factors affecting perception

• what are the 4 factors affecting perception


  culture, emotion, motivation, expectation
• how does culture affect perception


  social world we live in affects what our senses pick up
• whos study shows that culture effects perception


  Hudson's study
• Hudsons's study-aim


  find out whether different cultures percieve depth cues in 2D images differently
• hudson's study-method


  showed 2D drawings to black and white children, schooled and unschooled. children were asked which is closer to the man, the elephant or the antelope.
• hudson's study-results


  black and white schooled ptps more likely to percieve depth than unschooled ptps. white schooled ptps more likely to percieve depth than black schooled ptps.
• hudsons study-conclusion


  different cultures use depth cues differently, so have different perceptual sets.
• how does emotion affect perception


  tendency for our brain to notice exciting things and block threatening things
• whose study showed that emotion affects perception


  mcginnies
• mcginnies study-aim


  know if anxiety-provoking things are noticed more than neutral things
• mcginnies study-method


  students shows neutral and 'taboo' words. had to say word out loud. emotional arousal levelled through GSR.
• mcginnies study-results


  took longer to say taboo words. taboo words gave bigger change in GSR.
• mcginnies study-conclusion


  emotion affects perceptual set, in this case perceptual defence
• how does motivation affect perception


  wanting something increases its attractiveness
• whose study shows that motivation affects perception


  gilchrist and nesburg
• gilchrist and nesburgs study-aim


  find out if food deprivation affects the perception of food
• gilchrist and nesburgs study-method


  hungry (no food for 20 hours) nd not hungry ptps shown a slide of a meal (steak, spag bol, burger, fried chicken). had to adjust light to level of slide shown.
• gilchrist and nesburgs study- results


  perceived food as brighter, the longer deprived of food
• gilchrist and nesburgs study-conclusion


  sensitivity greater when food deprived. hunger is a motivating factor that affects the perception of food.
• how does expectation affect perception


  beliefs based on past experiences can affect how much we attend to things
• whose study shows that expectation affects perception


  bruner and minturn
• bruner and minturns study-aim


  find out if an ambiguous figure is seen differently if the context is changed
• bruner and minturns study-method


  ptps shown a sequence of letters or numbers with an ambiguous figure in the middle.

  
• bruner and minturns study-results


  those who saw letters said B. those who saw numbers said 13.
• bruner and minturns study-conclusion


  shows expectation is affected by the context the figure is presented
• what are the 3 evaluation points of hudsons study (culture)


  -cross cultural research

  -problems with method

  -poor design
• what are 3 evaluation points of mcginnies study (emotion)


  +objective measurement

  -embarrasment not defence

  -results are contradictory
• what are 3 evaluation points of gilchrist and nesburgs study (motivation)


  +support from similar studies

  -ethical issues

  -not like everyday life
• what are 3 evaluation points of bruner and minturns study (expectation)


  -artificial task

  -independant groupd design

  +real world application
• hudson evaluation-cross cultural research (-)


  P-cross cultural research

  E-language differences could've made method used unclear

  C-validity is affected
• hudson evaluation-problems with the method (-)


  P-problems with the method

  E-way the pictures were represented on paper may have confused ptps

  C-affects findings
• hudson evaluation-poor design (-)


  P-poor design

  E-early cross cultural studies were poorly designed (no control groups)

  C-findings lack validity
• mcginnie evaluation-objective measurment (+)


  objective measurment.

  GSR is a scientific method to measure emotion.

  better than rating scales.
• mcginnie evaluation-embarrasment not defence (-)


  embarrasment not defence.

  delayed recognition may just be embarrasment, not perceptual defence.

  there is no way of knowing what it is, results arent accurate.
• mcginnie evaluation-results are contradictory (-)


  results are contradictory.

  difficult to draw conclusions from results that are inconsistent.
• gilchrist and nesburg evaluation-support from similar studies (+)


  support from similar studies.

  sanford's study found similar results.

  strengthens the validity of the conclusions.
• gilchrist and nesburg evaluation-ethical issues (-)


  ethical issues.

  deprivation of food causes discomfort.

  a case of physical harm.
• gilchrist and nesburg evaluation-not like everyday life (-)


  not like everyday life.

  ptps judged pictures not real food.

  may not apply to real world.
• bruner and minturn evaluation-artificial task (-)


  artificial task.

  ambiguous figures are designed to trick perception.

  task lacks validity.
• bruner and minturn evaluation-independant groups design (-)


  independant groups design.

  ptp variables may have caused the difference in results, not expectation.

  can't trust results.