Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
SFU (10,000)
PSYC (1,000)
Lecture 3

PSYC 260 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Representativeness Heuristic, Operationalization

Course Code
PSYC 260
Lisa Droogendyk

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 3 pages of the document.
Last week’s review:
When would you use a correlational design if it cannot prove causation?
-Good first step
-Sometimes experimentation is not possible
-Look at how being older or younger affects the size of your social group
-Info would be interesting, even though not causation
-p.g 63 - study looked at how people respond to discriminatory situations - how was
“discriminatory situations” operationalized?
-How was discrimination measured?
-Why is it not possible for a correlation to be exactly -1,+1, or 0?
-Because it is very unlikely for things to be PERFECTLY matched
I found schemas affecting memory confusing as I had previously thought that when something
occurs that is inconsistent with a schema, it is remembered because it is unexpected and
-When we encounter info against our schemas, we are still motivated to keep our schemas
Can schemas change?
-Yes, but not easily
Week 3
Heuristics: Mental shortcuts people use to make judgements quickly and efficiently
Availability Heuristic
-What is more common?
-Dying from a shark, or falling airplane parts
-Airplane, even though most think shark
Because vivid examples of deadly shark attacks easily come to mind
-Make judgements based on how easily something comes to mind
-We assume easy recall = more common
Representativeness heuristic
-Estimate the likelihood of an event by comparing it to an existing prototype that already exists
in our minds
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version