (schema processing).
Evaluation
This study can also be accused of lacking ecological validity and therefore it may be difficult to
generalize the findings to real life. The comments made on the first experiment also apply to the
second one.
And finally, a good video clip to help to understand the key concepts of this study.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qYVI5WNuH0
References
Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering. A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loftus, E.F. and Palmer, J.C. (1974) “Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of
the Interaction between language and memory." Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior 13, 584-589.
Marshall, J. (1969). Law and Psychology in conflict. New York: Anchor Books cited in Loftus,
E.F. and Palmer, J.C. (1974) “Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the
Interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13,
584-589.
94
8. Loftus & Pickrell (1995)
Loftus & Pickerell carried out a classic study on false

memories which has come to be known as the "Lost in the Mall" study. You can use this study
for the following content:
Discuss ethical considerations related to research studies in the cognitive approach.

http://www.psychedout.org/uploads/2/7/9/7/27978279/loftus_pickrell_1995.pdf
Aim
To determine if false memories of autobiographical events can be created through the power of
suggestion.
Procedure
3 males and 21 females were the participants. Before the study, a parent or sibling of the
participant was contacted and asked two questions. First, could you retell three childhood
memories of the participant? Second, do you remember a time when the participant was lost in a
mall?
The participants then received a questionnaire in the mail. There were four memories that they
were asked to write about and then mail back the questionnaire to the psychologists. Three
events were real and one was “getting lost in the mall.” They were instructed that if they didn’t
remember the event, they should simply write “I do not remember this.”
The participants were interviewed twice over a period of four weeks. They were asked to recall
as much information as they could about the four events. Then they were asked to rate their
level of confidence about the memories on a scale of 1 - 10. After the second interview, they
were debriefed and asked if they could guess which of the memories was the false memory.
95
Results
About 25% of the participants “recalled” the false memory. However, they also ranked this
memory as less confident than the other memories and they wrote less about the memory on their
questionnaire.
Evaluation
Although this is often seen as strong evidence of the power of suggestion in creating false
memories, only 25% had them. The study does not tell us why some participants were more
susceptible to these memories than others.
It was possible to verify the memories through the involvement of parents and siblings.
Ecological validity was high as people were talking about their childhood memories.
The research has been applied in the areas of eyewitness testimony and therapy.
It is difficult to know whether this is a "true" false memory or a distortion of another memory of
being lost.
There are ethical concerns about the deception used in this study.
The fact that the questionnaire was filled out at home could lead to contamination - that is, they
could have consulted with someone.
There could be demand characteristics - such as social desirability effect.
96
9. Neisser & Harsch (1992)
Neisser & Harsch carried out a classic study of

flashbulb memory. You can use this study for the following content:
The abstract of the original study is available here. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-97049-001
Background
If you ask anyone where they were on September 11th, the day that two airplanes were used to
attack the World Trade Center in an act of terrorism, they will give emotional detail about what
they were doing at the time. These vivid memories that are connected to such emotional
moments in our lives are often referred to as “Flashbulb memories.” Flashbulb memories are
highly detailed, exceptionally vivid 'snapshots' of the moment and circumstances in which
surprising and personally relevant news was heard.
Because of the emotional and highly personal nature of flashbulb memories, it is believed that
they are highly resistant to forgetting. Flashbulb memories are one type of autobiographical
memory. The accuracy of these memories, however, is debatable. A number of studies suggest
that flashbulb memories are not especially accurate, but that they are experienced with great
vividness and confidence.
97
Much recent research has focused on the events of September 11th. Talarico & Rubin (2003)
recorded 54 Duke University students’ memory of first hearing about the terrorist attacks of
September 11 and a recent everyday event. They tested again either one, six, or thirty-two weeks
later. Both the flashbulb and everyday memories declined over time. However, ratings of
vividness and belief in accuracy declined only for the everyday memories. The power of the
emotion related to the event correlated with belief in accuracy, but not actual accuracy of the
memory. This led the researchers to conclude that flashbulb memories are not special in their
accuracy, but only in their perceived accuracy.
In 1992 Neisser & Harsch challenged the prevailing belief in flashbulb memory and argued that
these memories are also prone to significant distortion. In order to do this, they had students
recall their reactions to the Challenger disaster – an accident on January 28, 1986 in which a
space shuttle exploded in space, live on television. The event was being watched around the
world. One of the most celebrated members of the crew was a school-teacher named Christa
McAuliffe.
Aim
To determine whether flashbulb memories are susceptible to distortion.
Procedure
On the morning after the Challenger disaster – less than 24 hours after the event - 106 Emory
University students in an introductory psychology course were given a questionnaire at the end
of the class. They were asked to write a description of how they heard the news. On the back of
the questionnaire was a set of questions:
• What time was it?

• How did you hear about it?
• Where were you?
• What were you doing?
• Who told you?
• Who else was there?
• How did you feel about it?*
• How did the person who told you seem to feel about it?*
• What did you do afterward?
2 ½ years later they were given the questionnaire again. 44 of the original students - 30 women
and 14 men - were now seniors at the university. They were not told the purpose of the study
until they arrived. They were given the original questionnaire to fill in again. This time they were
also asked for each response to rate how confident they were of the accuracy of their memory on
a scale from 1 (just guessing) to 5 (absolutely certain).
98
They were also asked if they had filled out a questionnaire on this subject before. Incredibly,
only 11 participants or 25% said yes!
Seeing that there were discrepancies, semi-structured interviews were carried out a few months
later in order to determine if the participants would repeat what they had written a few months
earlier or revert to the original memory. The interviews were taped and transcribed. The
interviewer presented a prepared retrieval cue with the hope of prompting the original memories.
Participants whose 1988 recall had been far off the mark were given a cue based on their original
records; for example, the interviewer might ask “Is it possible that you already knew about the
explosion before seeing it on television?”
At the end of the interview the participants were shown their original 1986 reports in their own
handwriting.
Results
The researchers were surprised to see the extent of the discrepancies between the original
questionnaire and the follow-up 2 ½ years later. Here is a typical example:
24 hours after the accident: I was in my religion class and some people walked in and
started talking about it. I didn’t know any details except that it had exploded and the
schoolteacher’s students had all been watching which I thought was so sad. Then after
class I went to my room and watched the TV program talking about it and I got all the
details from that.
2.5 years later: When I first heard about the explosion I was sitting I my freshman dorm
room with my roommate and we were watching TV. It came on a news flash and we were
both totally shocked. I was really upset and I went upstairs to talk to a friend of mine and
then I called my parents.
In order to come up with a “score,” the researchers looked at the seven “content” questions – that
is, not the two that are about emotion (see asterisks above) – and gave a point if they matched the
original response. The maximum total response was then seven.
99
The mean score was 2.95/7.0. Eleven participants scored 0. Twenty-two of them scored 2 or less.
Only three participants scored the maximum score of 7. What is interesting is that in spite of the
lack of accuracy, the participants demonstrated a high level of confidence. The average level of
confidence for the questions was 4.17.
100
For the most part, participants told the same story in the spring as in the fall, when they were
interviewed. Additional cues had little effect on accuracy. When presented with the original
questionnaire, participants were surprised and could not account for the discrepancies.
Evaluation
The study was a case study. The strength of this method is that it was both longitudinal and
prospective. There was also method triangulation - both questionnaires and interviews were
used. The limitation is that it cannot be replicated. In addition, there was participant attrition -
that is, participants who dropped out of the study over time.
The study has high ecological validity. The researcher did not manipulate any variables and the
study was not done under highly controlled conditions.
The study was naturalistic. Although this is good for ecological validity, it is difficult to
eliminate the role of confounding variables. There was no control over the participants'
behaviour between the first questionnaire and the second. We have no idea how often this
memory was discussed or how often the participants were exposed to media about the event.
101
It is possible that the confidence levels were higher than they should have been as a result of
demand characteristics - that is, since the participants were asked to verify their level of
confidence, they could have increased their ratings to please the researcher or avoid social
disapproval for claiming not remember an important day in their country's history.
As mentioned in the background section above, there are several studies of different events - like
September 11th - which seem to have the same results. This demonstrates the transferability of
the findings of this study to other situations.
References
Neisser, U. & Harsch, N. (1992). Phantom flashbulbs: False recollections of hearing the news
about Challenger. In E. Winograd & U. Neisser (Eds.), Affect and accuracy in recall: Studies of
"flashbulb memories" , pp. 9-31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pezdek, K. (2003). Event memory and autobiographical memory for the events of September 11,
2001. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 1033–1045.
Talarico, J. M. & Rubin, D. C. (2003). "Confidence, not consistency, characterizes flashbulb

memories", Psychological Science, 14(5), 455-461.
102
10. Sharot et al (2007)
Sharot et al (2007) studied the biological basis of

flashbulb memory. You can use this study for the following content for the biological approach:
Techniques for studying the brain and behaviour.
Localization of function.
And for the cognitive approach:
The original study is available here. http://www.pnas.org/content/104/1/389.full.pdf
Aim
To determine the potential role of biological factors on flashbulb memories.
Procedure
This case study was conducted three years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in Manhattan. The
sample was made up of 24 participants who were in New York City on that day. Participants
were put into an fMRI. While in the scanner, they were presented with word cues on a screen.
The list of words is listed in the chart below. In addition, the word "Summer" or "September"
was projected along with this word in order to have the participant link the word to either
summer holidays or to the events of 9-11. Participants’ brain activity was observed while they
recalled the event. The memories of personal events from the summer served as a baseline of
brain activity for evaluating the nature of 9/11 memories.
103
hands reading sleep circle reporter
weather classes evening news breakfast drink
lunch New York City evening radio teacher
street corner homework writing building greed
work email exam food quiet
morning noise walking transportation mail
boredom red dream thought afternoon
clothes cool phone photograph mom
office weekday airplane sibling music
hearing weekend paper coffee moral
sidewalk shopping dad significant other stair
money university hot family friend
After the brain scanning session, participants were asked to rate their memories for vividness,
detail, confidence in accuracy and arousal. Participants were also asked to write a description of
their personal memories. Only half of the participants actually reported having what would be
called "flashbulb memories" of the event - that is, a greater sense of detail and a strong
confidence in the accuracy of the memory. Those that did report having flashbulb memories also
reported that they were closer to the World Trade Centre on the day of the terrorist attack.
Participants closer to the World Trade Centre also included more specific details in their written
memories.
Results
Sharot and her team found that the activation of the amygdala for the participants who were
downtown was higher when they recalled memories of the terrorist attack than when they
recalled events from the preceding summer, whereas those participants who were further away
from the event had equal levels of response in the amygdala when recalling both events. The
strength of amygdala activation at retrieval was shown to correlate with flashbulb memories.
These results suggest that close personal experience may be critical in engaging the neural
mechanisms that produce the vivid memories characteristic of flashbulb memory.
104
Evaluation
The study is correlational in nature and does not establish a cause and effect relationship.
The environment of the fMRI and the task that the participants are asked to do is highly artificial
- and thus low in ecological validity. However, because of the nature of the task, demand
characteristics are not really possible.
Although the study demonstrates the role of the amygdala as a result of proximity to the event, it
does not explain why some people have vivid memories after seeing the events on television or
the Internet.
The sample size is small and culturally biased. Research indicates that individualistic cultures are
more likely to have flashbulb memories than collectivistic cultures. This makes the findings
difficult to generalize.
As this study is a case study, it is difficult to replicate. However, there are several similar
experiences - for example, the 2015 earthquake in Nepal or the 2011 tsunami in Japan - which
could be studied to determine whether the results are transferable.
105
11. Yuille & Cutshall (1986)
Yuille & Cutshall (1986) carried out a study to demonstrate the

reliability of memory which challenged the findings of Loftus & Palmer (1974). You can use
this study for the following content in the cognitive approach:
The abstract of the original study is available here. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-22197-

001
Aim
To study whether leading questions would affect memory of eyewitnesses at a real

crime scene.
Procedure
The crime scene was in Vancouver. A thief entered a gun shop and tied up the owner
before stealing money and guns from the shop. The owner freed himself, and thinking
that the thief had escaped, went outside the shop. But the thief was still there and shot
him twice. Police had been called and there was gunfire - and the thief was eventually
killed. As the incident took place in front of the shop, there were eyewitnesses - 21 were
interviewed by the police.
The researchers chose this incident to study because there were enough witness and
there was forensic evidence available to confirm the stories of the eyewitnesses.
The researchers contacted the eyewitnesses four months after the event. 13 of the
eyewitnesses agreed to be interviewed as part of a study. They gave their account of
the incident, and then they were asked questions. Two leading questions were used.
Half the group was asked if they saw a broken headlight on the getaway car. The other
106
half was asked if they saw a yellow panel on the car (the panel was actually blue). They
were also asked to rate their stress on the day of the event on a seven point scale.
Results
It was found that eyewitnesses were actually very reliable. They recalled a large amount
of accurate detail that could be confirmed by the original police reports. They also did
not make errors as a result of the leading questions. 10 out of 13 of them said there was no
broken headlight or yellow quarter panel, or that they had not noticed those particular details.
The researchers found that the accuracy of the witnesses compared to the original policy reports
was between 79% and 84%. It appears that this research contradicts the study by Loftus &
Palmer (1974). It could be that the lack of emotional response to the video that was shown in
their study played a key role in the influence of the leading questions. The witnesses reported
that they didn't remember feeling afraid during the incident, but they did report having an
"adrenaline rush."
Evaluation
The study was a field study and thus has very strong ecological validity.
There was archival evidence (police records of the original testimonies) to confirm the accuracy
of the memories.
The study is not replicable and also not generalizable since it was a one-off incident. There was
no control of variables, so it is difficult to know the level of rehearsal that was used by the
different eyewitnesses. It could be that those who agreed to be in the study had spent the most
time thinking and reading about the case.
Because the eyewitnesses' safety was threatened, it could be that this is a case of flashbulb
memory, which would mean that it cannot be directly compared to Loftus's original research.
There was an attempt at deceiving the participants. As consent was given by all participants, the
idea that undue stress or harm would be caused by being asked to recall the incident is
unfounded.
The quantification of the qualitative responses from the participants is problematic and may be
open to researcher bias.
107
108

Cognitive Approach: Memory, Decision-Making, and Reliability

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cognitive Approach: Memory, Decision-Making, and Reliability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cognitive approach

• Ethical considerations related to research studies in the cognitive approach to studying

Reliability of cognitive processes

Emotion and cognition

HL extension: Cognitive processing in a digital world

• The influence of digital technology on cognitive processes and human interaction.

• Digital Nation https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/digitalnation/

Unit planning: Cognitive

The IB Psychology course looks at behaviour through three different

Chapter 3.2 The reliability of cognitive processes

HL Extension: Cognitive processing in the digital world

• The effect of technology on memory processing

The following section includes annotated samples of

Potential exam questions: Generic

Potential exam questions: Cognitive processes

• Explain one study related to schema theory.

• Evaluate Schema theory.

Potential exam questions: Reliability of cognitive processes

• Explain one study of reconstructive memory.

• Evaluate research on reconstructive memory.

Potential exam questions: Emotion and cognition

Potential exam questions: Cognitive processing in the digital world

• Evaluate research on the influence of digital technology on cognitive processing.

1. Mental representations guide our behaviour.

3. Humans are information processors.

4. The mind, although it cannot be directly observed, can be studied scientifically.

When people are thinking about how best to solve a mathematical

One assumption of the cognitive approach is that we are

ATL: Conceptual understanding

1. Failing to invest money in a retirement plan.

ATL: Thinking critically

Now please watch the following video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I43hq13MnYM

When expert football players like Manchester United's Zlatan

Schema and scripts - definitions of terms

Schema theory and memory

In cognitive psychology, schema are one of building blocks of many

Consider the following questions:

2. How important is it to be able to see something to know that it is true?

A second technique used by Bartlett was repeated reproduction. In repeated reproduction a

Research in psychology: Bartlett (1932)

The aim of Bartlett's classic study was to investigate how memory of

• Encoding: transforming sensory information into memory.

Research in psychology: Brewer and Treyens (1981)

Brewer and Treyens wanted to study the role of schema in the

Thinking critically about research

4. What are some ethical concerns with his study?

Evaluation of schema theory

TEACUP: Schema Theory

The concept of memory refers to the process by which information is

This is a good example of the problem of using artificial procedures in laboratory

Evidence in support of the model

Evaluation of the multi-store model of memory

Strengths and limitations of the Multi Store Model

Limitations of the MSM

The central executive

The phonological loop (verbal STM)

Landry and Bartling (2011) conducted an experiment using articulatory

The visuospatial sketchpad

The episodic buffer

Evaluation of the Working Memory Model

Summary of strengths and limitations of the Working Memory Model

• The model is supported by considerable experimental evidence.

Thinking and decision making