6668815
Description
Mind Map by siobhan johnston, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by siobhan johnston
almost 8 years ago
|
|
MORAY (1959 - classic) Dichotic listening
- BACKGROUND
- Cherry (1953) cocktail effect (selective attention): method of
shadowing one of two dichotic messages. Found those who
shadowed a message in one ear (attended info), were ignorant
to the content of the other ear (unattended/rejected info). Other
researchers developed his work by investigating why so little
seemed to be remembered from the unattended messages
(Broadbent (1958), Treisman (1964))
- Cherry (1953) cocktail effect (selective attention): method of
shadowing one of two dichotic messages. Found those who
shadowed a message in one ear (attended info), were ignorant
to the content of the other ear (unattended/rejected info). Other
researchers developed his work by investigating why so little
seemed to be remembered from the unattended messages
(Broadbent (1958), Treisman (1964))
- AIMS = To test factors that would
enable unattended dichotically
presented messages to be noticed.
- Research method = Lab experiement
- EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
- experiment 1
- Repeated measures
- IV = dichotic listening
test (3 conditions:
shadowed, rejected and
controlled message)
- DV = asked to recall as much as they
could from unattended message. the no
of words remembered in the form of a
recognition test (included words from
shadowed and rejected message and a
control set of words present I neither)
- Repeated measures
- experiment 2. NAME MENTIONED
- Independent measures
- IV = whether or not instructions in the message
were preceded by the participants own name
(affective instructions or NON affective instructions)
- DV = the frequency with which the
instructions were heard (affective)
- Independent measures
- experiment 3. DIGITS OR NOT
- independent measures
- IV = whether digits were inserted into one of the
messages or instead they would be asked about the
content of the shadowed message.
- DV = the mean number of digits remembered
- independent measures
- controls
- volume
- same male speaker who recorded
the passages throughout
- volume
- experiment 1
- SAMPLE
- undergraduates and research workers of both sexes
- experiment 2 = 12 particps
- experiment 3 = two groups of 14
- experiment 1 = not given
- self - selected
- undergraduates and research workers of both sexes
- procedure details
- experiment 1 = short list of simple words repeated 35 times in unattended ear,
asked to shadow a prose message in the attended ear. they were then asked to
report all they could remember of the rejected message. a recognition test was
then given 30 secs after the end of shadowing including words from shadowed
and rejected message and a control set of words present I neither.
- experiment 2 = particips shadowed 10
short passages of light friction. They
were told that their Reponses would
be recorded and that the object of the
experiment was to score as few
mistakes as possible. in some of the
passages no instructions were given,
in others instructions were
interpolated, and in the remaining
instructions were prefixed with the
partcips name. all particips
experienced all 10 conditions
- experiment 3 = messages were constructed which had
digit interspersed towards the end of the
message(experimental). similar messages had no digits
(control). particips either heard 2 experimental or one of
each. partcips of the experimental were told to remember
as many numbers as possible. the control group was told
they'd be asked questions about the content of the
shadowed message.
- before each
experiment
participants were
given four passages
of prose to shadow
for practice
- experiment 1 = short list of simple words repeated 35 times in unattended ear,
asked to shadow a prose message in the attended ear. they were then asked to
report all they could remember of the rejected message. a recognition test was
then given 30 secs after the end of shadowing including words from shadowed
and rejected message and a control set of words present I neither.
- Data collected = quantitative
- results
- experiment 1 = no evidence of the
words from the rejected message
being remembered. these findings
support cherry's work.
- experiment 2 = those who had
their name said before the
instructions heard more of the
instructions (affective instructions).
- experiment 3 = the mean no of digits recalled
when particips had been told they would be asked
about the content was NO DIFFERENT to those that
were told to listen to digits, even thought they
were prompted when digits were likely to occur in
the text, thus the stimulus did not seem important
enough to break through the attention barrier.
- experiment 1 = no evidence of the
words from the rejected message
being remembered. these findings
support cherry's work.
- conclusions
- when directing your attention to only one
message from one ear, one rejects the
message from the unattended ear and
almost none of the content of this
rejected message is able to penetrate the
attention barrier (cannot be recalled)
- a short list of simple
words presented as
the rejected
message shows no
trace of being
remembered even
when repeated
many times
- subjectively 'important' messages such as
a persons name can penetrate the block.
- it is very difficult to make
'neutral' material such as
numbers , important enough to
break through the attention
block.
- when directing your attention to only one
message from one ear, one rejects the
message from the unattended ear and
almost none of the content of this
rejected message is able to penetrate the
attention barrier (cannot be recalled)
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.