PSYC100 Workbook: Week 8 Activity Sem 1, 2023

Name:___________________________________________

Class (day/time):__________________________________
Thursday; 4:00 pm

Weekly Activity 8

Abstract and References

These questions will support you in developing the abstract for your lab report and also the
reference section.

You need to complete all tasks before coming to your tutorial.

Task 1 - complete this task prior to class

After completing the online activity, you will have knowledge of what makes up an abstract
and how to write references. Using that knowledge, and the Kaufmann and Findlay (2020)
text, complete the following questions.

1) Provide bullet points outlining what you will write in YOUR abstract (be specific!).

1. Definition of a recognition heuristic:

A ‘recognition heuristic’ is an algorithm that forms conclusions based on patterns of missing
knowledge. These adaptive cognitive strategies or ‘short cuts’ are used to simplify dilemmas guiding
decision making when little information is presented. Goldstein and Gigerenzer (2002) articulate the
theory behind this heuristic, arguing if one object is more easily recognisable than another, it
concludes that the recognisable object holds a higher value in satisfying the specific criteria (p. 76).

2. Participant Infomation:
Three hundred and seventy-three undergraduate students who are enrolled in the psychology
course ‘PSYC100: Foundations of Psychology’ were recruited from four Australian Catholic
University campuses (Brisbane, Melbourne, Strathfield and Canberra). These students voluntarily
participated in the following study during their allocated tutorial class time.

3. Key aspects of the method

IV = two levels of recognisability (most recognisable city is the capital OR most recognisable city is
NOT the capital) ; DV = number of correct responses for each condition
Participants were asked to answer the questionnaire individually via a QR code that was
presented to the class. The participants would each respond to 20 questions asking which city out
of the pair, is the capital city of an American state

4. Findings / Conclusion
Submissions were calculated to find the mean number of correct responses for the two
independent variable conditions.
The results determined the correct responses were higher for the condition in which the capital
was the recognised city in comparison to the lower results of the number of correct responses
submitted regarding the condition where the capital was not the more recognisable city
These findings of current study supported it’s hypothesis
PSYC100 Workbook: Week 8 Activity Sem 1, 2023

Task 2 – complete this task prior to class

1) You have been given two compulsory references for this study (Goldstein & Gigerenzer,
2002; Oppenheimer, 2003). In the space below, demonstrate how you would reference these
in the “Reference” section of your lab report using APA 7th edition format.

Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Models of ecological rationality: The recognition
heuristic. Psychological Review, 109 (1), 75–90.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.109.1.75

Oppenheimer, D. M. (2003). Not so fast! (and not so frugal!): Rethinking the recognition

heuristic. Cognition, 90 (1). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00141-0

2) Additionally, you are required to select a further article that you feel supports your
argument. Demonstrate how you would reference this in APA format AND briefly explain
why you chose this article.

Pohl, R.F. (2006), Empirical tests of the recognition heuristic. Journal of

Behavioral Decision Making, 19: 251-271. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.522
The theory of recognition heuristic was empirically tested through four experiments The main results
were:
1. The recognised object was chosen more often than the unrecognised one when the
recognition cue was valid;

2. Participants’ behaviour did not reflect the recognition validity of their own knowledge;

3. A less-is-more effect (i.e., better performance with less knowledge) was either absent
or of only a small size

4. Judgments were influenced by further knowledge, which could even compensate for
the recognition cue.

In almost all conditions, the recognised object was clearly chosen more often than the unrecognised
one
 PSYC100 Workbook: Week 8 Activity Sem 1, 2023

Mark (out of 2)
Criteria 0 1 2
Content Limited or no response to questions All questions have been attempted but the All or almost all questions have been

□ answers are too brief and/or incomplete □ correctly answered □

Some questions have been adequately

Answers are vague □
addressed, whilst answers to others are

missing or incomplete □
Answers are incorrect □
Written expression
Inappropriate language □ Expression is generally adequate □ Expression is clear and concise □

Spelling mistakes □ Answers may lack clarity at times □ Answers have a logical structure □

Use of incomplete sentences □ Answers may be poorly structured □

Collusion / plagiarism □