Introduction
• Main assumptions of the cognitive approach:
o behaviour and emotions can be explained in terms of the role of cognitive processes
such as attention, language, thinking and memory
o similarities and differences between people can be understood in terms of individual
patterns of cognition
Andrade (Doodling)
Title: What Does Doodling Do?
Year: 2010
Psychology being investigated:
• People have been known to daydream frequently when presented with something boring.
Background
• Before this study, it was unknown whether doodling impairs attention processes by removing
resources from the primary attention task or aids concentration towards the primary task,
additionally maintaining arousal.
• It is common in research on attention to pose the participants with dual tasks to monitor
performance and then see which cognitive processes are needed to complete these tasks.
Aim
• To test whether doodling aided information processing when performing a tedious task.
Procedure
• Research Method: Laboratory Experiment
• Experimental Design: Independent Groups
• IV: Doodling or Non-doodling (Control) Group
• DV: Mean correct recall, false alarms and memory scores
• Sample: 40 members of the MRC Applied Psychology Unit participant panel at the University
of Plymouth (UK). They were aged 18-55 and paid for participating. Participants were
assigned randomly to the control (20 - 18 females and 2 males) or doodling (20 - 17 females
and 3 males) group.
• Sampling Technique: Opportunity Sampling (they had volunteered for a different study and
were then recruited immediately after participating in that unrelated study)
• The researcher recorded a mock telephone message using a cassette recorder.
• A somewhat monotonous voice was used.
• It was 2.5 minutes long, with an average speaking rate of 227 words per minute
• The recording was being played at a comfortable volume for the participant to listen to.
• The script included the names of 8 people who would be attending a party alongside the
names of 3 people and 1 cat who would not attend. 8 place names were also mentioned.
• Participants were recruited after finishing an unrelated experiment for another researcher
and asked if they would mind spending another 5 minutes helping with research.
• The intention was to enhance the boredom of the task by testing people who were already
thinking about going home.
• The participants were randomly assigned to the two conditions (doodling or control)
• Participants were tested individually in a quiet and visually dull room.
• They were asked to note down the names of all people attending the party and nothing else.
They were also told they did not need to remember anything.
• Participants in the control condition were given a piece of lined paper and a pencil.
• Participants in the doodling group were given a piece of A4 paper with alternating rows of 10
squares and circles, 1 cm in diameter, with a 4.5 cm margin on the left-hand side where they
could write any target information.
• The doodling group was asked to shade the shapes
• They were told that “it does not matter how neatly or quickly you do this - it is just
something to help relieve the boredom.”
• Participants listened to the tape for 2.5 minutes and wrote down the information as directed.
• As soon as the recording finished, the researcher collected the sheets and talked to the
participant for a minute.
• This conversation included a debriefing and an apology for misleading them about the
memory test. The participants were asked if they suspected a memory test.
• Half the participants recalled the names of people, then places and the other half the places,
then names. (Counterbalancing)
Results
• Participants in the doodling group shaded a mean of 36.3 shapes (range 3-110). One
participant did not doodle and was replaced
• None of the participants in the control group doodled.
• 3 participants in the doodling group and 4 in the control group suspected a memory test.
However, none of them claimed they actively tried to remember the information for the test.
• If a response indicated a plausible mishearing, it was scored as correct.
• New names not similar to the ones given, names of people who could not attend, or
responses such as “sister”, which are relational words, were scored as false alarms.
• MONITORING PERFORMANCE SCORE = number of correct names - number of false alarms
• 15 Participants in the doodling group and 9 Participants in the control group scored the
maximum score.
• Monitoring performance was significantly higher in the doodling condition (mean = 7.7; SD =
0.6) compared with the control condition (mean = 6.9; SD = 1.3)
• Each participant generated a name score and a place score. The monitoring and recall phases
had to be the same if a plausible mishearing was presented.
• Those in doodling condition recalled a mean of 7.5 pieces of correct information compared
to the control group (5.8).
• Monitored names were recalled more than places.
• The recall was significantly better for those in doodling condition
• Memory scores were entered into a 2 (doodling, control) and 2 (names, places) mixed
measures ANOVA, which confirmed that the monitored names were recalled better than the
incidental places.
• Removing data from participants who had suspected a test were removed from the analysis,
there was still a significant difference (p=0.01)
Conclusions
• Participants who performed a shape-shading task concentrated better on a mock telephone
message than those who listened with no concurrent task.
• It is unclear whether doodling led to better recall because doodlers noticed more of the
target information (better attention) or whether it aided memory recall by encouraging
deeper processing of the message (better memory).
Ethical Issues
• Deception about the memory test
• Debriefing
• Lack of protection from harm- were given an unforeseen test on place names, which can
cause distress if they cannot remember the places.
• Strengths
o Standardized procedure - easy to replicate for reliability
o Many controls - more confident about the causal relationship
Weaknesses
• Low Generalisability: The sample was from a volunteer participant panel. Therefore, they
may be qualitatively different, and the results may not reflect the population.
• Participant Variables might have affected the findings
• Low mundane realism
• Low ecological validity
• It lacks any measure of daydreaming. A replication that included thought probes during the
telephone message or retrospective self-report of daydreaming would test whether the
effect of doodling on memory occurred via effects on daydreaming.
• Future neuroimaging studies could test the hypothesis that doodling selectively reduces
cortical activation associated with daydreaming
Issues and Debates
• Application: Useful for students while revising or in class and improves learning by
simultaneously using visuospatial and auditory tasks, leading to better information
processing.
• Individual and Situational Explanation: This study supports both. Individual - participants
may have used a similar strategy before or have a personality type that requires stimulation
when processing information.
• Situational: the process of doodling could have caused the improvement in recall.
Baron-Cohen et al. (Eyes Test)
Title: The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test Revised Version: A Study with Normal Adults and
Adults with Asperger Syndrome or High-functioning Autism
Year: 2001
Psychology being investigated:
• The main idea of the eye test was to investigate the theory of mind.
• This is the ability to attribute mental states to oneself or another person, which is how we
make sense of or predict another person’s behaviour.
• The notion is that many autistic individuals do not understand that other people have their
plans, thoughts, and points of view.
• It appears that they have difficulty understanding other people's beliefs, attitudes, and
emotions.
Background
• In 1997, the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test was developed to assess the theory of
mind. This appeared to discriminate between adults with Asperger syndrome (AS) or high-
functioning autistic (HFA) adults and control adults.
• The two former groups scored significantly worse. However, the researchers were not happy
with elements of the original study and wanted to “upgrade” their measures to make it
better.
Aims
• To test a group of adults with AS or HFA on the revised version of the eyes test. This was to
check if the deficits in this group found in the original study could be replicated.
• To test if, in a sample of normal adults, an inverse (negative) correlation would be found
between performance on the (revised) Eyes Test and the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ).
• To test whether females scored better on the Eyes Test than males.
Procedure
Topic Original problems New design
elements
Choice Forced choice between two responses meant that only a narrow range of 17-25 Forced choice
correct responses out of 25 would be statistically above chance. remained, but four
response options
remained.
This meant that the range of scores for which the test could reveal individual There were 36 pairs
differences is only 9, which is too narrow. of eyes used,
giving a range of 13-
36 correct
responses.
This meant that
individual
differences
could be examined
better in terms
of statistics.
Example When the first version was given to parents of children with AS, they scored
below the general population. However, they scored at a similar level with the
AS or HFA adults even though they did not have the condition.
This highlights that the test has a too narrow range of scores to distinguish
between someone with the “lesser variant” or the “broader phenotype” and
someone with the condition itself.
Mental state There were both basic and complex mental states, and so contained some In this version, only complex
mental
items that were easy and which therefore risked producing ceiling effects.
states were used to make
the
task much more challenging,
and in this way, increasing
the
likelihood of obtaining a
greater
range of performance in a
random
sample of adults.
Ease of solving Some pairs of eyes could be solved easily by looking at the gaze direction of the They were excluded
face. in
the revised version.
Topic Original problems New design
elements
Gender More female eye pairs than males. An equal number
was used.
This allowed a
control
condition - judging
the
gender from the
eyes.
Ease of guessing Target word and foil were always semantic opposite making it too easy to Increased the level of
guess. difficulty by ensuring
that the foil words had
the same emotional
valance as the target
word.
Ease of There may have been comprehension problems that might have contributed to A glossary with all
comprehension an individual’s score. terms was
included, which
was available
for the P’s to use
at all times.
• Research Method: Natural Experiment (as the IV is naturally occurring) and Questionnaire
• Experimental Design: Independent Groups
• IV: Four groups of participants (naturally occurring)
• DV: Score on Eyes Test and Autism Spectrum Quotient
• Sample: Group 1: 15 male adults with AS or HFA. Recruited via adverts in the UK National
Autistic Society Magazine or equivalent support groups. They spanned an equivalent range
of socioeconomic classes and educational levels, as seen in group 2.
Group 2: 122 normal adults drawn from the adult community and educational classes in Exeter or
from public library users in Cambridge. They had a broad range of occupations and educational
levels.
Group 3: 103 normal adult students (53 male; 50 female) studying for undergraduate degrees at
Cambridge University (71 in sciences, 32 in other subjects). This group is not representative of the
general population and can be considered to have a high IQ.
Group 4: Randomly selected 14 adults from the general population who were matched for their IQ
with group 1.
• Initially, the first two authors of this study chose the “correct” word and the “foil”.
• They were then piloted on 8 judges (4 m 4 f)
• For the correct word and its foil to be used, 5 out of 8 had to agree with the choice.
• No more than 2 judges should pick the foil
• Participants tested individually in a quiet room in Cambridge or Exeter.
• Participants in the AS/HFA group were asked to judge the gender of each eye pair
additionally.
• Groups 1, 3 and 4 completed a questionnaire to measure their AQ.
• Participants were asked to read through the glossary and ask if they were unsure of any
word. They were also reassured that they could refer to the glossary anytime.
• Sampling Technique: Opportunity and Volunteer Sampling
Results
• Group 1 performed significantly worse on eyes test than the other groups.
• Females scored higher than males on the eyes test, although this result wasn’t very
significant.
• Group 1 scored higher on AQ test than group 3 and 4 participants.
• No correlation between Eyes Test score and IQ
• Negative correlation between Eyes Test and AQ
• Conclusion
o Revised eyes test was successful in being a more sensitive test for social intelligence
of adults. AQ test and Eyes Test showed a significant negative correlation as
hypothesized showing that both can be used as tests for severity of autistic traits.
Strengths
• High internal validity due to changes made to the Eyes test- 4 options, equal female and male
eye pairs shown, glossary provided to all participants.
• Standardized procedure- images all of same size, black and white, 4 options with three foils
Weakness
• Low ecological validity: in real life setting, eyes are not static and body language hints can
help guess the emotional state of people.
• Low generalizability- only 15 males used in ASD group so not generalizable to females with
ASD. In student comparison group, all students were from a highly selective university
(Cambridge university) which is not representative of intellect of all regular students.
Ethics: if they were not able to guess the emotions, it might cause distress or embarrassment leading
to low self-esteem and psychological harm.
Issues and Debates
• Application: Plan support lessons or therapy for students or people with AS/HFA
• Reductionist: doesn’t take into account the full picture of understanding emotions
Pozzulo et al. (Line-Ups)
Title: The Culprit in target-absent Lineups: Understanding Young Children’s False Positive Responding
Year: 2011
Psychology being investigated:
• Memories can be distorted by other information known as ‘Post-event information’ that we
are exposed to during and after the encoding stage of information processing.
• Post-event information can produce ‘False Memories’, pieces considered accurate but result
from additional untrue details.
• How reliable are children at giving eyewitness testimony as required by the law?
• False positive response- Giving an affirmative(positive) but incorrect answer to a question.
Background
• Loftus and Palmer 1974 used a classical experiment to prove that words used in a question
(post-event information) can impact participants’ speed estimates of a vehicle seen in a
video.
• Pozzolo and Lindsay in 1997 concluded that children are less likely to say
‘I don’t know’ even though they know they were allowed to.
• Child witnesses were more likely to make incorrect decisions when shown a lineup due to
perceived forced choice, perception of authority figures, and pressure to make a choice.
Aims
• Investigate whether social factors affect child witnesses more than adult witnesses.
• To explore the impact of social versus cognitive factors in children’s performance as child
witnesses
• Hypothesis
1. Children will be as good as adults at identifying cartoon faces in a target present line-
up
2. Children will be worse than adults in rejecting cartoon faces in a target-absent line-up
3. Children will be worse than adults in identifying human faces in a target present line-up
4. Children will be worse than adults at rejecting human faces in a target-absent line-up
Procedure
• Research Method: Laboratory Experiment
• Experimental Design: Independent measures (children versus adults), Repeated measures
(target present versus target-absent and cartoon versus human)
• IV: Age (children versus adults), Line-up type (target present versus target absent), Familiarity
of target (cartoon versus human)
• DV: Whether the correct face was selected in the target-present lineup, whether an empty
silhouette was chosen in the target-absent lineup.
• Sample:
Children group- 59 children (21 females and 38 males) between the ages of 4-7 recruited from pre-
kindergarten and kindergarten classes of three private schools in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Mean age
of 4.98 years
Adult group- 53 adult participants (36 females and 17 males) between the ages of 17-30 were
recruited from the Introductory Psychology Participant Pool at Eastern Ontario University. Mean age
of 20.54 years
• Sampling Technique: Opportunity Sampling
• 4 Video Clips, one photo-array per clip
• HUMAN: 2 Video Clips, 6 secs each
1. Man, putting on a coat
2. Woman brushing hair Two human 'targets' were photographed wearing different
clothes. Four foils are made per target, similar in hair, facial features and colour.
Photographs are cropped until the neck.
CARTOON: 2 Video Clips, 6 secs each
3. Dora interacting with the audience.
4. Go! Diego! Go! Putting on safety gloves Two cartoon 'targets' and four foils were
picked per target from the internet, similar in hair, facial features and colour.
Photographs are cropped until the neck. Positions of targets were randomized, and
all photos were black and white. In all four lineups, the position of the target or its
matching foil was counterbalanced. Videos and photo arrays were presented on a
13-inch laptop screen.
• Each child and adult was tested individually and shown the first video
• Instructed to pay attention because they would be asked some questions and offered some
pictures after watching the video
• Following each of the four videos, all participants were asked their first free recall filler
question, ‘What did the cartoon character/person look like?’
• For adult participants: The second question asked was, ‘Do you remember anything about
the cartoon character/person?
• For child participants: The second question asked was a non-specific probing question: ‘Do
you remember anything else?’
If children did not respond to the first free recall question, they were asked, ‘Do you remember
anything from the video?’ and the researchers recorded replies.
• After each filler task, child participants were told to look at a photo array, point to the
cartoon/person photo if they see it, and point to the black silhouette box if the
cartoon/person is not there.
• Similar instructions were given for adults, but they indicated their responses on a matching
sheet.
• This procedure was repeated for all four videos.
Results
• Responses to cartoons were generally more accurate than responses to human targets.
• Children have similar accuracy as adults in identifying cartoon faces
• Children are significantly less accurate than adults when rejecting cartoon faces.
• Children are significantly less accurate than adults when identifying human faces.
• Children are significantly less accurate than adults when rejecting human faces.
• Conclusions
o Any errors in the target-absent lineup for cartoons result from social factors, not
cognitive factors.
o For children, social factors play a more significant part in decision-making in target-
absent line-ups than in target-present ones.
Ethical Issues
• Deception regarding aim
• Otherwise, it was a very ethical study as informed consent was taken, children had the right
to withdraw, no psychological or physical harm was caused, and confidentiality was
maintained.
Strengths
• High standardization along with controls
• Use of objective quantitative data enabling the use of statistical analysis
• High internal validity due to minimal information given to participants regarding aim- lower
demand characteristics
Weaknesses
• Low ecological validity and mundane realism because the line-up was not accurate and
lacked the emotional experience of a genuine police line-up
• Order effects are due to repeated measures of seeing all four videos and answering the same
questions. This can lead to demand characteristics.
Issues and Debates
• Application to everyday life: Improve reliability of child witness information
• Individual versus situational: This study supports a situational explanation due to the impact
of social factors like authority.
• Children as participants: Practical changes were made to the procedure to ensure children
could easily access tasks. Consent was gained in a child-friendly way.
Biological Approach
Previous chapter