In this paper we argue that the protocols of subjects recalling the names of their high school classmates, as well as an army of traditional memory phenomena, can be understood from an information processing analysis which interprets retrieval as a problem‐solving process. This characterization of retrieval focuses on the reconstructive and recursive nature of the process of remembering. Retrieval is viewed as a process in which some information about a target item is used to construct a description of the item (...) and this description is used in attempts to recover new fragments of information. A new description i s formed and the process continues recursively. Three subprocesses are identified: FIND A CONTEXT, in which a proper environment for conducting a search i s established: SEARCH, in which bits and pieces of information appropriate to the context are recovered until an adequate description can be formed within the search context; and VERIFY, in which recovery information is checked for consistency.From the perspective this characterization, we examine the protocols of subjects asked to think aloud while recalling the names of their classmates. Subjects' retrievals continued for a surprisingly long period and were characterized by the phenomena of overshoot, systematic hypothesizing, fabrications, establishment of search contexts, self‐corrections, and the use of a number of basic search strategies. The view of memory as a problem‐solving process not only leads us to the identification of these phenomena but also to a framework for a coherent interpretation for them. (shrink)

Abstract“NOISE” is a term we are using to describe a complex and distressing aspect of the bodily and cognitive experience of many very ill psychiatric patients. By “noise,” we mean an internally experienced state of crowding and confusion created by a variety of stimuli, the quantity, intensity and unpredictability of which make it difficult for individuals so afflicted to tolerate and organize their experience. Attempts to do so may only add to confusion and psychotic phenomena.

The basic problem of this investigation concerns how is it that an individual "understands" or "comprehends" what another communicates and, sometimes, even what he does not communicate but of which he has experience. We would like here to take stock of the models that psychology currently has available to study the phenomenon of interpersonal understanding,using a cognitive approach, and to propose some working hypotheses that in our opinion could guide further research.

Cognitive and temperamental predictors of field dependence-independence The purpose of the study was to define structures of connections between the temperamental and cognitive factors as predictors of field dependence-independence. It was assumed that both the structure of temperament traits and cognitive mechanisms manifest themselves in tasks used for measuring cognitive styles. 108 participants took part in the experiment. Embedded Figure Test was used as a measure of field dependence-independence; Formal of Characteristics of Behaviour Temperament Inventory /fcb-ti/ for temperament structure, and (...) three computerized tasks as indicators of wide spectrum of attention and working memory functioning. Three hypothetical models in path analysis were verified. The best fit of the results obtained is provided by the model comprising two groups of factors: two energetic temperamental factors: endurance and emotional reactivity, and two cognitive factors: efficiency of selective attention and efficiency of visual-spatial sketch pad. The data was discussed from temperamental, cognitive and developmental perspectives. (shrink)

ABSTRACTWhen processing information about human faces, we have to integrate different sources of information like skin colour and emotional expression. In 3 experiments, we investigated how these features are processed in a top-down manner when task instructions determine the relevance of features, and in a bottom-up manner when the stimulus features themselves determine process priority. In Experiment 1, participants learned to respond with approach-avoidance movements to faces that presented both emotion and colour features. For each participant, only one of these (...) two features was task-relevant while the other one could be ignored. In contrast to our predictions, we found better learning of task-irrelevant colour when emotion was task-relevant than vice versa. Experiment 2 showed that the learning of task-irrelevant emotional information was improved in general when participants’ awareness was increased by adding NoGo-trials. Experiment 3 replicated these results... (shrink)