Cognitive Psychology

I
INTRODUCTION
Cognitive Psychology, the scientific study of cognition. Cognition refers to the process of knowing, storing, nd cognitive psychology is the study of nd unconscious !ent l nd re soning, ll !ent l ctivities rel ted to c"uiring, nd nd using knowledge. The do! in of cognitive psychology sp ns the entire spectru! ctivities# sens tion nd perception, le rning ttention nd consciousness, i! gining nd dre !ing,

of conscious

!e!ory, thinking decision ! king,

nd pro$le! solving. Other topics th t f scin te cognitive psychologists

include cre tivity, intelligence, nd how people le rn, underst nd, nd use l ngu ge. Over the ye rs, cognitive psychologists h ve discovered th t !ent l si!ple nd n tur l ctivities th t see!

re, in f ct, e%tr ordin rily co!ple%. &or e% !ple, !ost children h ve no

trou$le le rning l ngu ge fro! their p rents. 'ut how do young children decode the !e nings of sounds nd gr sp the $ sic rules of gr !! r( )hy do children le rn l ngu ge !ore e sily nd r pidly th n dults( *%pl ining these pu++les h s proven very difficult, $ility in ! chines h ve f iled. *ven the !ost nd tte!pts to duplic te true l ngu ge dv nced co!puters

h ve trou$le underst nding the !e ning of

si!ple story or convers tion. Cognitive

psychologists h ve found si!il r co!ple%ity in other !ent l processes. Cognitive psychology is one field within cognitive science, n interdisciplin ry ppro ch to the

study of the hu! n !ind. Other fields in cognitive science include

nthropology, linguistics,

neuroscience ,the study of the $r in nd nervous syste!-, nd rtifici l intelligence. Cognitive neuroscience, or neurocognition, co!$ines cognitive psychology nd neuroscience. Cognitive psychology is so!eti!es confused with cognitive ther py, clinic l psychology, the $r nch of psychology devoted to the study disorders. See Psychother py# Cognitive Ther pies. type of psychother py nd tre t!ent of !ent l

used to tre t depression nd other !ent l disorders. Cognitive ther py f lls within the re l! of

II

ORI.IN/ O& CO.NITI0* P/1C2O3O.1

nd the !ind d tes $ ck s f r s the first recorded

Curiosity $out the n ture of knowledge

philosophers. The .reek philosopher Pl to held th t the se t of knowledge w s in the $r in, $ut his pupil 4ristotle $elieved th t knowledge w s loc ted in the he rt. 5 ny others since h ve wondered $out how we co!e to know nd underst nd our world, how we re!e!$er or represent infor! tion $out the world, nd how we rrive t decisions.

* rly /tudies of Cognition

4lthough Ren iss nce philosophers

nd theologi ns ctively de$ ted the source of knowledge

nd the n ture of sense perception , see *piste!ology-, the scientific study of cognition did not $egin until the l te 67th century. In 6897 .er! n physiologist )ilhel! )undt founded the first psychologic l l $or tory, t the University of 3eip+ig in 3eip+ig, .er! ny. Re soning th t sking people to people re the $est source of infor! tion $out their own thoughts, )undt set $out studying consciousness through the !ethod of introspection. This techni"ue involved o$serve nd report wh t occurred in their !inds s they eng ged in v rious !ent l t sks. In

688: .er! n psychologist 2er! nn *$$ingh us conducted the first e%peri!ents on !e!ory nd forgetting. In the United /t tes, psychologist )illi ! ; !es used introspection to theori+e $out the structure of !e!ory nd consciousness, nd in 687< he defined psychology s =the science of !ent l life.> In 687? 4!eric n psychologist 5 ry )hiton C lkins invented i!port nt techni"ue for studying !e!ory retention. n

'

The /hift to 'eh vioris!

nd $out

In the e rly 67<<s, however, with psychology $eco!ing !ore distinct fro! philosophy physiology, ttention shifted w y fro! "uestions $out !ent l life to "uestions

$eh vior. This shift occurred $ec use ! ny psychologists thought th t it w s i!possi$le to study !ent l life using scientific !ethods. &or e% !ple, critics of introspection l $eled it su$@ective nd specul tive, nd even its supporters found th t people were un $le to report on their own !ent l st tes in !uch det il. 'eh vior, on the other h nd, could $e o$served, !e sured, nd docu!ented. 4!eric n psychologist ;ohn '. ) tson, considered the founder of $eh vioris!, contended th t ll hu! n $eh vior could $e e%pl ined without reference to d ! nt in his $elief th t even the !ost dv nced for!s of personAs thoughts, feelings, or !ent l st tes. 4nother le ding $eh viorist, 4!eric n psychologist '. &. /kinner, w s hu! n le rning, such s l ngu ge c"uisition, could $e e%pl ined in ter!s of the $ sic

principles of conditioning ,see 3e rning-.

Ree!ergence of Cognitive Psychology

nd throughout the 67:<s revived hope for the =cognitive revolution> in psychology. In 67B7 ni! l nd other psychologic l re li!its to the

3 nd! rk develop!ents in the l te 67B<s scientific study of !ent l life studies, th t theori+ed nd fueled

C n di n psychologist Don ld O. 2e$$ pu$lished pioneering work, $ sed in p rt on $out the $iologic l $ sis of !e!ory pheno!en . In 67:? 4!eric n psychologist .eorge 5iller showed th t there

!ount of infor! tion th t people c n hold in shortCter! !e!ory t ny one ti!e. In the l te 67:<s 4!eric n linguist No ! Cho!sky refuted /kinnerAs $eh viorist e%pl n tion of l ngu ge develop!ent inn te psychology. s overly si!plistic. Cho!skyAs theory, which proposed th t children possess n $ility to e%tr ct !e ning fro! speech sounds, sti!ul ted further interest in cognitive

Cognition s Infor! tion Processing

$out hu! n

The develop!ent of digit l co!puters introduced new !et phors for thinking likening the !ind to $l nk sl te ,t $ul r s -, $l ck $o%, nd even

!ent l oper tions. Philosophers h d offered such !ech nic l !et phors ! ny ti!es $efore, !ech nic l ro$ot. 'ut w y for psychologists nd information the co!puter !et phor w s !ore powerful $ec use it provided $oth to conceptu li+e their o$serv tions nd

co!!on l ngu ge for theorists to co!!unic te their ctivities of people. Thus, cognitive

ide s. Co!puter ter!s such s input, output, processing, information storage, retrieval see!ed to rese!$le the =re l> !ent l psychologists $eg n descri$ing hu! ns s infor! tion processors. The information-processing model sees hu! n cognition s

series of st ges through which nd is l ter

infor! tion p sses se"uenti lly. In this !odel, infor! tion gets into our $r in ,is encoded-, is ret ined $riefly or for longer periods of ti!e ,shortCter! or longCter! stor ge-, re ctiv ted ,retrieved- for further processing or use. )ith the develop!ent of !oreCsophistic ted co!puter syste!s in the 678<s !odels re@ected the ide of infor! tion processing s line r nd se"uenti l nd 677<s, nd inste d re

cognitive psychologists e%tended the co!puter !et phor to new !odels of cognition. These proposed th t the $r in is c p $le of p r llel processing, in which !ultiple oper tions cognition, reflects findings in neuroscience th t suggest line r processing c nnot the recorded speed of hu! n !e!ory retriev l. 4lthough the infor! tionCprocessing !odel is cognitive e%periences. Descri$ing the powerful tool for guiding the study of cognitive s process of stor ge nd

c rried out si!ult neously. One such !odel, c lled the parallel distributed processing model of ccount for

processes, ! ny psychologists rgue th t it f lls short of c pturing the full richness of peopleAs ct of re!e!$ering retriev l, for e% !ple, neglects the su$@ective e%perience of re!e!$ering. 4nother criticis! is th t infor! tionCprocessing theory ! y not reflect how the $r in !odels, such s the p r llel distri$uted processing !odel, try to dr wing on studies of $r in structure D6st century. ctu lly works. Newer ddress this criticis! $y

nd function. Psychologists continue to de$ te the

de"u cy of the infor! tionCprocessing !odel, $ut its influence likely will l st well into the

III

5*T2OD/ O& R*/*4RC2

wide v riety of rese rch !ethods.

3ike other psychologists, cognitive psychologists use

5ethods p rticul rly relev nt to cognitive psychology c n $e org ni+ed into three gener l c tegories# ,6- selfCreports, or peopleAs descriptions of their e%periencesE ,D- re ctionCti!e !e sure!entsE nd ,F- !ethods th t !e sure $iologic l f ctors such s $r in ctivity.

/elfCReports
re

One w y of rese rching cognition is to conduct e%peri!ents in which the p rticip nts sked to report their e%periences. &or e% !ple,

n e%peri!ent on p ttern recognition !ight list of words, then either s y wh t they l rger list ,recognition-. /elfCreport $out how their

present people with v rious visu l sti!uli nd sk the! to n !e wh t they see. 4n e%peri!ent on !e!ory $ility !ight re"uire p rticip nts to view c n re!e!$er ,rec ll- or select the words they s w fro!

!e sures so!eti!es include peopleAs descriptions of their own intuitions listen to story or to !usic.

!inds work. &or e% !ple, people !ight report on the !ent l i! gery they e%perience s they

'

Re ctionCTi!e 5e sure!ents
nd other cognitive processes is to nd distinguish $etween sked to n !e the colors in

One co!!on w y th t psychologists study thinking

!e sure how f st people c n ! ke decisions, solve pro$le!s, different sti!uli. In typic l l $or tory studies, people !ight $e which words re printed, to sc n for "uickly s possi$le $out whether st te!ents re true or f lse. &or

speci l ch r cter in n rr y of letters, or to respond s

de!onstr tion of how re ction ti!es c n illustr te !ent l processes, look loud e ch color

t the t s

cco!p nying illustr tion, entitled =/troop Test.> &irst, look nd, $eginning with the first colu!n, n !e the right side of the illustr tion words interfere with their th t re ding is n nd

t the left side of the illustr tion s f st s you c n. Ne%t, look re printed

g in n !e the colors in which the words

f st s you c n. Did you t ke longer to finish the second t sk( 4l!ost ll people find th t the $ility to n !e the colors. People do not need to re d color n !es nd th t processing the word !e nings interferes with $efore n !ing the printed colors, $ut they see! un $le to stop the!selves. This test suggests uto! tic process the t sk of color n !ing. Co!puters llow psychologists to !e sure re ction ti!e in very s! ll units, typic lly in !illiseconds ,thous ndths of recogni+e so!e f ces in precise !e sure!ents second-. &or e% !ple, e%peri!ents h ve shown th t people c n second. /uch $out how the $r in processes, $out F<< !illiseconds, or less th n oneCthird of llow scientists to test hypotheses

stores, nd retrieves infor! tion.

'iologic l 5ethods

4dv nces in !edic l technology h ve ! de possi$le so!e of the !ost e%citing develop!ents in the history of cognitive psychology. Prior to the 679<s, it w s virtu lly i!possi$le to !e sure the ctivity of the living hu! n $r in without cutting open the he d. The invention of sophistic ted $r in i! ging techni"ues !e ns we c n now view pictures of the $r in =in

ction.> These techni"ues include co!puted to!ogr phy ,CT-, positron e!ission to!ogr phy ,P*T-, ! gnetic reson nce i! ging ,5RI-, nd function l ! gnetic reson nce i! ging person eng ges in v rious !ent l ,function l 5RI-. 'y o$serving p tterns of $r in ctivity s

ctivities, rese rchers h ve g ined new insights into !e!ory, perception, l ngu ge, nd other processes. &or !ore infor! tion $out $r in i! ging techni"ues, see 'r in# 'r in I! ging. /cientists use nu!$er of other !ethods to !e sure $r in nd nervous syste! ctivity. /c lp ctivity of the $r in $y !e ns

electroenceph logr phy ,**.- !e sures the gener l electric l

of electrodes t ped to the sc lp. Rese rchers h ve found th t cert in **. re dings correl te with p rticul r st tes of consciousness, such s rous l, rel %ed w kefulness, sleep, nd deep sleep. 4nother techni"ue, electrooculogr phy, !e sures the !ove!ents of the eyes inv sive rese rch !ethods, such p rt of the $r in. &or s sti!ul ting p rts of the $r in with nd is often used in studies of sleep nd dre !ing. /tudies of cognitive processes in ni! ls ! y use pro$e or re!oving n overview of $iologic l !ethods used in psychologic l rese rch, see

'iopsychology# 5ethods of Rese rch.

I0

TOPIC/ O& /TUD1

One of the $ro dest $r nches of psychology, cognitive psychology enco!p sses do+ens of topics of study. This rticle $riefly descri$es so!e of the !ost i!port nt re s in the field# perception, le rning nd !e!ory, thinking nd re soning, nd l ngu ge.

Perception

/tudies in perception try to underst nd how people interpret sensory infor! tion to ! ke sense out of their world. The hu! n sense org ns receive infor! tion $out the world in the for! of physic l energyGfor e% !ple, light w ves nd sound w ves. This energy is converted $y our sensory syste! into electric l i!pulses th t tr vel to the $r in. Perception is the !ent l process th t tr nsl tes these i!pulses into things we c n recogni+e nd underst nd# people, o$@ects, pl ces, sounds, t stes, nd s!ells. Perception is such n tur l, effortless process th t !ost people re not even w re of it. 'ut

to cognitive psychologists, perception is one of the gre t !ysteries of the !ind. They wonder $out "uestions such s =2ow do we perceive the world in three di!ensions even though the i! ges pro@ected into the eyes re twoCdi!ension l(> =)hy do we perceive !elodies in !usic, r ther th n series of disconnected notes(> =)h t c uses visu l illusions(>

One re of study in perception is p ttern recognition, the $ility to recogni+e f !ili r for!s in se of sensory infor! tion. &or e% !ple, recogni+ing friendAs f ce in crowd is for! of p ttern recognition. 4nother re of interest in perception concerns the difference $etween perceiving nd i! gining. /o!e cognitive psychologists propose th t perceiving nd i! gining re often "uite si!il r, $ut others dis gree with this point of view.

See PerceptionE Illusion.

'

3e rning nd 5e!ory
s so!ething th t occurs in cl ssroo!. To psychologists, the

5 ny people think of le rning nd

word learning refers !ore gener lly to how we

c"uire knowledge, develop new $eh viors, re oper nt conditioning s

d pt to lifeAs ch llenges. Rese rchers h ve discovered ! ny gener l principles th t nd punish!entnd le rning through o$serv tion.

govern $ sic le rning. &or e% !ple, two co!!on for!s of le rning ,the sh ping of $eh vior through rew rd Cognitive psychologists

re p rticul rly interested in co!ple% for!s of le rning, such

le rning l ngu ges or dv nced ! the! tics. 3e rning is tightly interwoven with !e!ory, the process of storing nd retrieving infor! tion in the $r in. 5e!ory pl ys centr l role in ne rly ll !ent l ctivities. 5ore th n @ust f ctC retriev l syste!, !e!ory llows us to ! ke inferences, solve unf !ili r pro$le!s, nd rel te o$@ects nd events to prior knowledge. 5e!ory is one of the !ost ctive re s of rese rch in cognitive psychology. Rese rchers investig te "uestions such s, )h t is the c p city of !e!ory( )hy do people forget infor! tion( )h t p rts of the $r in re involved in !e!ory( 2ow is knowledge represented nd org ni+ed in !e!ory( )h t f ctors influence the ccur cy of !e!ories( 5ost psychologists distinguish )orking !e!ory, t le st three syste!s or co!ponents of !e!ory. The first is n inst nt.

sensory !e!ory, in which infor! tion is held $y the sensory syste! for only

lso c lled shortCter! !e!ory, holds infor! tion in consciousness

te!por rily for i!!edi te ! nipul tion nd use. 3ongCter! !e!ory is wh t !ost people think of s !e!ory. It stores i!!ense volu!es of infor! tion for long periods of ti!e. See 3e rningE 5e!ory.

Thinking nd Re soning

Thinking involves the !ent l ! nipul tion of infor! tion for the purpose of re soning, solving pro$le!s, ! king decisions fro! $eh vior. Cognitive psychologists h ve noted th t people use $out nu!$er of str tegies when re soning $out specific c ses fro! gener l lso fre"uently nd @udg!ents, or si!ply i! gining. 4lthough cognitive psychologists c nnot see thinking processes, they c n ! ke inferences $out these processes

pro$le! or decision. Often people e!ploy deductive re soning or inductive re soning, re ssu!ed to $e true. In inductive re soning, people infer

two for!s of logic. In deductive re soning, people dr w conclusions gener l principles th t

rule fro! specific c ses. )hen ! king @udg!ents or solving pro$le!s, people

rely on heuristics, rules of thu!$ th t usu lly le d to the correct solution $ut gu r nteed to work ll of the ti!e. 5 ny philosophers h ve sserted th t hu! ns re r tion l thinkers who rrive

re not

re c reful

nd

syste! tic in their ev lu tion of infor! tion. 'ut when cognitive psychologists look c refully t the kinds of decisions people ! ke people dise se nd how they t those decisions, they find th t serious tropic l re often less th n r tion l. &or e% !ple, i! gine th t you h ve

nd !ust decide whether to h ve surgery or t ke !edic tion. The !edic tion, while lso not e%tre!ely effective. The surgery is very effective, $ut fter the surgery. .iven this live si% !onths l terG

not p rticul rly d ngerous, is

there is F< percent ch nce th t you will die within si% !onths nother w yGth t 9< percent of those who select surgery the f ct th t peopleAs decisions

hypothetic l scen rio, !ost people choose the !edic tion. 'ut when the risk is phr sed re still people re !ore willing to choose the d ngerous procedure. The ter! framing effects refers to re he vily influenced $y the w y infor! tion is fr !ed. One void these effects when ! king focus of rese rch in decision ! king is how to help people difficult or lifeCthre tening decisions.

3 ngu ge
nd

Of ll hu! n $ilities, l ngu ge is perh ps the !ost i!pressive. In spoken, written, gestured for!s, l ngu ge is the pri! ry !e ns of co!!unic tion other

!ong people. 4lthough

ni! l species h ve evolved sophistic ted syste!s of co!!unic tion, none of these $out $str ct concepts such s !or lity, nd record the

syste!s ppro ches hu! n l ngu ge in co!ple%ity. )ith l ngu ge, we c n refer to events or ide s in the p st or future, t lk stories of hu! n civili+ tion. 3 ngu ge is centr l topic of study in cognitive psychology $ec use it is closely connected c"uire l ngu ge nd why they h ve n e sier ti!e nd

with perception, !e!ory, thinking, pro$le! solving, nd other !ent l processes. Of p rticul r interest to psychologists is how children ! stering l ngu ge th n dults who try to le rn second l ngu ge. 5 ny scientists $elieve critic l period in inf ncy ll over the world chieve specific

the hu! n $r in is uni"uely =wired> to le rn l ngu ge during e rly childhood. /upporters of this ide l ngu ge !ilestones !uch of l ngu ge c p city is in$orn. 4nother widely de$ ted "uestion is whether note th t children t roughly the s !e

ge. 2owever, schol rs continue to de$ te how

ni! ls other th n hu! ns h ve the c p city for

l ngu ge. Rese rchers h ve tried to nswer this "uestion $y tr ining chi!p n+ees nd gorill s Gthe closest genetic rel tives of the hu! n speciesGto use sign l ngu ge or to press sy!$ols on key$o rd. This rese rch h s shown th t pes c n produce nd underst nd si!ple phr ses nd even ppreci te su$tle differences in word order nd sentence structure. nd sentences

One chi!p n+ee, H n+i, h s de!onstr ted the $ility to underst nd spoken *nglish sentences

t the level of

D Cye rCold child. 4lthough so!e scientists re! in skeptic l of these findings, rudi!ent ry for! of l ngu ge. nd

!ost now gree th t pes c n tt in

Other re s of rese rch include the structure of l ngu ge, how l ngu ge is org ni+ed represented in the !ind, how we process l ngu ge, $etween l ngu ge

nd underst nd l ngu ge, the neurologic l $ sis of

nd l ngu ge disorders. 4nother su$@ect of investig tion concerns the rel tionship nd thought. &or e% !ple, is thinking !erely speech th t is not voc li+ed,

or re other processes involved( 2ow does l ngu ge influence the w y we think( Psycholinguistics is the interdisciplin ry study of the !ent l processes involved in l ngu ge c"uisition, production, v rious disciplines, nthropology. nd co!prehension. /peci lists in this field ! y co!e fro! one of cognitive psychology, linguistics, neuroscience, nd including