When an event occurs in our lives, we rely on our memory to recall and reiterate that event. Unfortunately, our memories are not films or recordings of events that we can go back to and look at or rewind to determine precisely what happened. We must reproduce the information from our memory based on our recollection and perhaps a skewed and /or induced version of what we remember. You would like to think that a firsthand account would be the most reliable and dependable source of information concerning an event. However, that may not necessarily be the case based on the misinformation effect and false memories.

The misinformation effect refers to the possibility that remembrance of an event can be influenced by information that is provided or added after an event. It is not only additional information, but how that information is introduced that could cause a disruption of precise recollection. For example, a person is an eyewitness to a robbery being committed with a knife. The eyewitness is later asked did you see what kind of gun was used in the robbery. The fact that the inquisitor had insinuated without a doubt that a gun was used could trigger the misinformation effect and could elicit an inaccurate response from the witness. The witness might question their own memory and believe that a gun was used in the robbery and their recollection will most likely remain that a gun was indeed used in the robbery. To get a more accurate firsthand response from the witness the first question should have been phrased what type of weapon was used in the robbery. When phrased this way the question will induce a response that is not tainted or influenced by the interrogator and will be a more accurate account of what the witness believed they saw.

False memories occur when you remember something that either did not happen or recall it happening differently than it did occur. False memories can be caused by the misinformation effect as misinformation or persuasion will cause a memory to be inaccurate. Additional information added or subtracted to the memory of an event generally through the passage of time can also lead to false memories. When we store information in our memory the memory does not always remain the same it updates. Information can be added or subtracted based on additional information we may have seen or heard. This newly found information can add to the accuracy of the event or further distort the memory by adding false information that will become your permanent memory of the event. For example, if you have a conversation with someone about an event say a party from a month ago. You will collaborate with the individual and revisit things that happened and more than likely come to a consensus agreement as to the undertakings of the evening. This will now be your memory of the party. You either created or corrected a false memory.

To test the reliability of eyewitness testimony and exhibit the misinformation effect as well as false memories, collaborate with your spouse and try to remember the events of your wedding day. Who was there, what the seating arrangement was, what you ate anything that you can think of? You more than likely will come up with several circumstances when you and your spouse disagree and if not, that is good as well. Now, go back and look at your wedding video. Inevitably you will find a difference in what you recall and the actual events that occurred. The events that you inaccurately recalled compared to the video are false memories. If you are not married think about the last class reunion you attended. The conversations more than likely revolved around events from the past that made you and others recall information from memory. As you reminisced, you probably found more than one instance where there were different perceptions and interpretations of events. People thought that you were at events that you did not attend and there was what you deemed other inaccuracies in the stories being told. More than likely you conspired with old classmates to correct the inaccuracies and simply reformed your memory. The newly discovered version of events had now become your updated memory of what happened. Whether it did or did not happen that way. You have succumbed to the misinformation effect and created false memories.

Based on the misinformation effect and false memories how reliable is eyewitness testimony? If the information has not been influenced, coerced, or allowed to wait too long for retrieval, probably pretty good. If not, information is likely to become distorted and not an accurate depiction of the events especially over time. Films or recordings may be the only true eyewitness testimony.

References
Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience (4th ed.). Wadsworth, Inc.

According to Goldstein (2011) attention is our ability to focus and concentrate on distinct subject matter. In psychology there are multiple theories and studies done to try to determine our capacity for attention. I will examine two aspects of attention, selective attention or our “ability to focus on one message and ignore all others,” (Goldstein, 2011) and divided attention “paying attention to more than one thing at a time.” These theories are exemplified by Broadbent’s filter model of attention, Treisman’s attenuation model of attention and Nilli Lavie’s concepts of processing capacity and perceptual load.

In Broadbent’s filter model of attention information enters our mind, is held in sensory memory for a fraction of a second, is filtered based on its physical characteristics (tone of voice, pitch, speed of talking, and accent), and then essentially processed. The information is deciphered early and only the filtered message gets further attention. The Broadbent model shows that we can pay attention to one activity while filtering out everything else around us. An example of which would be attending a crowded party and carrying on a conversation while disregarding, or filtering out, the background noise around us, also referred to as selective attention. Another would be driving down the road and being so focused on driving that you missed your exit along with the large sign marking the exit.

In the Treisman model messages are split into two streams based on the message’s physical characteristics, language and meaning by a process known as the attenuator. The primary, attended, message gets most of the further processing attention while a portion of the unattended messages also get some processing, rather than just being filtered out as in the Broadbent model. An example of this would be while at the same party as previously mentioned, and carrying on a conversation, someone says your name and you immediately focus on where your name came from. Although we have the capacity to focus on one activity while filtering out others as in the Broadbent model, we can also process background, or unattended, messages depending on how pertinent they are to the listener as in the Treisman model.

The Nilli Lavie’s theory suggests that we can pay attention to more than one thing at a time, however, we have a limited capacity to process information based on the division of processing resources into processing capacity (how much information we can process) and perceptual load (how easy information is to process). Essentially, we can process more information depending on how easy the information is to process. For an example watching a ball game is a relatively easy task to process whereas a meeting at work will have a higher perceptual load. If you were to engage in a conversation while watching the ball game, you would be adding to the processing capacity however your processing capacity would not be overwhelmed. If you were to engage in the same conversation while in a meeting at work, you would be adding more processing to an already high processing capacity and although the new information is easy to process you will become overwhelmed with too much information and thus not be able to process all the information.

The Broadbent’s filter model of attention and Treisman’s attenuation model of attention shows us how to some degree we can focus on one message while ignoring everything else. Nilli Lavie’s concepts of processing capacity and perceptual load show us that we have a limited capacity for information processing and divided attention can result in our inability to process all the information. We all have been involved in a conversation or a task that was interrupted by another person or event that had the potential to cause us to lose focus on the task at hand. We either ignored the interruption through selective attention or tried to divide our mental faculties among the current objective and the new occurrence with divided attention depending on our capacity for attention.

References

Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience (4th ed.). Wadsworth, Inc.

Perception is how we identify and comprehend people places and things in the world around us. When it comes to perception in psychology there are two main concepts that need to be acknowledged those of bottom-up processing and top-down processing. The combination of these two concepts is how we view or perceive the world that we live in.

Bottom-up processing is sensory driven and involves the ways in which our eyes, ears, nose, skin, and tongue take cues from the environment and convert them into thoughts and responses in our brain. For example, if a person hears a loud noise a signal, known as an action potential, is sent from the ears to the brain to alert the person that there is a loud noise. The conversion of environmental senses to brain activity is referred to as transduction. What we do with that information is top-down processing.

Top-down processing involves an examination of our surroundings and based on previous knowledge, as well as experience, determine what that means to us as individual. We have developed conclusions about the aspects and characteristics of components and attributes associated with the world around us and use these conclusions to determine how we perceive things. For example, if we run across an individual who is crying outside of a hospital, we presume that that individual is hurt or in distress, that would be a big picture analysis based on prior experience and knowledge. Top-down processing allows us to make a quick assessment of the environment based on what has happened in the past.

To examine the combination of these two processes I would like to pose the example of a blind date from my male perspective. As I approach my date from a distance, my top-down processing begins, and my first impressions begin to take shape. I notice that she is dressed well, nothing too flashy or over the top, with a nice touch of fashionable accessories to compliment her clean cut out fit. My top-down processing tells me that she is confident, responsible, and organized. As I continue to approach her my bottom-up processing surges as she acknowledges my presence with an outreaching hand and smile inquisitive yet inviting smile. More bottom-up processing occurs and action potentials fire as we make eye contact and I notice that the subtle aroma of her perfume. As our conversation continues so continues the processing. Her voice (bottom-up processing) is assertive but not loud, confidant but not aggressive (top-down processing). The combination of the two processes has led me to the perception that this is the kind of person I like and that this is going to be a good date.

We use perception to guide our lives every day and perception differs between individuals based on the combination of bottom-up and top-down processing. Some people view a glass of water as being half full and others as half empty. My blind date is but one example of an encounter involving perception. Was she a nice girl? In my perception the answer is yes. We are continually bombarded with bottom-up stimuli. We take sensory cues from the environment (bottom-up processing) and based on our top-down processing have learned to convert them into perceptions based on our knowledge and experiences. The Bottom-up processing is the sensory input, and the top-down processing is how we interpret the input. The interplay between the two processes forms our perception.

References

Goldstein, E. B. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience (4th ed.). Wadsworth, Inc.