Running head: CULTURAL VIEW OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY



Running head: CULTURAL VIEW OF COGNITION

Name Here

Cognitive Psychology – University of Northern Iowa

Dr. Jack Yates

Date Here

The individual who explains cognition without first examining objective research by educated professionals undoubtedly finds themselves thinking solely in terms of the cultural perspective. Even after reading research, though, one is not free from explaining cognition in terms of cultural ideology as scientists themselves are influenced by the culture. Such a paradigm gives good reason for one to study cultural ideologies of cognitive processes so as to understand not only where these cultural ideologies come from, but also to understand the researcher’s scholarly point of view. But what does one mean by the phrase “cultural ideology?” Since culture is a set of beliefs and traditions passed down through generations, the ideologies of the culture are those held from previous and have influence over future generations. Since cultural ideologies are passed down through generations, interviewers were able to gather answers from their peers at a public university in a Midwestern Iowa city. These interviewers collected information from the respondents about cognitive processes such as pattern recognition, attention, imagery, concepts, and also gave insights about ontological questions existing within society.

Pattern Recognition

Due to the complexity of cognitive concepts, it is not surprising that many individuals have not yet formed ideas about certain questions they may be asked. One example is when asked how the human is able to process information from memory. The culture was unable to clearly distinguish whether the process was like a picture, image, list of characteristics, or features. The culture indicated that memory exists as a list of features, but after a while these features may become more like a still picture. Also, respondents answered that making connections between old information and present objects was a thoughtless process. One example is when an individual sits in a chair; the individual does not consciously recognize that the object is a chair, yet still sits down in it. Further, the respondents were asked about the role the setting or context has in the ability for the individual to perceive that an object, in this case a table, is present in one’s environment. In either case, the cultural notion is that the individual is able to perceive the table in each, but the individual is able to recognize the table faster if the person expects the table to be there (context).

Respondents were asked how they identified objects when looking at them. Individuals reported that through prior observation, experience with the object, and familiarity with the properties they are able to identify the object. In order for the respondents to elaborate on object identification, they were asked how they recognized a table. Respondents answered that the properties of a table such as its flat surface, four legs, and shape were important in their ability to recognize it. Further, the respondents were asked how they identified a familiar face. Again, the responses dealt with properties: eyes, ears, nose, and face shape. Lastly, they were asked how they distinguished between the letters T and Q. The respondents indicated that since the T uses straight lines and the Q uses curved lines that they were easily able to distinguish between the two.

Attention

Another aspect of cognition explained by the culture is that of attention. Respondents within the culture believe that an individual can focus solely on one person in a noisy, crowded room. The respondents also reported that they have pretended to listen to one person while actually listening to another. Additionally, the respondents also believe that it is not possible to listen to two people at once and hear everything that is said. There may have been some social desirability bias in the data gathering process because some of the respondents stated the desire to not appear rude by ignoring someone talking to them. This may have impacted their response to the question about whether or not they have pretended to pay attention to one person while actually listening to another.

The respondents stated that their focused attention can be distracted. Respondents stated that sudden events such as a crash of plates or silverware, or things of interest to the individual can draw their attention elsewhere. The noise of a crashing of plates or silverware may alert someone of approaching danger. Furthermore, being distracted by something of interest such as an attractive individual or a new pair of shoes may be explained by psychological concepts such as the need for affection by others (attractive individual) and affiliation into certain groups (shoes). Such explanations show that the culture may be subtly aware of, but not formally educated about, the cognitive concepts that govern their behaviors.

While the culture does not believe that people can listen to two people at one time, it is believed possible to perform two tasks at the same time. An example of this cultural belief is that individuals stated people can drive and talk on their cell phones at the same time. It was also discussed in class that people can watch television and do homework simultaneously. These activities give strong evidence in the belief of multitasking.

When asked whether there were any tasks that require no attention at all, the respondents stated that all tasks except for biological processes such as heart rate require human attention. When the respondents were asked, however, the percentage of tasks that require attention, the range was between 20 to 50 percent. Tasks not requiring human attention ranged from having a conversation with an individual to the production of language. Additionally, respondents were asked whether there was a difference in required attention between simple and complex tasks. There was wide agreement among the cultural respondents that more attention is required for complex tasks than that required for simple tasks. The difference between complex and simple tasks was that while complex tasks require a high level of knowledge and much effort there is not much of a knowledge requirement or high level of effort for the simple tasks. Examples given of complex tasks were fixing a car and working through a multi-step math problem. Examples given of simple tasks were answering the phone and chewing food while eating. Excellent summary of cultural views on attention

Imagery

The respondents were asked the question, “When you look at something under good lighting, do you see it as it really is?” The informants were in strong agreement that they did see the image as it really existed. Also, the culture was asked whether people and animals saw the same image under the same lighting. While the respondents believed that humans saw the same thing among one another, they also stated that humans perceive images differently than animals. This also related to the idea that the culture widely agreed that humans think in images. Thinking in images, according to the cultural view, means that individuals generate a picture to help explain something as it is described to them. So tacitly, the emphasis is on imagery as visual pictures

Interesting similarities can be examined when comparing the ideas humans hold on the cognitive concept of imagery. The participants were asked to generate and describe an image of someone and something. Each person described that both types of images were generated in their head and were also placed in a setting or context, such as a tea pot sitting on a table or a television in their dorm room. Further, each person explained that the image they were thinking of was in color. When developing an image of someone, the culture claimed that it was a self-portrait from the shoulders up. This idea is interesting to think about because the images are generated internally, yet the images were very similar across the respondent pool. So “getting an image” makes people assume a certain attitude toward the task that restricts what they do … get a traditional “head shot” of someone!

In order to understand the cultural perceptions of cognitive concepts, the interviewers also asked the cultural respondents which characteristics their images have once they’ve generated them. The culture widely agreed that the characteristics of their images could be described both like a photograph and a real life image. Some individuals responded that the image was like a faint copy of the real thing. These descriptions contrasted to characteristic descriptions which they did not choose, such as whether their images were like a detailed description in words or a recreation that the person can change. The descriptions given by the respondents describe the vividness of people’s mental images and the similarities they report.

Given that images are very similar among humans with sight, being able to examine whether the respondents believe blind people are able to generate these same images would allow for further understand of cultural ideologies. The informants did not believe that blind people get images like those who are not blind. According to the respondents, blind people are able to develop some sort of image, but they were unsure what exactly it was. Some reported their belief that blind individuals are able to generate images from being able to touch objects, but these are not the same images generated by those who are not blind. Also, the respondents reported their beliefs on blind people’s ability to generate videos within their brain. Overall, the culture believes that blind people are unable to generate videos. There were some respondents that believed if blind people could generate videos, they would be different than those who are not blind. Since none of the respondents were visually impaired, it is interesting to see the salience of a cultural perspective that exists within the culture about the blind. Good summary

If humans are able to generate images, regardless of ability to see or not, then how detailed are these images? The culture stated that their images are very detailed, which can be evidenced in respondents’ answers of their mental images being in a setting or context. The culture also described these images to be much like a snapshot or a copy of the original from which they got the image. In their images, individuals describe a detail as something tangible that can be touched or sensed by the person.

Concepts

While none of the individuals interviewed had previously heard of the concept of a Clockwork Universe, many stated their belief that the planets revolving around the sun functioned like clockwork. Additionally, the respondents were asked whether they thought a cat, the earth’s weather, and human beings functioned in the same way. The responses were inconsistent, but one common answer was that the biological processes such as a beating heart ran like clockwork in the cat and human being. Individuals were unable to pinpoint how the earth’s weather functioned like clockwork, though.

Another concept that the interviewers were able to gather from the respondents dealt with whether certain tangible objects were more real than concepts of beliefs. The respondents were asked whether the mind, brain, or soul was the most real out of the three. Unanimously, the cultural idea was that the brain was the most real followed by the mind and then soul. Interestingly enough, the cultural respondents unanimously agreed that the mind was a product of the brain and that the soul was defined in spiritual terms which can not be directly observed. Therefore, the culture believes that tangible objects are the most real, followed by the concept of the mind, with the belief in the soul coming third. I think the ordering brain/mind/soul reflects our mechanistic ontology.

Thinking about the way in which children learn and acquire concepts is a popular topic of conversation within the culture. The culture was asked to describe how a child learns the concept of a bird. The respondents stated that children are taught by others and learn from books as to what a bird is. Respondents reported themselves what they know to be the concept of a bird: a winged, thin-legged animal with a beak that is small and cute. The culture also reported that the child is reinforced in their learning as they are rewarded for being correct in their descriptions and punished by being corrected for incorrect descriptions. So, it must be that the culture developed their description of a bird in the reward-punishment model previously described.

Ontology

Another interesting issue relating to the cultural view of cognitive psychology is that which deals with ontological concepts. Ontology is a field that deals with controversial issues where a discourse over the concept’s reality is present. The culture had some widely agreed upon concepts such as the definition of a table or a chair, but questions such as the existence of a soul or whether or not computers are able to think are highly debated. Being able to observe human discourse on these topics not only allows one to see cognitive processes at work, but also for the observer to examine the emphasis in thought that currently exists within the culture.

With ontological questions such as the existence of a soul and whether or not computers can think shows a salience of two often competing perspectives that currently exist in the culture. These two perspectives are that of spirituality and mechanism. Spirituality explains ontology in terms of unobservable forces, where mechanism breaks things down to a science and views the universe as a machine. With two major humanitarian movements such as that during the medieval period (Spirituality) and that after the existence of Descartes (Mechanism), the individual can see that both perspectives are still very salient and are long from disappearing from cultural ideology. Professor Yates described the current ontology existing as a cake with layers. They are mixed with one another, yet still exist separately in their own explanatory terms. But furthermore I think the spirit view is pretty defensive these days, whereas the mechanism view is generally accepted without question.

Summary

In conclusion, one can see that the culture has passed ideas about cognitive processes down from generation to generation. While psychology is a relatively new field when compared to other sciences, the idea that humans have beliefs about topics within the field shows their interest in explaining behavior. These behaviors tend to be explained in a mechanistic way, which is the underlying theme of today’s culture where behaviors and scientific concepts are explained in terms of the physical and assumed to work much like a machine. These mechanistic explanations can be broken down in humans as interpretations of cognitive processes such as pattern recognition, concepts, imagery, attention, and ontological beliefs. As science continues to make advancements in these concepts through a mechanistic lens, it will undoubtedly have an impact on the explanations the culture has about human cognition.

Nice job,… very clearly organized.

Score: 10

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download