Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Cognitive psych ppt.


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Cognitive psych ppt.

  1. 1.  are used to select from among choices or to evaluate opportunities. Addresses various forms of reasoning
  2. 2.  reflect the strengths of an economic perspective. One such strength is the ease of developing and using mathematical models for human behavior.
  3. 3.  Alternative Model › makes greater allowance for the psychological make-up of each individual decision maker. Subjective expected utility theory › the goal of human action is to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Subjective Probability › which is a calculation based on the individuals estimates of likelihood rather than an objective computations
  4. 4.  considered options one by one and then we select an option as we find one that is satisfactory or just good enough to meet our minimum level of acceptability. Bounded rationality › we are rational, but within the limits
  5. 5.  eliminate alternatives focusing on aspects of the various options.Condition probability• is the likelihood of one event , given another.
  6. 6.  can be applied to a broad range of behaviors and environments. development of a field of study that is based on decision making in natural environments.
  7. 7.  Working as a group can enhance the effectiveness of decision making, just as it can enhance the effectiveness of problem solving.Benefits of Group Decision Making:  the group benefits from the expertise of each of the members  increase in resources and ideas  improved group memory over individual memory
  8. 8.  In a small group, they have open communication and members share a common mind set, identify with the group, and agree on acceptable group behavior. In a group made up of diverse members, they are in the position to make better decisions.
  9. 9.  One of them is groupthink. Groupthink - a phenomena characterized by premature decision making that is generally the result of group members attempting to avoid conflict; frequently results in suboptimum decision making that avoids nontraditional ideas.
  10. 10. Anxiety
  11. 11. 1) An isolated, cohesive, and homogeneous group is empowered to make decisions2) Objective and impartial leadership is absent, within the group or outside it3) High levels of stress impinge on the group decision-making process
  12. 12. 1) In closed-mindedness, the group is not open to alternative ideas2) In rationalization, the group goes to great lengths to justify both the process and the product of its decision making3) In the squelching of dissent, thos who disagree are ignored, criticized, or even ostracized4) In the formation of a "mindguard" for the group, one person appoints himself or herself the keeper of the group norm and ensures that people stay in line5) In feeling invulnerable, the group believes that it must be right, given the intelligence of the members and the information available to them6) In feeling unanimous, members believe that everyone unanimously shares the opinions expressed by the group
  13. 13.  The leader of a group should encourage constructive criticism, be impartial, and ensure that members seek input from people outside the group. The group should form subgroups that meet separately to consider alternative solutions to a single problem.
  14. 14. It is important that the leader should take responsibility for preventing spurious conformity to a group norm.
  15. 15.  People make decisions based on biases and heuristics in their thinking. These mental shortcuts lighten the cognitive load of making decisions, but they also allow for a much greater chance of error.
  16. 16. In representativeness, we judge the probability of an uncertain event according to:1) how obviously it is similar to or representative of the population from which it is derived2) the degree to which it reflects the salient features of the process by which it is generated
  17. 17. Example:Gamblers fallacy - a mistaken belief that the probability of a given random event, such as winning or losing at a game of chance, is influenced by previous random events.Hot hand or Streak Shooter
  18. 18.  One reason that people misguidedly use the representativeness heuristic is because they fail to understand the concept of base rates. Base rate - refers to the prevalence of an event or characteristic within its population of events or characteristics.
  19. 19.  Availability heuristic - we make judgments on the basis of how easily we can call to mind what we perceive as relevant instances of a phenomenon. Conjunction fallacy - an individual gives a higher estimate for a subset of events than for the larger set of events containing the given subset. Inclusion fallacy - a variant of the conjunction fallacy in which the individual judges a greater likelihood that every member of an inclusive category has a particular characteristic than that every member of a subset of the inclusive category has that characteristic.
  20. 20.  Anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic - a heuristic related to availability by which people adjust their evaltuations of things by means of certain reference points called end-anchors Framing effects - the way that the options are presented influences the selection of an option Illusory correlation - another judgment phenomenon in which we tend to see particular events or particular attributes and categories as going together because we are predisposed to do so.
  21. 21.  Overconfidence - an individuals overevaluation of her or his own skills, knowledge or judgment. Sunk-cost fallacy -- the decision to continue to invest in something simply because one has invested in it before and one hopes to recover ones investment. Opportunity costs - the prices paid for availing oneself of certain opportunities Hindsight bias - when we look at a situation retrospectively, we believe we easily can see all the signs and events leading up to a particular outcome.
  22. 22.  Heuristics do not always lead us astray. Sometimes, they are amazingly simple ways of drawing sound conclusions. Take the best - a simple heuristic which can be amazingly effective in decision situations.
  23. 23.  The prefrontal cortex, and particularly the anterior cingulate cortex, is active during decision-making process. The amount of gain associated with a decision also affects the amount of activation observed in the parietal region. During decision making, the anterior cingulate cortex is involved in consideration of potential rewards. This area of the brain is onvolved in the comparison and weighing of possible solutions.
  24. 24.  a related kind of thinking. It is the process of drawing conclusions from principles and from evidence. In reasoning, we move from what is already known to infer a new conclusion or to evaluate a proposed conclusion.
  25. 25. 1) Deductive reasoning - process of reasoning from one or more general statements regarding what is known to reach a logically certain conclusion. It often involves reasoning from one or more general statements regarding what is known to a specific application of the general statement.2) Inductive reasoning - process of reasoning from specific facts or observations to reach a likely conclusion that may explain the facts. In inductive reasoning, we never can reach a logically certain conclusion. We only can reach a particularly well- founded or probable conclusion.
  26. 26.  is based on logical propositions.• Proposition - basically an assertion, which may either be true or false.• Premises - propositions about which arguments are made.
  27. 27.  one of the primary types of deductive reasoning. It is in which the reasoner must draw a conclusion based on an if- then proposition. The conditional if-then proposition states that if antecedent condition p is met, then consequent event q follows.
  28. 28.  modus ponens - "If p, then q. p. Therefore, q." - the reasoner affirms the antecedent modus tollens - "If p, then q. Not q. Therefore, not p. - the reasoner denies the consequent
  29. 29. Type of argument Conditional Existing Inference proposition condition p→q P q modus ponens If you are a You are a Therefore, you mother, then mother have a childDeductively valid you have a childInferences p→q ¬ q you do ¬ p therefore, modus tollens If you are a not have a you are not a mother, then child. mother you have a child p→q ¬p ¬q denying the If you are a You are not a Therefore, youantecedent mother, then mother do not have you have a child childDeductive fallacies p→q q p affirming the If you are a You have a Therefore, youconsequent mother, then child are a mother you have a child
  30. 30. Proposition based on what Test Type of reasoningshows on the face of the Cardp q Based onA given card has a Does the card have an even modus ponensconsonant on one side number on the other side?¬q ¬p Based onA given card does not Does the card not have a modus tollenshave an even number on consonant on the other side?one side. That is, a given That is, does the card have acard has an odd number vowel on the other side?on one side¬p ¬q Based onA given card does not Does the card not have an denying thehave a consonant on one even number on the other antecedentsside. That is, a given card side? That is, does the cardhas a vowel on one side. have an odd number on the other sideq p Based onA given card has an even Does the card have a affirming thenumber on side consonant on the other side? consequent
  31. 31. Pragmatic reasoning schemas - general organizing principles or rules related to particular kinds of goals, such as permissions, obligations, or causations. These schemas are sometimes referred to as pragmatic rules.
  32. 32.  Syllogisms › Are deductive arguments that involve drawing conclusions from two premises. › All syllogisms comprise a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. › Sometimes conclusions mat be that no logical conclusion may be reached based on two given premises.
  33. 33.  In a syllogism, each of the two premises describes a particular relationship between two items and at least one of the items is common to both premises. First term of the major premise is the subject. The common term is the middle term. Second term is the predicate. Relationship among terms is linear. Quantitative or qualitative comparison.
  34. 34. You are smarter than your best friend.Your best friend is smarter than your roommate.Which of you is the smartest?What logical deduction can you reach based on the premises of this linear syllogism? Is deductive validity the same as truth? First term Linear Second term (Item) Relationship (Item) Premise A You Are smarter Your best friend than Premise B Your best friend Is smarter than Your roommateConclusion: Who - Is/are the is smartest? smartest of the three
  35. 35.  When deductively valid, its conclusion follows logically from the premises. How do people solve linear syllogisms? › Are solved spatially, through mental representations of linear continua. › Using a semantic model involving propositional representations.  ―you are smarter than your roommate‖  [smarter (you, your roommate)] › A combination of spatial and propositional representations
  36. 36.  The premises state something about the category memberships of the terms. Common term as the middle term. First and second terms in each premise are linked through the categorical membership of the terms.
  37. 37. All cognitive psychologists are pianists.All pianists are athletes.Therefore, all cognitive psychologists are athletes.
  38. 38. Type of Form of Description Examples Reversibility premise premise The premise positively All males are (affirmatively) states men.Universal All A are B that all members of the All men areaffirmative males Nonreversible first class (universal) are member of the second All A are B. class All B are A. No A are B. The premise states that No men No men are none of the members of females =Universal (alternative: the first class are are No females arenegative All A are not B) members of the second females men. class Reversible Na A are B = No B are A. The premise states that Some Some F are women only some of the Some women are FParticular Some A are members of the first females Nonreversibleaffirmative B class are members of are women Some A are B the second class Some B are A The premise states that Some Some F are not some members of the womenParticular Some A are first class are not women are Nonreversiblenegative not B members of the second not Some A are not B class females Some B are not A
  39. 39.  Atmosphere bias › If there is at least one negative in the premises, people will prefer a negative solution. › If there is at least one particular in the premises, people will prefer a particular solution. Conversion of premises › Terms of a given premise are reversed. › ―If A, then B into ―If B, then A‖ › People often believed that the reversed form is as valid as the original but don’t realize that the statements are not equivalent.
  40. 40.  Using a semantic (meaning-based) process based on mental models Rule-based (―syntactic‖) processes › Mental Model- is an internal representation of information that corresponds analogously with whatever is being represented.Types of representations of Syllogisms Circle diagrams Truth table
  41. 41.  Heuristics in syllogistic reasoning include overextension – in these errors, we overextend the use of strategies that work in some syllogisms to syllogisms in which the strategies fail us. Foreclosure effects – when we fail to consider all the possibilities before reaching a conclusion. Premise phrasing effects – may lead us to leap to a conclusion without adequately reflecting on the deductive validity of the syllogism.
  42. 42.  Confirmation Bias › We seek confirmation rather than disconfirmation of what we already believe. › Can be detrimental and dangerous in some circumstances. › Explicit attention to the premises seems more likely to lead to valid inferences. Explicit attention to irrelevant information more often leads to inferences based on prior beliefs regarding the believability of the conclusion.
  43. 43.  Based on our observations › Reaching any logically certain conclusion is not possible. As the future has not happened, how can we predict what it will bring? Given possible alternative futures, how do we know which one to predict? For example, in the number series 2,4,6,?,
  44. 44.  Inductive reasoning › Involves reasoning where there is no logically certain conclusion. Often it involves reasoning from specific facts or observations to a general conclusion that may explain the facts. › Basis of empirical method. Why people use inductive reasoning?  Helps them to become increasingly able to make sense out of the great variability in their environment.  It helps them to predict events in their environment, thereby reducing their uncertainty.
  45. 45. Casual Inferences – how people make judgments about whether something causes something else.John Stuart Mill – proposed a set of canons- widely accepted heuristic principles on which people may base their judgments. o Method of agreement o Method of difference
  46. 46. The office staff of the company There was a drasticCompany 1 organized and joined a union. drop in the value of The company’s major product the company’s stock was under suspicion as a carcinogen. The office staff did not There was a drasticCompany 2 organize and join a union. The drop in the value of company’s major product the company’s stock was under suspicion as a carcinogen. Illegal campaign contributions There was no drasticCompany 3 were traced to the company’s drop in the value of manager’s. the company’s the company’s stock. major product was not under suspicion as a carcinogen.
  47. 47. Common Errors of Inductive Reasoning Law of large numbers Ignore base-rate information Demonstrate confirmation bias, which leads to errors such as illusory correlations Frequently make mistakes when attempting to determine casualty based on correlational evidence alone. Failing to recognize that many phenomena have multiple causes.  Discounting error – we stop searching fro additional alternative or contributing causes
  48. 48. Confirmation bias can have a major effect on our everyday lives.• Self-fulfilling prophecyRelationship between covariation (correlation) information and casual inferences
  49. 49.  uses bottom-up strategies and top-down strategies uses information from their sensory experiences and based on what they already know
  50. 50.  Analogy › is a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analogue or source) to another particular subject (the target), and a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process. › also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is often, though not necessarily, a similarity
  51. 51.  Analogical reasoning seeks to identify specific sets of similar and dissimilar characteristics, in search of some unique combination of characteristics that can then be used to define distinctive properties of each set. a means of transfer—applying knowledge acquired in one context in new situations.
  52. 52.  Inductive reasoning is considered a basic component of thinking, and it is one of the most broadly studied procedures of cognition. The inductive method, or teaching by examples, is one of the oldest methods of instruction. In addition, induction, or rather its role in generating scientific knowledge, is one of the most enduring problems of philosophy.
  53. 53. 2 complementary systems of reasoning 1. Associative System - involves mental operations based on observed similarities and temporal contiguities - can lead to speedy responses that are highly sensitive to patterns and to general tendencies - can detect similarities between observed patterns and patterns stored in memory
  54. 54. 2. Rule-Based System - involves manipulation based on the relations among symbols. - requires more deliberate, painstaking procedures for reaching conclusions - carefully analyze relevant features of the available date, based on rules stored in memory
  55. 55.  Reasoning involves brain areas associated with working memory, such as the basal ganglia.Basal Ganglia – involved in a variety of functions, including cognitive and learning Moral reasoning in persons who show antisocial behaviors indicative of poor moral reasoning, malfunctions were noted in several areas within the prefrontal cortex, including the dorsal and ventral regions
  56. 56.  Impairments in the amygdala, hippocampus, angular gyrus, anterior cingulated, temporal cortex were also observed. Anterior Cingulated is involved in decision making and the hippocampus is involved in the working memory. Therefore, it is to be expected that malfunctions in theses areas would result in deficiencies in reasoning.