1.A. it is important to note that variables that may increase the likelyhood of misinformation effects.

These are if the information presented is plausible, if there is social pressure, if participants were given positive feedback, and if there was a long delay. there are four leading cognitive explanations for misinformation effects. The first is intergration and this is the classic study by loftus. P1 showed slides of a car at a yield sign or a stop sign p2 questionnaire with critical question details that was consistent or was non consistant such as did another car pass the car when it wasw stopped at a STOP SIGN people given consistant information got much more correct answers than those given inconsistent. Second however was a study by zaragosa which was similar to loftuss except that it gives the questions in chronological order. This was found to significantly reduce loftuss effects. Another theory is the fuzz trace gist based processing. And that is that we remember the gist of what we saw not things verbatim, so when we try to recall information that may have been peripherial, we are not good at it. Finally there is the imagination inflation effect where p1 cmplete inventory about things that happened or did not happen when we were kids p2 asks did X Y or Z happen to you as kids, and told that parents said it did. After couple of weeks p3 another inventory score and on items mentioned on the previous one about things they did as kods, those told their parents said they did it report 40-60% more often that they in fact did do it. 2. content and source are two broad catergories for how we forget. Content errors are 1. If you dont remember you were told then you dont forget. 2. Some people like Anderson thinks that continual suppression leads to repression, here are the explanations for people forgetting not forgetting while instructed to: Information persists because you choose to ifnore it, not about forgetting but deliberately choosing to not ignore source. 3. You know you were told to ignore something, but you dont remember what it was, so you fail to ignore it. 4. If I tell you to ignore something, cant that backfire? Bcause it makes it salient to me, its more unconscious because of reasons you dont remember that it is having an influence on you. MY STUDIES. Two groups similar to a directed forgetting paradigm involving word pairs. But before word pairs are presented, one group of people are told to forget word pair if there is a loud beep before it, one is not told anything. There are 20 word pairs and 5 loud beeps. After the word pairs are presented, the people are asked to recall all the word pairs, regardless of the beeps, and estimate the # of beeps total,. If the experimental group results were fairly accurate at remembering the nuber of beeps and scored poorly on words they were told to forget, this would refute the 1st type of error as you remember you were told AND forgot significantly. My second study would be similar to the first except there will be 15 beeps prior to 20 total word pairs and participants will be told to remember every word pair if there is a beep before it, and control will be told just to remember all. If the results show that people estimate poorly the total # of beeps but are good at remembering all the word pairs, this would support the second reason 3. I am a consultant to a prosecuter in a robbery case. The perpetrater is accused of robbing a liquor store. The key eye witness says the following I was in the store, and I heard all the commosion and got increadibly emotionally aroused, I was terrified! But I saw the defendant there, with the gun, and I know its him! To refute this claim, the defendants attory says the following the weapons effect would show that it is very unlikely the witness would remember my defendents face weapons effect refers to the concentration of a crime witnesses attention on a weapon, and the result reduction in ability to remember other details of the crime. The following experiment proved this conceptwe presented a series of slids depicting an event in a fast food restaurant. Half of the subjects saw a customer point a gun at the chashier, the other half saw him hand the cashier a check. Results showed that subjects made more eye fixations on the qwapon than on the check, and fixations on the weapon were of a longer duration than fixations on the check. In addition the memory of subjects in the weapon condition was poorer than the memory of subjects in the check condition. The jury and judge think this is a very good point. In reply to this, me, as a consultant to the prosecuter bring up the following study on thematically induced arousal, and how it leads to a better memory! This studied argued that th weapons effect is because the visual stimulus that induced the arousal severs as an attention magnet. They induced arousal empatheticly and found that the memory was greater during this aroused state. This shows that since the witness says she only heard the commotion but never saw the gun, and that arousaed her, that they shuld remember what the defendant looked like accurately. 4. the part curing procedure goes as follows in p1 you learn a bunch of words, in p2 I as the experimenter choose a subset of the words from the original list and instruct you to reheard them, in p3 I ask you to emmeber as many as you can total from the first phase, people in control can do wtvr they want in the second and they do much better in remembering all of them in p3! People in the control do better because part cueing creates temporary interference. If people are allowed to choose th items they will reverse the partial cue effect and remember better. To your request of switching the cards, I would reply NAY! Because they would nullify the reversal of the part cueing effect and lead to blockage. If you switch up the cards, it would be like switching up which words I said I was going to remember!Suppression effects are different from blocking because suppression we dont want to remember while in bolcking we do. The think dont think paradigm supports this. The 40 30 15 supports this. Riccio banded thoughts says that when you try to forgoet, you have a better association which leads to a better memory. 5. a, directed forgetting paradigm, think dont think, forgetting passed relationships hot flame cold flame. Riccio banded thoughts. 6. Cartesian:comprehension_>acceptance/rejection Spinozan Comprehension&Accept__>certify or unaccept To test both of these belief systems, stressing their system is nessesary. If stressed and caused to eject the content early, before it reaches the second step. In the Cartesian model will be prevented from accepting or rejecting something it comprehends and a spinozan is prevented from unaccepting or certiftying a proposition. So spinozan while stressed would think all is true. Recource depletion like in prisoners makes them accept anything people say forced confessions Induce in lab by having people perform multiple tasks Subjects wholistened to doubtful propositions while resource depleted remembered them much better. Why does this happen? If Cartesian is true, they would understand what was being said, but not have an opioion on it, this is not so though. Also on autobiographical propositions people take accept it right away, if you say that this is so you take it as I believe this is so A spinozan system should accept anothers implicit self description as part of the comprehension of the others action and should unaccept that description only if the system has both the time and energy. When experimentally deduced, this effect is exacerbated. Evidence for zpinozan is by evidence for the precedence of acceptance over rejection Cartozan says that first comprehend, then accept, then unaccept. it may not assess the propositions it comprehended if stressed Can mere comprehension occur? pennacilin. they were more likely to have their mind changed by research from a different institution. no studies or cartesian. gerrig -- plane or something? alternative spinozan -- default says we dont but we can be deduced. how medical information is assessed -- just knowing that... reading nyt may not think twice, but in a decision, may so. source monitoring. gilbert. first phase people learn a bunch of stuff that they know nothing about, fictional creatures they learned 20 facts about, once they learnt them to 100%. what they look like where they live phase 2 -- give statements that are not identical but could be paraphrase. they are either correct, or rephrased to be false. 2 kinds of statements, some are true some are false with respect with what was learnt in P1 we see each of those statements in phase 2 twice. the first time you are seeing the statements in phase 2. you are reading true and false statements half of hte time you arent asessing them just reading but other half you are asessing when later asked about the veracity of the statements they only read, subjects tended to regard them as true. Suggest subjects were unable to represent the statements in a truth neutrqal fashion even when motivated to do so. two conditions, same people. they are reading and asessing or asssesing-- people who asessed both time did better. more you repeadtily see a false statement, it becomes true. if they read it first they more often said it was true-- repeated measure design -- sports spinozan. but modified, if you induce people to assess they do. its not default. I think that the default spiniozan model is the best one because it can be reproduced in the lab and the markers on it are clearly identifiable. As opposed to the Cartesian, spinozan where there can be errors produced based on the experiment. 8.b. availibilty people predict the frequency of an event, or a proportion within a population, based on how easily an example can be brought to mind. Representive a sample looks representive if it is similar to imporatn characteristics of the population from which it was selected We judge a sample more likely if it looks like the population THHTHT or HHHTTT same but people say first is more Framing medical death 50% life 50% confirmation bias card study, if p than q. rather confirm a hypothesis than try to disprove it base rate fallacy underemphasizing important information about base rates by emphasizing representiveness, lawyesr and engineers. Im good at these tasks thought 9. gamblers task Concurrent measurement of galvanic skin response shows that healthy participants show a "stress" reaction to hovering over the bad decks after only 10 trials,, wason task if p then q. critismsm is in the african tribe generic -- 25% flipped. specific 85% flipped self-misattribution error. Phase 1 Studies list of famous and non famous names. P2 fame juidgment task. People who they studied as nonfamous they said were. Explanations: relying on the memory of the gist, general semantic features. May bind together studied items and generated associates which forms a well-organized representation two levels. one is, a more methadological critque. how limited are the effects to certain types of contexts. watson -- we know it is concrete, and we talk about cosmidis, social exchange context. 0-- generality of procedure questions biger picture is if you step back from these tasks, do they capture for you what goes on in decision making. 1. testing hypothesis you already have, 2. attempt to model what we come out with stuff people who do these tasks feel that it captures how we deal with normal life events. if you dont, argue against. 10. availibility heursitic, where did we talk about it? 1. decision making in general, 2. schema activation 3. monster studies explanation gerrig pillow, talk about how children are more suspectable going on. 4. whats going on in the real world. Kids from college from Idaho or from allaska, which can you think of more examples of? Recencymore recent items better, violent shootings recent, then I think they happen more often Familiaritypeople who know lots of divourced people estimate national rate to be high Recognition heuristic, which two Italian cities larger population Milan or Modena, most have heard of Milan so they say its higher. Illusory correlation stereotype of people, two variables not statisicly related. 6 out of 60 gay people psychological problems and 8 out of 80 straight but people with a bias look at only the gay prob cell being more aware of it can help reduce it. 11. people with really eidetic good memories. chronic confabulators. experts and on experts given info on diagnosing down syndrome, went back and have. recognition memory test have to say yes or no things on the test have to be on the final. in those types, information that is consistent with down syndrome and inconsistent with down syndrome. -- availability. hot flame is lady liberty, people who still ahd feelings showed an increase when not to think past life. no increase in control. after the suppression ended