MODULE 1

INTRODUCTION TO COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY

UNIT 1
HISTORY & EMERGENCE OF

MISNA MOHAMMED ALI

COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY - INTRO

Cognition - the process of knowing. It includes mental activities associated
with thought, decision making, language and other higher mental processes.
It describes the acquisition, storage, transformation, and use of knowledge.
If cognition operates every time you acquire some information, place it in
storage,
transform that information, and use it then cognition definitely includes a wide
range of mental processes.
When you read and think about the question what is cognitive psychology?, you
are engaging in cognition. Cognitive psychology deals with the perception of
information (you read the question), it deals with understanding (you
comprehend
the question), it deals with thought (you determine whether you know the
answer), and it deals with the formulation and production of an answer (you
may say,
“Cognitive psychology is the study of thinking”—you may also say, “I don’t
know!”). Cognitive psychology can also be viewed as the study of processes
underlying mental events. In fact, cognitive psychology encompasses
everything
we do.
Cognitive psychology - the branch of psychology that explores the operation of

1
mental processes related to perceiving, attending, thinking, language, and
memory,
mainly through inferences from behavior.
Cognitive psychology studies mental processes, including how people perceive,
think, remember, learn, solve problems, and make decisions.
Cognitive psychology – the study of thinking Cognitive psychology is the
branch of psychology dedicated to the study of how the human brain work –
how we think, remember and learn. Cognitive psychologists apply
psychological science to understand how we perceive events and make
decisions. The cognitive perspective in psychology focuses on how the
interactions of thinking, emotion, creativity, and problem solving abilities affect
how and why you think the way you.
Cognitive Psychology is the scientific study of thinking mind and is concerned
with:
 How we attend and gain information about the world.
 How the information is stored and processed by the brain
 How we solve problems, think and formulate language.
Cognitive psychology involves a total range of psychological process:
sensations
and perceptions, thinking, imagining, remembering, language intelligence and
developmental process, neuroscience pattern recognition, attention and
consciousness, learning memory concept formation.
Cognitive psychology – 2 ASPECTS
A related term, cognitive psychology, has two meanings:
➢ Sometimes it is synonym for the word cognition, and so it refers to the
variety of mental activities we just listed.
➢ Sometimes it refers to a particular theoretical approach to psychology.
Specifically, the cognitive approach is a theoretical orientation that
emphasizes people’s mental processes and their knowledge. For Instance:
ethnic stereotypes would emphasize topics such as the influence of these
stereotypes on the judgments we make about people from different ethnic

2
groups (Whitley & Kite, 2006).

BRIEF HISTORY OF COGNITIVE

PSYCHOLOGY
At the beginning of the 21st century, cognitive psychology is a broad field
concerned with memory, perception, attention, pattern recognition,
consciousness,neuroscience, representation of knowledge, cognitive
development, language, thinking, and, human and artificial intelligence. But
contemplation about the source of knowledge, how people think, solve
problems, and perceive their world is as ancient as human history and has
occupied a venerated position in the musings of philosophers, theologians,
mystics, and scientists for as long as we can tell. These notions started to be
tested empirically during the latter part of the nineteenth century and throughout
the twentieth century and became known in the history of science as cognitive
psychology. The history of cognitive psychology can be parsed into four
periods: philosophical, early experimental, the cognitive revolution, and modern
cognitive psychology.
PHILOSOPHICAL PERIOD
• The Origins of Cognitive Psychology Philosophers and other theorists have
speculated about human thought processes for more than twenty-three
centuries.
• Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics suggest that thoughtful people were
concerned with processes such as thought, memory, and most of all the “ka”, or
soul, Great energy was directed toward preserving the soul but also some
theorized that knowledge was localized in the heart.
• Greek philosophers were obsessed with knowledge and cognitive matters and
current models of cognition often have some ties to ancient Greece. Aristotle’s
views on the locus of knowledge were similar to the Egyptians. He examined
topics such as perception, memory and mental imagery. Aristotle emphasized
the importance of empirical evidence, or scientific evidence obtained by careful
observation and experimentation. His emphasis on empirical evidence and

3
many of the topics he studied are consistent with twenty-first century cognitive
psychology. In fact, Leahey (2003) suggests that Aristotle could reasonably be
called the first cognitive psychologist. Although, psychology as a discipline did
not emerge until the late 1800s.
However, Plato postulated that the brain was the true locus of knowledge.
Renaissance scholars considered thinking, logic, and the nature of the soul and,
although divergent views were expressed, the locus of the knowledge and
rationality was thought to be in the brain.
• During the eighteenth century, philosophic debate over the source of
knowledge
took place between the empiricist and the nativist. A British empiricist
believed knowledge came from experience. However, the nativist believed
knowledge was innate and based on structural characteristics and properties
inherent in the brain. Modern cognitive psychologists continue to argue these
matters, although usually with scientific data.
EARLY EXPERIMENTAL PERIOD
• Cognition has been studied scientifically since the end of the nineteenth
century. In 1879, the philosophical aspects of mental processes gave way to
empirical observations when William Wundt founded the first psychological
laboratory in Germany in 1879. Psychology began to break away from
philosophy and form a discipline based on objective science rather than on
speculation, logic, and conjecture.
• Wundt proposed that psychology should study mental processes, using a
technique called introspection. Introspection involved carefully trained
observers would systematically analyze their own sensations and report them as
objectively as possible. However, Wundt’s introspection technique sounds
subjective to most current cognitive psychologists.
• Another important German psychologist, named Hermann Ebbinghaus
(1850–1909), focused on factors that influence human memory. He constructed

4
more than 2,000 nonsense syllables (for instance, DAK) and tested his own
ability to learn these stimuli. Ebbinghaus examined a variety of factors that
might influence performance, such as the amount of time between list
presentations.
• Meanwhile, in the United States, similar research was being conducted by
psychologists such as Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930). Calkins reported a
memory phenomenon called the Recency effect - refers to the observation that
our recall is especially accurate for the final items in a series of stimuli. Calkins
was the first woman to be president of the American Psychological Association.
• Ebbinghaus, Calkins, and other pioneers inspired hundreds of researchers to
examine how selected variables influenced memory. These early researchers
typically used nonsense stimuli.
• By the beginning of the twentieth century American psychology was
beginning
to take a distinctive form with a wide range of topics under investigation.
Leading this expanded experimental psychology was William James, the first
president of the American Psychological Association. His thoughts about
attention and memory, and his distinction of a dichotomy memory store—
primary and secondary memory—led directly to experiments in the 1960s on
that topic. Clearly, James’s ideas were important in shaping modern cognitive
psychology. He is best known for his textbook Principles of Psychology,
published in 1890. The book foreshadows numerous topics that fascinate
twenty-first-century cognitive psychologists, such as perception attention
memory reasoning and the tip-of-the- behaviorism
• Behaviorism, led by John Watson, was predicated on the idea that overt
behavior could be objectively observed, offered an attractive scientific approach
to psychology. Despite interest in overt behavior, cognitive process was not
totally neglected. According to the behaviorist approach, psychology must
focus on objective, observable reactions to stimuli in the environment.

5
Although they did not conduct research in cognitive psychology, they did
contribute significantly to contemporary research methods. For example,
behaviorists emphasized the importance of the operational definition, a precise
definition that specifies exactly how a concept is to be measured. We must also
acknowledge the important contribution of behaviorists to contemporary
applied psychology. Their learning principles are extensively used in
psychotherapy, business, and education
• In several laboratories in America interesting research was being done on
memory, attention, perception, language, concept formation, and problem
solving that was the preformal stage of cognitive psychology. In addition to
these efforts within psychology, several forces outside of traditional
experimental psychology helped shape cognitive psychology. Among these
forces are the considerable influence of the Swiss psychologist, Jean Piaget,
whose central idea was that there are distinctive cognitive stages through which
children develop. In Russia, the brilliant young savant, Lev Vygotsky,
suggested a model of development psychology in which learning precedes
development. In 1932, Tolman, a well-known behavioral psychologist,
observed that rats learned a cognitive map of their environment while learning
to run a maze. Although cognition was not the dominant school of
psychological thought in America during this time, some experimental
psychologists demonstrated that scientific methodology could be used in the
study of mental events. The techniques, subject matter, procedures, and even
the interpretations used by these researchers anticipated the emergence of a
cognitive discipline.
• Gestalt psychology offered an alternative way to study sensory perception to
the
problematic method of introspection that diffused the research on cognition.
Gestalt psychology emphasizes that we humans have basic tendencies to
actively organize what we see; furthermore, the whole is greater than the sum of

6
its parts. Concurrently the behaviorists attempted to create a purely objective
psychology by successfully attacking the cognitive psychologists and
Gestaltists as well.
• Another important influence was the work of Frederic Bartlett, from England,
who investigated memory from a naturalistic viewpoint and was particularly
concerned with the remembering of stories. From recall of stories, Bartlett
hypothesized that memory is largely determined by schemata, or the way
knowledge is organized and represented in the brain. Even some animal studies
were beginning to embrace cognitive themes.
Bartlett proposed that human memory is an active, constructive process, in
which we interpret and transform the information we encounter. We search for
meaning, trying to integrate this new information so that it is more consistent
with our own personal experiences.
COGNITIVE REVOLUTION
• Cognitive psychologists generally agree that the birth of cognitive psychology
should be listed as 1956 (Thagard, 2005; Viney & King, 2003). During this
prolific year, researchers published numerous influential books and articles on
attention, memory, language, concept formation, and problem solving.
• Cognitive psychology began to take form as a new way of understanding the
science of the mind during the late 1950s. These formative events were spurred
on by research discoveries in memory, learning, and attention as well as ideas
outside of the mainstay of experimental psychology, such as communication
theory, developmental psychology, social psychology, linguistics, and computer
science, which gave cognitive psychologists additional breadth to deal with the
complexity of human information processing and thinking. The reemergence of
cognitive psychology during this period is commonly referred to as the
Cognitive Revolution, emerging in 1956 with a conference on communication
theory at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (Solso, 1998) in which
seminal papers were presented by Noam Chomsky, Jerome Bruner, Allen

7
Newell and Herbert Simon, and George Miller.
• In the 1950s, interest turned to attention, memory, pattern recognition, images,
semantic organization, language processes, thinking, and even consciousness
(the most dogmatically eschewed concept), as well as other cognitive topics
once considered outside the boundary of experimental psychology. Behaviorism
and its dogma failed to account for the richness and diversity of human
experience. Behaviorists could not account for the results found by Piaget’s and
Chomsky’s developmental studies. And information theory and computer
science gave psychologists new ways to conceptualize and discuss cognition.
MODERN COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY
• By the 1960s, cognitive psychology had experienced a renaissance. Cognitive
Psychology, which systematized the new science, was written by Ulric Neisser
and was published in America (1967). Neisser’s book was central to the
solidification of cognitive psychology as it gave a label to the field and defined
the topical areas. Neisser used the computer metaphor for selecting, storing.
Recovering, combining, outputting, and manipulating information.
• The 1970s saw the emergence of professional journals devoted to cognitive
psychology such as Cognitive Psychology, Cognition, Memory & Cognition,
and a series of symposia volumes.
• In the 1970s and 1980s cognitive laboratories were beginning to be built,
symposia and conferences appeared at national and regional meetings, courses
in cognitive psychology and related topics were being added to curricula, grants
were awarded to people investigating memory, language processing, attention,
and like topics, new textbooks were written on the theme of cognition, and
universities recruited professors of cognitive psychology to replace those of
traditional experimental psychology.
• In the 1980s and 1990s serious efforts were made to find corresponding neural
components that were linked to cognitive constructs.

8
• The science of human cognition is still undergoing transformation due to
major
changes in computer technology and brain science. As a result cognitive
psychology has converged with computer science and neuroscience to create a
new discipline called cognitive science. Finally, with the advent of new ways to
see the brain (e.g. functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI], positron
emission tomography [PET], electroencephalogram [EEG]) cognitive
psychologists have expanded their operations to neuroscience, which promises
to empirically display the parts of the brain involved in cognition that were
hypothesized by twentieth-century psychologists.

UNIT 2

Christy

NEUROSCIENCE
Neuroscience is the branch of science concerned with studying the nervous
system. It is a multidisciplinary field integrating numerous perspectives from
biology, psychology, and medicine. It consists of several sub-fields ranging
from the study of neurochemicals to behavior and thought.For example,
cognitive neuroscience is the scientific study of the influence of brain structures
on mental processes, done using brain scanning techniques such as fMRI.

COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE
Cognitive neuroscience aims to discover how brain structures influence how we
process information and map mental cognitive functions to specific areas of the
brain. This is done using brain imaging techniques such as fMRI and PET
scans.The earliest historical roots of neuroscience can be traced to the ancient
Egyptians, who practiced trephination — drilling a hole into the skull to treat
brain and/or mental disorders — and possessed some knowledge about the
symptoms of brain damageMuch later, the invention of the microscope and the

9
use of staining procedures led to the discovery of individual neurons (cells of
the nervous system) by Santiago Ramón y Cajal in the late 1890s, setting the
stage for the modern study of the nervous system (Guillery, 2004). The
emergence of neuroscience as a distinct field began in the 20th century,
pioneered by David Rioch, Francis O. Schmitt, and Stephen Kuffler (Cowan et
al., 2000).

COMPUTER SCIENCE & AI

Most of the current development of artificial intelligence is based on brain
cognition, however, this replication of biology cannot simulate the subjective
emotional and mental state changes of human beings. Due to the imperfections
of existing artificial intelligence, this manuscript summarizes and clarifies that
artificial intelligence system combined with cognitive psychology is the
research direction of artificial intelligence. It aims to promote the development
of artificial intelligence and give computers human advanced cognitive abilities,
so that computers can recognize emotions, understand human feelings, and
eventually achieve dialog and empathy with humans and other artificial
intelligence.examples of human–computer interaction: face attraction, affective
computing, and music emotion, which is conducive to the further and higher
level of artificial intelligence research.

PHILOSOPHY

The philosophy of cognitive psychology explores the foundational issues and

assumptions underlying the study of mental processes. Nature of Cognition: It
investigates what cognition is, how mental processes such as perception,
memory, and reasoning work, and whether they can be reduced to brain activity
or need to be understood as higher-level constructs.
Mind-Body Problem: It addresses how mental states relate to physical states of
the brain, considering dualism (mind and body as separate) versus physicalism
(mental states as brain states).
Epistemology: It examines how cognitive psychology contributes to knowledge,
including questions about the reliability of cognitive processes and the nature of
cognitive representations.
Methodology: It reflects on the methods used in cognitive psychology, such as
experiments and computational modeling, and their philosophical implications.

10
Consciousness: It explores the nature of consciousness and how it fits into
cognitive models, including debates on whether consciousness can be fully
explained by cognitive science or if it requires additional considerations.
Overall, the philosophy of cognitive psychology seeks to understand the deeper
implications and theoretical underpinnings of how we study the mind and
cognitive functions.

ANTHROPOLOGY
Anthropology and cognitive psychology intersect in various ways, particularly
in understanding how human cognition is influenced by cultural and social
contexts. Anthropology examines cultural practices, beliefs, and societal
structures, while cognitive psychology focuses on mental processes such as
perception, memory, and problem-solving.
Cultural Cognition: Anthropology can provide insights into how cultural factors
shape cognitive processes. For instance, how different cultures approach
problem-solving or memory can reveal how cognitive processes are influenced
by cultural norms and practices.
Cognitive Development: Research in anthropology often includes studies of
childhood development in different cultural settings, which can inform
cognitive psychology about how cognitive abilities develop in diverse
environments.
Language and Thought: Both fields explore how language influences thought
processes. Cognitive psychology studies how language affects cognitive
functions like memory and problem-solving, while anthropology looks at how
different cultures use language and how it shapes their worldview.
Social Cognition: Anthropology’s focus on social interactions and structures
complements cognitive psychology’s interest in how people understand and
interpret social information.

EDUCATION
Education and cognitive psychology intersect in several ways, focusing on
understanding how people learn and how to improve educational practices.
Cognitive psychology, which studies mental processes like perception, memory,
and problem-solving, provides insights into how students acquire, process, and
retain information.

11
Key areas of overlap include:
Memory and Learning: Research in cognitive psychology helps educators
understand how memory works and how to design teaching methods that
enhance retention and recall. Techniques such as spaced repetition and retrieval
practice are grounded in cognitive principles.

Metacognition: Cognitive psychology explores metacognition, which involves

awareness and control of one’s own learning processes. Educators can use this
understanding to teach students strategies for self-regulation and effective study
habits.

Cognitive Load Theory: This theory, based on cognitive psychology, suggests

that instructional design should account for the limited capacity of working
memory. Effective educational practices aim to minimize cognitive overload to
improve learning efficiency.
Individual Differences: Cognitive psychology examines differences in cognitive
abilities and learning styles, helping educators tailor instruction to meet diverse
needs.
By applying insights from cognitive psychology, educators can develop
strategies and tools to support more effective teaching and learning

PSYCHIATRY & CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY

Psychiatry and clinical psychology both intersect with cognitive psychology,
though they focus on different aspects of mental health.
Psychiatry: This medical field involves diagnosing and treating mental illnesses
primarily through medical and pharmacological approaches. Psychiatrists often
integrate cognitive psychological theories to understand the cognitive aspects of
mental disorders and to develop treatment plans. For instance, they might use
knowledge of cognitive distortions to guide medication management and overall
treatment strategies.

Clinical Psychology: Clinical psychologists focus on assessing and treating

emotional, mental, and behavioral disorders, often using therapeutic techniques
grounded in cognitive psychology. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), a
prominent approach within clinical psychology, directly utilizes cognitive

12
principles to help individuals modify maladaptive thinking patterns and
behaviors.

In summary, while psychiatry may use cognitive psychology principles to

inform treatment plans and medication management, clinical psychology
applies these principles more directly through therapeutic techniques.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE & ROBOTICS

Artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics have significantly influenced cognitive

psychology by providing new tools and methods for understanding human
cognition.

Modeling Cognitive Processes: AI, especially through neural networks and

machine learning, helps simulate and understand cognitive processes like
perception, learning, and decision-making. By creating models that mimic
human thinking, researchers can test hypotheses about cognitive functions and
refine theories.
Robotic Experiments: Robots equipped with sensors and AI can perform tasks
that require cognitive functions, such as problem-solving or language
comprehension. Studying how robots perform these tasks helps psychologists
understand human cognitive abilities and limitations.
Human-Robot Interaction: Research into how people interact with robots
provides insights into social cognition and human behavior. This includes
studying how humans perceive and react to robots, which informs both
psychological theory and practical applications in areas like assistive
technology and human-robot collaboration.
Cognitive Assistive Technologies: AI-driven technologies, such as virtual
assistants and adaptive learning systems, support individuals with cognitive
impairments or learning difficulties. These tools provide practical applications
of cognitive psychology theories in real-world settings.
Data Analysis and Pattern Recognition: AI tools analyze large datasets from
psychological experiments to identify patterns and insights that might be
difficult for human researchers to discern. This enhances the understanding of
cognitive processes and improves experimental design.

13
Overall, the integration of AI and robotics into cognitive psychology enriches
research methodologies, theoretical models, and practical applications, offering
deeper insights into the complexities of human cognition.

UNIT 3

SCHOOLS OF PSYCHOLOGY
Anugraha and Sariga

Structuralism

Historians often date the “founding” of the actual field of psychology back to
1879, when Wilhelm Wundt converted a laboratory into the first institute for
research in experimental psychology (Fancher, 1979). Wundt wanted to
establish a “science of mind,” to discover the laws and principles that explained
our immediate conscious experience. Wundt wanted to identify the simplest
essential units of the mind. In essence, he wanted to create a table of
“mental elements,” much like a chemist’s periodic chart. Once the set of
elements was identified, Wundt believed, psychologists could determine how
these units combine to produce complex mental phenomena.
Wundt foresaw an entire field devoted to the study of how systematically
varying stimuli would affect or produce different mental states; he described
this field in a volume titled Principles of Physiological Psychology (Fancher,
1979). Wundt and his students carried out hundreds of studies, many involving a

14
technique of investigation called introspection. Although this term today
connotes “soul searching,” Wundt’s technique was much more focused. It
consisted of presenting highly trained observers (usually graduate students) with
various stimuli and asking them to describe their conscious experiences. Wundt
assumed that the raw materials of consciousness were sensory and thus “below”
the level of meaning. According to him the elements of mind can be classified
into 3 broad categories, 1) Sensation,
2) Feelings and 3) Images. Wundt thought any conscious thought or idea
resulted from a
combination of sensations that could be defined in terms of exactly four
properties: mode (for
example, visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory), quality (such as color, shape,
texture), intensity,
and duration. Wundt’s goal was to “cut through the learned categories and
concepts that define
our everyday experience of the world”.
Wundt believed strongly that with proper training, people could detect and
report the workings of their own minds. A student of Wundt, Edward B.
Titchener, applied the term structuralism to his own endeavors as well as to
Wundt’s (Hillner, 1984). The term was meant to convey Wundt’s focus on what
the elemental components of the mind are rather than on the question of why the
mind works as it does. The method of introspection, unfortunately, proved
problematic. Nonetheless, Wundt was a pioneer in the study of many cognitive
phenomena, he was the first to approach cognitive questions scientifically and
the first to try to design experiments to test cognitive theories.

Functionalism

While Wundt was working in Leipzig, an American named William James was
working to establish the new discipline of psychology in the United States. In
many ways, Wundt and James were opposites. James regarded psychology’s
mission to be the explanation of our experience. Like Wundt, James was
interested in conscious experience. Unlike Wundt, James was not interested in
the elementary units of consciousness. Instead, he asked why the mind works
the way it does. He assumed that the way the mind works has a great deal to do

15
with its function—the purposes of its various operations. Hence the term
functionalism was applied to his approach.
Functionalism suggested that psychologists should focus on the processes of
thought rather than on its contents. Functionalism seeks to understand what
people do and why they do it.
This principal question about processes was in contrast to that of the
structuralists, who had asked what the elementary contents (structures) of the
human mind are. Functionalists held that the key to understanding the human
mind and behavior was to study the processes of how and why the mind works
as it does, rather than to study the structural contents and elements of the mind.
They were particularly interested in the practical applications of their research.
Functionalists were unified by the kinds of questions they asked but not
necessarily by the answers they found or by the methods they used for finding
those answers. Because functionalists believed in using whichever methods best
answered a given researcher’s questions, it seems natural for functionalism to
have led to pragmatism.
Pragmatists believe that knowledge is validated by its usefulness like what can
you do with it?
Pragmatists are concerned not only with knowing what people do; they also
want to know what we can do with our knowledge of what people do. For
example, pragmatists believe in the importance of the psychology of learning
and memory. Because it can help us improve the performance of children in
school. It can also help us learn to remember the names of people we meet. A
leader in guiding functionalism toward pragmatism was William James (1842–
1910). His chief functional contribution to the field of psychology was the book
Principles of Psychology (1890/1970).Other American psychologists shared
James’s assumptions and approaches. Fellow functionalists such as John Dewey
and Edward L. Thorndike, for example, shared James’s conviction that the most
important thing the mind did was to let the individual adapt to her or his
environment. Functionalists drew heavily on Darwinian evolutionary theory and
tried to extend biological conceptions of adaptation to psychological
phenomena (Hillner, 1984). Structuralists and functionalists differed in their
methods as well as their focus The structuralists were convinced the proper
setting for experimental psychology was the laboratory, where experimental
stimuli could be stripped of their everyday meanings to determine the true
nature of mind. Functionalists disagreed sharply with this approach, attempting
instead to study mental phenomena in real-life situations. Their basic belief was
that psychologists should study whole organisms in whole, real-life tasks.

16
Behaviorism

The study of the mind and conscious experience was entering what might be
termed a sort of "dark age." Psychologist John B Watson (1878-1958), intensely
dissatisfied with psychology's lack of progress, suggested a shift that he
believed would make the fledgling enterprise of psychology truly scientific
Watson's radical notion was the banishment of consciousness from scientific
study Why would he propose such a radical move? The hallmarks of scientific
study are observation, measurement, and repeatability. The study of
consciousness lends itself to none of these. It cannot be reliably observed or
measured, and the results of an introspective analysis cannot be reliably
reproduced. But behavior can be observed. measured, and repeated; hence, it
should serve as the focus of scientific psychology Watson's approach, termed
behaviorism, discarded both the subject matter and the approach of the
structuralists and functionalists, instead emphasizing the study of observable
responses and their relation to observable stimuli. Given its emphasis on
observable stimuli and responses, it makes sense that behaviorism is sometimes
referred to as S-R psychology.
According to behaviorists, psychology should dedicate itself to discovering
these S-R connections. Between stimulus and response is a "black box" that
houses consciousness.Investigation of the contents of the black box is a futile
enterprise, according to the behaviorists, because the contents do not lend
themselves to scientific investigation The behaviorists were not denying that we
experience consciousness; for example, they wouldn't have a problem with
acknowledging that people have a conscious experience of hunger.
They simply rejected the idea that this conscious experience could be
meaningfully studied, owing to its inherently subjective nature. They also give
consciousness no camal role in producing behavior, we don't eat because we
feel hungry Eating is an observable response that occurs in the
presence of some verifiable stimulus, such as low insulin levels or a plate of
fresh out of the oven cookies. The complete rejection of consciousness from
scientific study was a radical move, but it struck a resounding chord. In the
United States, the behaviorist approach dominated experimental
psychology for the first half of the 20th century.
Laying the Foundation for Cognitive Psychology The rejection of consciousness
as a topic for scientific study was not without good intent. The behaviorists
wanted to establish psychology as a rigorous experimental science alongside
other disciplines more readily acknowledged as "scientific," such as biology and

17
chemistry. Their sincere belief was that the study of mind was never going to
get us there. But scientists throughout the short history of psychology have
demonstrated time and time again that rigorous observation and measurement of
mental processes is possible. In fact, even before the behaviorists "threw down
the gauntlet" to scientists interested in human behavior, Hermann Ebbinghaus
was quietly conducting a strikingly methodical and precise series of
experiments on remembering.
Ebbinghaus: Pioneering Experiments on Memory. In the late 1800s, Ebbinghaus
embarked on an investigation of his own memory-an investigation that
demonstrated convincingly that complex mental processes could be submitted
to experimental test. Ebbinghaus was a truly dedicated researcher; he served as
his only subject, tirelessly testing and retesting his own memory under
rigorously controlled conditions of presentation and testing. He did this by
memorizing list after list of nonsense syllables-letter strings that do not form
words (e.g., DBJ). For a given list, he would record the number of study trials it
took to learn the list to perfection. Then, after varying periods of time, he would
attempt to relearn the list to perfection again. As you might imagine, it took him
fewer trials to relearn lists that he had memorized previously. Ebbinghaus
coined the term savings to refer to this reduction in the number of trials it took
to relearn a list. His previous experience in perfect ly learning the material
saved him some trials the second time he tried to learn it. Think about it: if
you've already learned to do something well and then take some time off, you're
not going to have to start from scratch when you attempt to redo or relearn the
task.
Using the method of savings, Ebbinghaus revealed a number of fundamental
prin ciples of memory. He found that recall was more difficult as list length
increased, a har binger of later research that would investigate the limited nature
of working memory. He found that his retention increased with the frequency of
repetitions (if you study more, you'll remember more). And he captured the
pattern of forgetting over time in what has been termed the forgetting curve,
which relates the amount recalled to the time that has elapsed since study.
Forgetting occurs rapidly early in the retention interval, then slows down
considerably. This pattern has been replicated in countless investigations of
mem ory, but as you'll read later, the precise function that relates what we
remember and for get to the passage of time depends on myriad
variables.Ebbinghaus's research was significant for a number of reasons. First, it
demonstrated that precise and well-controlled experimental methods could be
applied to study com plex mental processes, setting the stage for the
experimental approach to cognition that was to follow. Second, it provided a
well-conceived research paradigm for the study of memory that inspired a
legion of later researchers. Finally, as noted above, it established a number of

18
core principles of memory function that are still being replicated and extended
in laboratory research today.
Bartlett's Memory Research.
Sir Frederick Bartlett objected to the use of tightly controlled laboratory
procedures for revealing memory function. He believed that if psychological
research was to be generalizable, it should be as naturalistic as possible.
Following this principle, his procedure involved the presentation of materials
that were meaningful rather than nonsensical. In assessing subjects' memory for
stories and folk tales, Bartlett (1932) discovered a fair amount of reconstruction.
Some details were left out of the story; other details were inserted. Based on his
results, Bartlett characterized memory as a reconstructive process rather than a
reproductive one. This reconstruction was guided by what Bartlett termed
schemata, generalized knowledge structures about events and situations that are
constructed based on past experience. Note that in contrast to the behaviorist
explanations of the day, Bartlett was postulating that mental structures
(schemata) exerted a causal influence over behavior. Bartlett's work was
distinctive and important in a couple of ways. First, it provided an alternative to
the mechanistic, S-R view of remembering as a group of simple verbal
associations. Second, it showed incredible prescience, foreshadowing some
major concerns that have taken center stage in present-day cognitive
psychology-the reconstructive nature of memory. A social anthropologist at
heart, Bartlett was interested in remembering as a dynamic, social process that
helps us make sense of our daily lives.
His classic book was titled Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social
Psychology (emphasis added). Cognitive psychology's current emphasis on the
study of cognition within natural contexts owes much to Bartlett's early
investigations. It's interesting to note the strong contrast between the methods
used by Ebbinghaus and those used by Bartlett to study remembering.
Ebbinghaus's method involved the pre cisely controlled presentation and
remembering of lists of nonsense syllables, while Bartlett's method (though
somewhat controlled) left more to chance, as subjects were exposed to stories
and asked to remember them.
Gestalt Psychology.
The Gestalt perspective in psychology, developed in Germany and very active
in the first half of
the last century, emphasized the role that organizational processes play in
perception and problem solving. The German word gestalt means something
like configuration. Psychologists who adopted the Gestalt approach were
interested in the organizational principles that guide mental processing.
Gestaltists believed that the answer to this question revealed something

19
fundamental about visual perception. The spirit of the Gestalt approach is
captured well by their oft-cited credo "The whole is different than the sum of its
parts." One cannot capture the essence of conscious experience by analyzing it
into its elements, as the structuralists attempted to do. Experience is more than
just a summary of elementary sensations, images, and feelings. When combined
in a particular way, these elements of experience form a particular gestalt, or
whole. And one cannot understand human experience and behavior by
eliminating all talk of conscious experience, as the behaviorists attempted to do.
Current cognitive psychology embodies the spirit of the Gestalt view by placing
the mind center stage and viewing it as an active processor of information. In
addition, the Gestalt approach still has a strong influence on how we view
particular cognitive processes, most notably, perception and problem solving.
Genetic epistemology
Jean Piaget, a Genevan scientist known as a naturalist, philosopher, logician,
educator, and developmental psychologist (Flavell, 1963), conducted studies of
the cognitive development of infants, children, and adolescents that have also
helped to shape modern cognitive psychology.
Piaget’s work was largely sympathetic to the Gestalt idea that the relationship
between parts and wholes is complex. Piaget sought to describe the intellectual
structures underlying cognitive experience at different developmental points
through an approach he called genetic epistemology.
We’ll discuss Piagetian theory in much more detail in Chapter 14; for now, only
a brief overview will be given.
Piaget’s observations of infants and children convinced him that a child’s
intellectual structures differ qualitatively from those of a mature adult. As he
watched young children, for example,
Piaget noticed that their assumptions about the numerosity of objects seemed to
differ from those of an older child or adult. Specifically, young children seemed
to believe that a row of, say, five buttons becomes more numerous if the row is
simply spread out. Piaget believed that children in different stages of cognitive
development used different mental structures to perceive, remember, and think
about the world. In fact, the mental structures available at any given point of
development limited and constrained the cognitive abilities of a child, making
them cognitively different from those of an older child in a different stage, or of
an adult. The study of individual difference
Galton, a half-cousin of Charles Darwin, inherited a substantial sum in his early
20s that afforded him the time and resources to pursue his interests. A child
prodigy himself (he read and wrote by the age of 2 1⁄2), Galton trained in
medicine and mathematics at Cambridge University, England.

20
Like many of his fellow students (and many of today’s college students), Galton
felt a great deal of academic pressure and competitiveness and “was constantly
preoccupied with his standing relative to his fellow students” (Fancher, 1979, p.
257). This strong preoccupation (which may have contributed to a break- down
he suffered at Cambridge) developed into a lifelong interest in measuring
intellectual ability. Galton’s interest in intellectual differences among people
stemmed in part from his reading of his cousin Charles Darwin’s writings on
evolution. Darwin believed animals (including humans) evolved through a
process he called natural selection, by which certain inherited traits are
perpetuated because individuals possessing those traits are more likely to
survive and reproduce. Galton wondered whether intellectual talents could also
be inherited.
Galton noticed “intelligence” or “smartness” or “eminence” seemed to run in
families; that is, smart parents appeared to produce smart children. Of course,
this could be explained in terms of either genetics or environment (for example,
intelligent parents may have greater resources to spend on their children’s
education and/or greater interest or motivation to do so). Thus Galton’s question
of how large a role genetics plays in intelligence was difficult to answer. To
address it, Galton put his mathematical training to use in analyzing data (usually
family trees of “eminent” men) and, later, inventing statistical tests, some of
which are still used today. Galton (1883/1907) studied a variety of cognitive
abilities, in each case focusing on ways of measuring the ability and then noting
its variation among different individuals. Among the abilities he studied (in both

laboratory and “naturalistic” settings) was mental imagery. He developed a

questionnaire, instructing respondents to “think of some definite object—
suppose it is your breakfast-table as you sat down this morning—and consider
carefully the picture that rises before your mind’s eye” (p. 58). He then asked, Is
the image dim or clear? Are all of the objects in the image well defined?

Does part of the image seem to be better defined? Are the colors of the objects
in the image distinct and natural? Galton was surprised to discover much
variability in this capacity: Some respondents reported almost no imagery;
others experienced images so vividly they could hardly tell they were images!
Galton left a large legacy to psychology, and to cognitive psychology in
particular. His invention of tests and questionnaires to assess mental abilities
inspired later cognitive psychologists to develop similar measures. His
statistical analyses, later refined by other statisticians, allowed hypotheses to be
rigorously tested. His work on mental imagery is still cited by current
investigators. Most broadly, Galton’s work challenged psychologists, both those
who believed in the importance of genetic influences and those strongly

21
opposed to the idea, to think about the nature of mental—that is, cognitive—
abilities and capacitie.

Evolutionary

evolutionary psychology, the study of behaviour, thought, and feeling as viewed

through the lens of evolutionary biology. Evolutionary psychologists presume
all human behaviours reflect the influence of physical and psychological
predispositions that helped human ancestors survive and reproduce. In the
evolutionary view, any animal’s brain and body are composed of mechanisms
designed to work together to facilitate success within the environments that
were commonly encountered by that animal’s ancestors. Thus, a killer whale,
though distantly related to a cow, would not do well with a cow’s brain, since
the killer whale needs a brain designed to control a body that tracks prey in the
ocean rather than eating grass in a meadow. Likewise, a bat, though also a
mammal, needs a brain designed to run a tiny body that flies around catching
insects at high speeds in the dark. Evolutionary psychologists ask: What are the
implications of human evolutionary history (e.g., living in omnivorous and
hierarchical primate groups populated by kin) for the design of the human mind.
Charles Darwin himself perhaps deserves the title of first evolutionary
psychologist, as his observations laid the groundwork for the field of study that
would emerge more than a century later. In 1873 he argued that human
emotional expressions likely evolved in the same way as physical features (such
as opposable thumbs and upright posture). Darwin presumed emotional
expressions served the very useful function of communicating with other
members of one’s own species. An angry facial expression signals a willingness
to fight but leaves the observer an option to back off without either animal being
hurt. Darwin’s view had a profound influence on the early development of
psychology.

In 1890 William James’s classic text The Principles of Psychology used the
term evolutionary psychology, and James argued that many human behaviours
reflect the operation of instincts (inherited predispositions to respond to certain
stimuli in adaptive ways). A prototypical instinct for James was a sneeze, the
predisposition to respond with a rapid blast of air to clear away a nasal irritant.

22
 UNIT 4
Juel George

Information processing and connectionism

During the 1950s, communication science and computer science began to

develop and gain popularity. Researchers then began speculating that human
thought processes could be analysed from a similar perspective (Leahey, 2003;
MacKay, 2004). Two important components of the information-processing
approach are that (a) a mental process can be compared with the operations of a
computer, and (b) a mental process can be interpreted as information
progressing through the system in a series of stages, one step at a time. Central
to the information processing approach is the idea that cognition can be thought
of as information passing through a system. Here, brain is considered as the
hardware and cognitive processes as the software. Information-processing
approach has four major assumption:
1. Humans as symbol manipulators. Information-processing theorists assume
that people are general-purpose symbol manipulators that is they can perform
astonishing cognitive acts by applying only a few mental operations to symbols.
Information is then stored symbolically, and the way it is coded and stored
greatly affects how easy it is to use it later. Example: When solving math
problems, we manipulate numbers and symbols according to learned rules.
2. Data- information from environment and processes. Memory stores where
information is held for possible later use and the different processes that operate
on the information at different points or that transfer it from store to store is
considered here. Recognition, detection, recoding and retrieval are some
processes in human memory storage. Example: Recognizing a friend's face
involves detecting features, storing this information, and retrieving it later.
3. Human thought- system of interrelated capabilities. Different individuals
have different cognitive capacities- different attention spans, memory capacities
and language skills, to name a few. Information-processing theorists try to find
the relationships between these capacities to explain how individuals go about
performing specific cognitive tasks. Example: Some people can memorize long
lists quickly, while others may excel in language acquisition.
4. Humans as active information seekers and scanners. Information is stored in
the memory of humans in three different ways. Sensory memory is a memory
system that retains representations of sensory input for brief periods of time.
23
Short- term memory is the memory system that holds information we are
processing at the moment. Our third memory system, long-term memory allows
us to retain vast amounts of information for very long periods of time. Example:
Reading a book involves storing words in short-term memory and
comprehending the content, which may be retained in long-term memory. This
approach is rooted in structuralism. They hold that information-processing is
sequential. They rely on computer metaphor. Finally, one of the major
information-processing approach models is the Atkinson-Shiffrin model or
Modal model of memory.
Atkinson-Shiffrin Model
The Atkinson-Shiffrin model, also known as the multi-store model, is a classic
theory of memory that proposes three distinct memory stores:
- Sensory Register: This is where sensory information (visual, auditory, etc.) is
initially processed for a very brief period (milliseconds).
: Short-Term Memory (STM): Information that is attended to from the sensory
register moves to STM. It has a limited capacity and duration (around 7 items
for about 18-20 seconds).
: Long-Term Memory (LTM): Information from STM that is rehearsed and
encoded is transferred to LTM, which has a vast capacity and potentially
unlimited duration
. Key Processes
*Sensory Input: Information enters the sensory register from the environment
through the senses.
* Attention: If attention is paid to the information in the sensory register, it is
transferred to STM.
* Rehearsal: Information in STM can be maintained through rehearsal (mental
repetition) to increase the chances of transfer to LTM.
* Encoding: Information is transformed into a format suitable for LTM storage.
* Retrieval: Information from LTM can be retrieved and brought back to STM
for use.

CONNECTIONIST APPROACH
The connectionist approach or parallel distributed processing (PDP) is another
paradigm of cognitive psychology. Connectionism depicts cognition as a
network of connections among simpler processing units (McClelland, 1988).
Connectionism seeks to replace the computer metaphor of the information-

24
processing framework with a brain metaphor. Connectionist approach assume
that cognitive processes occur in parallel that is many at the same time. The
connectionist approach is also called neural network model because the
processing units are sometimes compared to neurons.
Each unit is connected to other units in a large network. Each unit has some
level of activation at any particular moment in time. The exact level of
activation depends on the input to that unit from both the environment and other
units to which it is connected.
Connections between two units have weights, which can be positive or
negative. A positively weighted connection causes one unit to excite, or raise the
level of activation of units to which it is connected; a negatively weighted
connection has the opposite effect, inhibiting or lowering the activation of
connected units. The connectionist framework allows for a wide variety of
models that can vary in the number of units hypothesized, number and pattern
of connections among units, and connection of units to the environment. All
connectionist models share the assumption, however, that there is no need to
hypothesize a central processor that directs the flow of information from one
process or storage area to another. Instead, different patterns of activation
account for the various cognitive processes (Dawson, 1998). Knowledge is not
stored in various storehouses but within connections between units. Learning
occurs when new connective patterns are established that change the weights of
connections between units.
Connectionist approach has some major assumptions:
1.Cognitive system is made up of billions of interconnected nodes/neurons that
form together the complex networks.
2.Nodes within a network can be activated and the pattern of activation
corresponds conscious experience. Stronger the connection, activation takes
place simultaneously.
3.Networks operate in parallel.
4.Processing of a single task is distributed throughout the brain and not in one
specific location.
5.Connections between two nodes is modelled on the way neurons interact. The
effect of one neuron on the other can be excitatory or inhibitory.
6.Connectionist approach hypothesizes that knowledge is not stored in various
storehouses but within connections between units. Learning occurs when new
connections are established.
The fundamental premise of connectionism is that individual neurons do not
transmit large amounts of symbolic information. Instead they compute by being

25
appropriately connected to large numbers of similar units. This is in sharp
contrast to the conventional computer model of intelligence. Feldman and
Ballard (1982), in an early description of connectionism, argued that this
approach is more consistent with the way the brain functions than an
informationprocessing approach

UNIT-5
IMPORTANCE OF ECOLOGICAL APPROACH

Hridya J

Lave described the results of the Adult Math Project as “an observational and
experimental investigation of everyday arithmetic practices Lave, Murtaugh,
and de la Rocha studied how people used arithmetic in their everyday lives. In
one study, they followed people on grocery-shopping trips to analyze how and
when people calculate “best buys.” They found that people’s methods of
calculation varied with the context. This was somewhat surprising, because
students in our culture are taught to use the same specified formulas on all
problems of a given type to yield one definite numerical answer.
To illustrate,
compare a typical third-grade arithmetic problem presented by teachers to
students

26
1) Brandi had eight seashells. Nikki had five more. How many seashells did the
two of them have together ?
With the following problem,posed and solved by one of the grocery shoppers,
regarding the number of apples she should purchase for her family for the week:
2)There’s only about three or four [apples] at home, and I have four kids, so you
figure at least two a piece in the next three days. These are the kinds of things I
have to resupply. I only have a certain amount of storage space in the
refrigerator, so I can’t load it up totally.
Now that I’m home in the summertime, this is a good snack food. And I like an
apple sometimes at lunchtime when I come home.
Lave pointed out a number of contrasts between this arithmetic problem solving
and the kind used in solving school problems.
First, the second example has many possible answers (for example, 5, 6, 9),
unlike the first problem, which has one (13)
Second, the first problem is given to the problem solver to solve; the second is
constructed by the problem solver herself.
Third, the first problem is somewhat disconnected from personal experience,
goals, and interests, whereas the second comes out of practical daily living.

There has been much recent interest in the ecological approach, the idea of
studying cognition in everyday contexts actually arose several years earlier. A
major proponent of this viewpoint was J. J. Gibson, who works on perception.
Ulric Neisser, a friend and colleague of Gibson, wrote a book in 1976 aimed at
redirecting the field of psychology toward studying more “realistic” cognitive
phenomena.

We can see the influences of both the functionalist and the Gestalt schoolson the
ecological approach.
The functionalists focused on the purposes served by cognitive processes,
certainly an ecological question.
Gestalt psychology’s emphasis on the context surrounding any experience is
likewise compatible with the ecological approach.
The ecological approach would deny the studying of cognitive phenomena in
artificial circumstances divorced from larger contexts. Thus this tradition relies
less on laboratory experiments or computer simulations and more on naturalistic
observation and field studies to explore cognition.

27
LIMITATIONS OF LABORATORY STUDIES
Time consuming process :
For it to be done properly, experimental research must isolate each variable and
conduct testing on it. Then combinations of variables must also be considered.
This process can be lengthy and require a large amount of financial and
personnel resources. Those costs may never be offset by consumer sales if the
product or idea never makes it to market. If what is being tested is a theory, it
can lead to a false sense of validity that may change how others approach their
own research.

Participants can be influenced by their current situation :

Human error isn’t just confined to the researchers. Participants in an
experimental research study can also be influenced by extraneous variables.
There could be something in the environment, such an allergy, that creates a
distraction. In a conversation with a researcher, there may be a physical
attraction that changes the responses of the participant. Even internal triggers,
such as a fear of enclosed spaces, could influence the results that are obtained. It
is also very common for participants to “go along” with what they think a
researcher wants to see instead of providing an honest response.

Reproducibility : Results obtained in one labe might not be easily reproducible

in another due to slight differences in equipment,procedures,or environmental
factors.

Ethical Constraints : There are ethical limits to what can be tested in a lab. It
might seem like a good idea to test new pharmaceuticals on animals before
humans to see if they will work, but what happens if the animal dies because of
the experimental research? Or what about human trials that fail and cause injury
or death? Experimental research might be effective, but sometimes the approach
has ethical or practical complications that cannot be ignored. Sometimes there
are variables that cannot be manipulated as it should be so that results can be
obtained.

Scale and Complexity :The variables of a product, theory, or idea are under
such tight controls that the data being produced can be corrupted or inaccurate,
but still seem like it is authentic. This can work in two negative ways for the

28
researcher. First, the variables can be controlled in such a way that it skews the
data toward a favorable or desired result. Secondly, the data can be corrupted to
seem like it is positive, but because the real-life environment is so different
from the controlled environment, the positive results could never be achieved
outside of the experimental research.

Experimental research does not provide an actual explanation :

Experimental research is an opportunity to answer a Yes or No question. It will
either show you that it will work or it will not work as intended. One could
argue that partial results could be achieved, but that would still fit into the “No”
category because the desired results were not fully achieved. The answer is nice
to have, but there is no explanation as to how you got to that answer.
Experimental research is unable to answer the question of “Why” when looking
at outcomes.

Cost: High quality lab equipments and materials can be expensive,limiting the
scope and scale of experiment.

Controlled variables :
Although laboratory settings can control extraneous variables, natural
environments provide certain challenges. Some studies need to be completed in
a natural setting to be accurate. It may not always be possible to control the
extraneous variables because of the unpredictability of Mother Nature. Even if
the variables are controlled, the outcome may ensure internal validity, but do so
at the expense of external validity. Either way, applying the results to the
general population can be quite challenging in either scenario.

Manipulating variables isn’t necessarily an objective standpoint :

For research to be effective, it must be objective. Being able to manipulate
variables reduces that objectivity. Although there are benefits to observing the
consequences of such manipulation, those benefits may not provide realistic
results that can be used in the future. Taking a sample is reflective of that
sample and the results may not translate over to the general population.

29