Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Louisa C. Egan, Laurie R. Santos, Paul Bloom Evidence from children and monkeys.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Louisa C. Egan, Laurie R. Santos, Paul Bloom Evidence from children and monkeys."— Presentation transcript:

1 Louisa C. Egan, Laurie R. Santos, Paul Bloom Evidence from children and monkeys

2  Louisa C. Egan  She works department of psychology in University of Yale  She works about attitude changes  Psychology of Negotiations Evolution of Human Nature Developmental Psychology Cross-Cultural Psychology Judgment and Decision-Making

3  Laurie R. Santos  She is a professor of psychology and cognitive science at University of Yale. Her research explores the evolutionary origins of the human mind by comparing the cognitive abilities of humans and non-human animals, including primates and canines.

4  Paul Bloom  He is a professor of pschology and cognitive science at University of Yale. He researchs children and adults understand the physical and social world, with special focus on language, morality, religion.

5  Why does cognitive dissonance exist in the in the first place?  Is it mental process that we learn as we mature and a reflection of our increasing complex cognitive abilities?

6  This study aim of investigates origins of cognitive dissonance because cognitive dissonance may be describes an individual’s cognition; beliefs,attitudes and behaviors. May be evolutionary and developmental.

7  Psychologists have long been investigate cognitive dissonance so this many areas of psychology includes attitudes, prejudice, moral cognition, decision making, happiness, therapy.

8  Child study:  Subjects:  Thirty, four years old children(14 girls and 16 boys) four children did not complete for inability to understand procedures or fatigue.  Procedures:  Used to smiley face rating scale that included six faces. Corresponding to six levels of liking.  Smiley face stikers give as rewards good behaviors conclusion. And children were enthusiastic about playing with the stikers.

9  Children select between six smiley faces, they select large smile faces.Two condition contitudes choice and no- choice. Once a child had rated stikers, the experimenter randomly labeled the stikers in each triad as A,B and C  Each child participated in one of two conditions either the choice condition or the no choice.  In the choice condition child was given one choice between A and B. Displayed A in one hand and B in the other and said ‘you get to choose a stiker to take home’ so child was given a similar choice between unchosen alternative and C. Experiment continue and child exhausted.

10  This situation continue no choice condition.  After child receive this stiker that is was given a choice between the unreceived alternative.  At least two triads were used with each child.  Capuchin study :  There are 6 capuchins. These are 4 adults and 2 adolescents.  Procedures:  Monkeys preferences for at least nine different M and M candies.Monkey are in cage, monkey saw outside tray candies.The door opened monkey select candies.this experiment made 20 trials two experimental sessions. So monkey option C select long duration. Each monkey were tested four times.(by 2 months)

11  Each child selected choice 80% C (no choice condition) 4-5 triads. An unpaired t test revealed a reliable difference between the two conditions t(28)=2,23 p=.05, two-tailed. C choice m=63.0% no-choice condition m=47.2 %  One sample t test m= 50% t(14)=2.28 p=.04 two tailed, no choice condition t(14)=0.53, p=.60 two tailed.  In capuchins within-subjects variables revealed significant main effect of condition F(1,5)=32.5 p=.002  C m=60.0% in choice. M=38.3% no-choice.paired sign=.03. one sample t test choice C t(5)=5.48,p=.003 no-choice significantly t(5)=4.18,p=.009. So they can choice inferior alternative. That is interpretate can select inflate value of the alternative chosen.

12  Both children and capuchins can demonstrate decrease their chosen against conditions.  These results suggest that children and monkeys change their current preferences to fit with their past decisions.  Indeed do you select for survive or for get rid of your non-choose alternative? If you select why?  Is it developmental or evolutionary our another choice selecting? Or can be attitudes,beliefs, individual’s cognitions and behaviors?


Download ppt "Louisa C. Egan, Laurie R. Santos, Paul Bloom Evidence from children and monkeys."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google