Cognition: Exploring the Science of the Mind (Sixth Edition)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
One of the most successful cognitive psychology texts ever published: up-to-date, authoritative, and clearly written.
Cognition uses the best of current research to help students think like psychologists and understand how cognitive psychology is relevant to their lives. The Sixth Edition offers revised and revitalized ZAPS 2.0 Cognition Labs, enhanced neuroscience illustrations, and a new ebook, providing a highly interactive way for students to learn cognitive psychology.
resources to an energy supply or a bank account, drawn on by all tasks, and we have used this analogy in much of our discussion. For example, Kahneman (1973) hypothesized that mental tasks require the expenditure of mental eﬀort (also see Eysenck, 1982). The term “eﬀort” was meant rather literally here, so that mental tasks require eﬀort in about the same fashion that physical tasks do. Other authors have oﬀered diﬀerent views, conceiving of these resources more as “mental tools” rather than as
right sequence. In our day-to-day lives, however, we typically want to remember more meaningful, and more complicated, material. We wish to remember the episodes we experience, the details of rich scenes we have observed, or the many-step arguments we have read in a book. Do the same memory principles apply to these cases? The answer to this question is clearly yes. Our memory for events, or pictures, or complex bodies of knowledge is enormously dependent on our being able to organize the
Similar eﬀects can be documented with nonverbal materials. Consider the picture shown in Figure 5.9. This picture at ﬁrst looks like a bunch of meaningless blotches; with some study, though, you may discover that a familiar object is depicted. Wiseman and Neisser (1974) tested people’s memory for this picture. Consistent with what we have seen so far, their memory was good if they understood the picture, and bad otherwise. (Also see G. H. Bower, Karlin, & Dueck, 1975; Mandler & Ritchey, 1977;
word “other.” But it is the whole that people learn, not the parts. Therefore, if you’ve seen “other,” it’s entirely sensible to deny that you have seen “the” or, for that matter, “he” or “her,” even though all these letter combinations are contained within “other.” Learning a list of words works in the same way. The word “piano” was contained in what the research participants learned, just as T H E is contained in “other.” What was learned, however, was not just this word; instead, what was
words, with no indication that their memories would be tested later on. (They might be told, for example, that they’re merely checking the list for spelling errors.) Then, sometime later, the participants are given a lexical-decision task: They are shown a series of letter strings (“star,” “lamb,” “nire”) and, for each, must indicate (by pressing one button or another) whether the string is a word in English or not. And, of course, some of the letter strings in the lexical decision task are