Textbook Notes (368,418)
Canada (161,876)
Psychology (3,337)
PSYC 2650 (228)
Baron (12)
Chapter 1

Chapter 1 - The Science of the Mind.doc

11 Pages
57 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC 2650
Professor
Baron
Semester
Winter

Description
Cog Psych Ch1 The Science of the Mind -depends on our cognition what we know, what we remember, and how we think. - ex someone's ability to cope with grief depends on how memory functions. - ex role of memory in shaping someone's self-image-and hence their self-esteem -claims can be made for virtually every conversation you participate in, and every social interaction you witness: In each of these settings, ones ability to understand ones world depends critically on knowledge you bring to the situation 1.1Scope of Cognitive Psychology -When cognitive psychology was first launched, generally understood ascientific study of knowledge -conception of field led immediately to series of questions: How is knowledge acquired? How is knowledge retained so that it's available when needed? How is knowledge used-as a basis for action, or as a basis for generating further knowledge? -questions catalogued risk a misunderstanding, make it sound like cognitive psychology is concerned only with our functioning as intellectuals -relevance of cognitive psychology far broader -thanks to fact huge range of our actions, thoughts, and feelings all depend onknowledge. - ex look at study memory and ask: When we investigate how memory functions, what exactly we are investigating:' Or, what tasks rely on memory: -memory for what you have learned during term. Likewise, rely on memory when at supermarket and trying to remember a recipe so you can buy ingredients. -rely on memory when reminiscing about childhood. But what else draws on memory:' -Consider simple story (adapted from Charniak, 1972): -Betsy wanted to bring Jacob a present. She shook her piggy bank. It made no sound. She went to look for her mother. -four-sentence tale easy to understand, only because you provided some important bits of background yourself. -ex, weren't at all puzzled, reading the story, about why Betsy was interested in her piggy bank; - weren't puzzled, about why story's first sentence led naturally to the second. - because already knew (a) the things one gives as presents often things bought for occasion (rather than things already owned), (b) buying things requires money, (c) money is stored in piggy banks. -Without these facts, would have been bewildered about why a desire to give a gift would lead someone to her piggy bank. -Likewise, immediately understood why Betsyshook her piggy bank. -understood she was trying to determine its contents. -knew this only because already understood (d) children don't keep track of how much money is in their bank, (e) one cannot simply look into the bank to learn its contents. - Without these facts, Betsy's shaking of the bank would make no sense. -Similarly, understood what it meant bank made no sound. -because you know (f) that it's usually coins (not bills) kept in piggy banks, (g) coins make noise when shaken. - If didn't know these facts, might have interpreted bank's silence, when shaken, as good news, indicating bank filled of $20 bills- -inference would have led to very different expectation for how the story would unfold from there. -clearly suggests , in general, our understanding of stories or ordinary conversations depends on memory-depends on drawing key bits of information from our storehouse of knowledge. \ -Chapter 6, will consider various cases of clinical amnesia-cases which someone, because of brain damage, lost ability to remember certain materials. -cases are fascinating at many levels, including fact they provide us with key insights into what memory is for: Without memory, what is disrupted -well-studied amnesia patient - man identified as H.M.; - memory loss unanticipated by-product of brain surgery intended to control his epilepsy, loss was quite profound. -H.M. had no trouble remembering events prior to surgery, but seemed completely unable to recall any event that occurred after his operation. -If asked who president is, or about recent events, reported facts and events current at time of surgery. - If asked questions about last week, or hour ago, recalled nothing. -memory loss, had massive consequences for H.M:s life some of consequences perhaps surprising. -ex had an uncle of whom very fond, H.M. often asked about his uncle: ~ -uncle died sometime after H.M:s surgery -information came as horrible shock, triggering enormous grief, but because of amnesia, H.M. soon forgot about it. - he later asked about his uncle again and was informed of his passing; his grief was just as intense as when he was initially told -With no memory, no opportunity to live w/ news, adjust to it. his grief could not subside. Without memory, H.M. had no way to come to terms with his uncle's death. -different glimpse of memory function comes from H.M:s poignant comments about his state and about "who he is:' -Each of us has a conception of who we are, of what sort of person we are. -conception supported by numerous memories: We know whether we're deserving of praise for our good deeds or blame for our transgressions because we remember our good deeds and our transgressions. -We know whether we've kept promises or achieved goals because, again, we have relevant memories. -Not true for people who suffer from amnesia -H.M. sometimes commented, he didn't know who he was. - didn't know if he should be proud of his accomplishments or ashamed of his crimes; - he didn't know if he'd been clever or stupid, honorable or dishonest, industrious or lazy. -without a memory, there is no self. -What is the scope of cognitive psychology -field sometimes defined as scientific study of the acquisition, retention, and use of knowledge. - topics relevant toan extraordinarily broad range of concerns. - self-concept, it seems, depends on knowledge (in particular, on our episodic knowledge). -emotional adjustments to the world, rely on our memories. -ability to understand a story we've read, or a conversation, or, presumably, any of our experiences, depends on our supplementing that experience with some knowledge. 1.2A Brief History -modern form, cognitive psychology is roughly 50 years old. -Despite relative youth, cognitive psychology has enormous impact- -many speak of the "cognitive revolution" within psychology. - "revolution;' which took place across 1950s and 1960s, represented striking change in style of research and theorizing employed by most psychologists. - new style intended initially for studying problems : memory, decision making, and so on. -new styles soon exported to other domains provided important insights in these domains. -cognitive revolution changed intellectual map of our field. The Years of Introspection - need some historical context. -late 19th century, scholars-notably Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) and his student Edward Bradford Titchener (1867-1927) -launched new enterprise of research psychology, defining their field as an endeavor separate from philosophy or biology. -Wundt's and Titchener's view, psychology needed to be concerned largely with study of conscious mental events-our feelings, thoughts, perceptions, and recollections. -how should these events be studied? -early researchers started w/ fact - there is no way for you to experience my thoughts, or I yours. -only person who can experience or observe your thoughts is you. -concluded = only way to study thoughts is for each of us to introspect, or "look within;' to observe and record content of our own mental lives and sequence of our own experiences. -Wundt and Titchener insisted introspection could not be casual. - introspectors had to be meticulously trained: - given a vocabulary to describe what they observed; trained to be as careful and complete as possible; trained simply to report on their experiences, w/ minimum of interpretation. -style of research enormously influential for several years, but psychologists gradually became disenchanted with it , easy to see why. -one concern, early investigators soon forced to acknowledge some thoughts are unconscious -meant introspection inevitably limited as research tool. -follows from fact introspection, by nature, is study of conscious experiences, tells us nothing about unconscious events. - now know unconscious thought plays huge part in our mental lives. -ex what is your phone number? likely moment you read question, number "popped" into thoughts w/o any effort, noticeable steps, or strategies on your part. -theres good reason to think that this simple bit of remembering requires a complex series of steps (see, for example, Chapter 8). -steps take place outside your awareness, if we rely on introspection as means of studying mental events, no way of examining these processes. - other problems with introspection: In order for any science to proceed, must be some way of testing its claims; -otherwise, no way of separating correct assertions from false ones, accurate descriptions of the world from fictions. - science needs way of resolving disagreements: -If you claim Earth has one moon, and I insist it has two, need some way of determining who is right. -Otherwise, no way of locating fact of the matter, so our "science" will become a matter of opinion, not fact. -With introspection, testability of claims often unattainable. -imagine I insist my headaches worse than yours. - How could we ever test claim? -might be true that I describe headaches in extreme terms: talk about "unbelievable, agonizing, excruciating" headaches. - might simply mean one is inclined toward extravagant descriptions; might reflect my verbal style, not my headaches. -Similarly, might be true I need bed rest whenever one of my headaches strikes. -Does that mean my headaches truly intolerable? - might mean instead that I am self-indulgent and rest even in face of mild pain. -Perhaps headaches are identical, but you're stoic about yours and I'm not. -How should we test claims about my headaches? -needed is some means of directly comparing headaches , would require transplanting one of my headaches into your experience, or vice versa. -Then one could make appropriate comparison. -no way to do this leaving one unable to determine if headache reports are exaggerated or not, distorted or accurate. -We're left with no access to the objective facts. -only information about headaches : what comes through filter of description, no way to know how (or whether) that filter is coloring the evidence. -For purposes of science, not acceptable. -science needs objective observations, observations -observations that aren't dependent on a particular point of view or particular descriptive style. -not enough to consider "the world as one person sees it:' -. In scientific discourse, usually achieve objectivity by making sure all facts are in plain view, so one can inspect my evidence, and I yours. -that way, we can be certain neither of us distorting or misreporting or exaggerating the facts. -And that is precisely what we cannot do with introspection 1.3 The Years of Behaviorism - organism's behaviors are observable in the right way: -can watch ones actions, and so can anyone appropriately positioned -data concerned with behavior are objective data, and so grist for scientific mill. -stimuli in the world same "objective" category: measurable, recordable, physical events -In addition, can arrange to record stimuli one experiences day after day after day and behaviors ones produce each day. - means one can record how pattern of behaviors changes with passage of time and accumulation of experience. -Thus, ones learning history can be objectively recorded and scientifically studied. -contrast, ones beliefs, wishes, goals, and expectations : all things that cannot be directly observed, therefore not objectively recorded. -need to rule out discussion of these "mentalistic" notions. -These studied only via introspection (or so it was claimed), and introspection as suggested, worthless as scientific tool. -Hence, scientific psychology needs to avoid invisible internal processes or events. - this perspective led researchers to behaviorist movement, dominated psychology in America for roughly first half of 20th -movement in many ways a success , uncovered range of broad principles concerned w/ how behavior changes in response to different configurations of stimuli (including those stimuli we call "rewards" and "punishments"). -Many principles remain in place within contemporary psychology, provide base for important enterprise called "learning theory;' as well range of practical applications. -late 1950s, psychologists convinced great deal of one's behavior could not be explained in ways behaviorists claimed- could not be explained only with reference to objective, overt events (such as stimuli and responses). -reason= we can easily show the way people act, things that they say, way that they feel, guided not by objective situation itself, but by how they understand or interpret the situation. - if we follow the behaviorists' instruction, focus only on objective situation, regularly misunderstand why people acting as they are , make wrong predictions about how they will behave in the future. - behaviorists' perspective demands that we not talk about mental entities like beliefs, memories, etc , - no way to study these entities directly, so no way to study them scientifically. -subjective entities play pivotal role in guiding behavior, must consider these entities if want to understand behavior! -Evidence pertinent to assertions threaded throughout chapters of text - find it necessary to mention people's perceptions and strategies and understanding, as we strive to explain why (and how) they perform various tasks , accomplish various goals - example of pattern: Imagine presenting the "Betsy and Jacob" story to people , then ask various questions - responses will reflect understanding of the story, which depends on far more than physical stimulus- 29 syllables of story itself - If we wanted to predict responses, need to refer to stimulus (the story itself) and also persons' knowledge and understanding of, and contribution to, this stimulus. -different example :you sit in a dining hall. A friend produces this physical stimulus: "Pass the salt, please:' -immediately produce a bit of salt-passing behavior. -In this exchange, there is a physical stimulus (the words uttered) and easily defined response (passing of the salt), -simple event seems fine from behaviorists' perspective: elements out in the open, for all to observe, easily objectively recorded. - note things would have proceeded in same way if friend offered a different stimulus. "Could I have the sale" would have done the trick. - science of salt-passing behavior. When is this behavior produced? Since just observed the behavior is evoked by all of these different stimuli, surely want toask: What do these stimuli have in common? -If we can answer question, well on way to understanding why all of these stimuli have same effect. -Iffocus is entirely on the observable, objective aspects of stimuli, they actually have little in common. -many circumstances, similar sounds would not lead to salt passing behavior. ex-Imagine friend says, "Salt the pass;' or "Sass the palt:' - acoustically similar to "Pass the salt" but wouldn't have the same impact. ex-"She has only a small part in the play. All she gets to say is, 'Pass the salt, please:" -In this case, exactly the right syllables uttered, but you wouldn't pass the salt in response. -science of salt-passing won't get very far if insist on talking only about physical stimulus. -Stimuli physically different from each other ("Salt, please" and the bit about the ions) have similar effects. -Stimuli physically similar to each other ("Pass the salt" and "Sass the palt") have different effects. -Physical similarity, plainly not what unites various stimuli that evoke salt-passing. -clear that various stimuli that evoke salt-passing do have something in common with each other: -They all mean the same thing. -Sometimes meaning derives easily from words themselves ("Please pass the salt"). - other cases, meaning depends on certain pragmatic rules. - (ex, pragmatically understand question "Could you pass the salt not question about arm strength, although, interpreted literally, it might be understood that way.) - all cases, seems plain to predict behavior in dining hall, we need to ask what these stimuli mean to you. -extraordinarily simple point, but it is a point, echoed by countless examples indicates impossibility of a complete behaviorist psychology. 1.4 The Roots of the Cognitive Revolution -seem to be nearing an impasse: If we wish to explain or predict behavior, need to make reference to mental world-world of perceptions, understandings, and intentions. -how people act shaped by how they perceive the situation, how they understand the stimuli - how should one study the mental world:' - need to talk about mental world if we hope to explain behavior. -the only direct means for studying mental world turns out to be unworkable. -solution actually suggested many years ago, by philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). -Kant's transcendental method, one begins with observable facts , then works backward from these observations. -In essence, one asks: How could these observations have come about:' What must the underlying causes be that led to these effects? -method, sometimes called "inference to best explanation;' at heart of most modern science. - ex Physicists routinely use this method to study objects or events that cannot be observed directly. -no physicist ever observed an electron, not stopped physicists from learning a great deal about electrons. -Even though electrons themselves not observable, their presence often leads to observable results -inessence, visible effectsfrom an invisible cause. -electrons cause observable tracks in cloud chambers, produce momentary fluctuations in a magnetic field. - use observations same way a police detective uses clues-asking what the "crime" must have been like if it left this and that clue. - ( size 11 footprint:' suggest what size feet the criminal has, even though no one observed his feet. smell of tobacco smoke suggests criminal was a smoker etc .) -physicists observe clues electrons leave behind, from this information form hypotheses about what exactly electrons must be like, in order to have produced these specific effects. -physicists (and other scientists) have huge advantage over a police detective; indeed, this is crucial for the distinction between science and police work: -If a police detective has insufficient evidence, can't arrange for crime to happen again, so that more evidence will be produced. - scientists have this option; can arrange for new experiments, with new measures. -can set stage in advance, to maximize likelihood the "culprit" (in our example, the electron) will leave useful clues behind. -ex add new measuring devices to situation, or place various obstacles in electron's path. - scientist can gather more and more data, including data crucial for testing specific predictions of a
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 2650

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit