381 reputation
16
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 5 months
seen Nov 13 '13 at 15:04

Doctoral Candidate in Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science at Indiana University (Bloomington)


Nov
13
comment What is the status of evolutionary psychology in academia today?
All I can say is that we DID read Nowak in my social psych class, and not Pinker, though to be fair, I'm not a social psychologist and this was a class specifically about agent-based modeling in social psych, so it might be a special interest thing.
Sep
22
comment Does correcting responses after feedback lead to better learning?
@ Izhaki, I've added some details as requested. However, I'm hoping for general comments on the method proposed rather than comments about my particular experiment.
Sep
22
comment Does correcting responses after feedback lead to better learning?
@what - because it is a binary forced choice task, no experimentation is needed to find the right answer if you already know that a particular one of the answers is wrong.
May
1
comment Can we increase our higher order thinking (HOT) skills by practicing inductive reasoning?
The field in general is currently skeptical about general-purpose thinking skills. People who appear to reason competently in familiar domains often act like noobs in unfamiliar ones. Even if such skills exist, I doubt that they can be demonstrably improved via any sort of short-term, well-controlled training amenable to experimental manipulation, so I'd be surprised if there were experimental evidence demonstrating the kind of thing you're asking about. But ready to be proven wrong.
Apr
11
comment What is the status of evolutionary psychology in academia today?
The Axelrod work is foundational for the Nowak stuff and the latter is fairly recent as far as I know.
Mar
6
comment What is a test called that involves indicating whether a line has the same slope as a previous image?
I believe that match-to-sample, also called XAB, does not necessarily refer to tasks in which the probe items are presented simultaneously. See e.g. link, which uses these terms in the context of auditory stimuli which would necessarily be presented sequentially. I don't think it would be correct to refer to it as a recognition memory task - I've more often seen it used as a measure of perceptual discrimination.
Mar
6
comment Does associating a color with numbers improve math learning?
Needs clarification as to what you mean by "learn math". This could mean a variety of things, such as "learn the sequence of number names", "learn the association of numerals with number names", "learn how to use counting to assess the cardinality of a set", "memorize arithmetic facts", ... I see no particular reason to think that the effects would be the same for all these skills, so better to focus on what you want her to learn at this moment.
Mar
1
comment What is the bias/thought process that results in distrust of “formal” knowledge in favor of “folk” knowledge?
@Ben Brocka, few people know the details of the evidence, nor are they qualified to judge whether it is "thoroughly proven." Thus, they are forced to rely on other people's assessments of the evidence, to which my earlier comments apply. It would be interesting to know why science is trusted more in some areas than others, but I doubt this reflects a systematic bias in favor of folk science as such. It can be explained more parsimoniously by a general mechanism such as greater skepticism regarding claims - scientific or otherwise - that conflict with existing beliefs or values.
Mar
1
comment What is the bias/thought process that results in distrust of “formal” knowledge in favor of “folk” knowledge?
I don't think there is anything unusual, from a psychological point of view, about some people instinctively distrusting scientists. Why would they trust scientists by default? Scientists are as liable as anyone else to bias by incentives or their own belief systems. I would guess that folk knowledge is often passed on through personal connections and thus, for some, the source may seem more trustworthy than some scientist they have never met before.
Feb
19
comment Quantify degree to which non-diagnostic features bias category-present response
(b) While it's technically correct to say that participants don't know the true probabilities, it would IMHO be more accurate to say that they know, or should know (based on training received), that at any given moment, one and only one feature is relevant, and that feature is perfectly diagnostic. The task is not framed in terms of probabilities - it's completely deterministic. So I am not sure I see the relevance of a Bayesian framework here. Also, they don't get any feedback, so even if I were using a Bayesian framework, I don't see how I'd do updating.
Feb
19
comment Quantify degree to which non-diagnostic features bias category-present response
@Jeromy, sorry for such a long delay in my reply. (a) there might be some misunderstanding. Each stimulus has 3 features. Suppose I am considering the probabilities of "yes" responses regarding questions for which feature X is relevant, and I'm comparing that probability for stimuli where feature Y is present to the probability where Y is absent. In reality, feature X is present for 50% of the stimuli in which feature Y is present, and also for 50% of the stimuli in which feature Y is absent, so a correct responder will answer "yes" 50% of the time for both types of stimuli.