Cognitive Psychology 8_08
Parts-based approach vs. Image-based approach
Object recognition involves the capacity to perceive objects based on the models of known objects. The two major techniques to understand object recognition include the parts-based approach and the image-based theory. The parts-based approach asserts that objects are usually stored in memory as part of the structural description (Schacter, Gilbert, Wegner & Hood, 2016). The parts’ inventories form alphabetic elements that can be merged to form objects, just like the way the letters are joined to form words. When an individual terms objects as carved, rectangular, or circular, it implies that such objects are already filed in an inventory, together with their link to each other.
Image-based approach involves recognizing objects as seen before through the memory that stores objects in templates. According to Schacter, et al. (2016), the object is recognized as whole in the memory, and is directly compared to another object viewed through retinal image. An illustration of an image-base theory is the supermarket scanners that utilize a type of template matching to recognize the barcodes on labels. An image-based approach is generally accepted, although it does not offer an adequate explanation concerning object recognition.
Both part-based and image-based approaches express object recognition through categorizing them. In part-based approach, object recognition establishes an image that fits its visible parts, notes down the spatial links among the parts, and then match up the structural description to inventories that are in the memory. Although most objects possess similar faces, the brain can differentiate them through categorizing different parts. Image-base approach assists in recognizing objects, even when they are not in a regular structure, because individuals already have templates to establish a link with the object.
Episodic memory vs. Semantic Memory
The study of premeditated recollection of realistic information revolves around two kinds of memory: episodic and semantic memory. Episodic memory involves an individual’s memory gained from personal experience, which is determined by time and place. On the other hand, semantic memory involves worldly knowledge that does not incorporate contextual elements such as time or place. Byrne (2009) termed episodic memory as the recollection of specific events while semantic memory is concerned with general knowledge and facts. Endel Tulvin (1972) distinguished episodic memory from semantic memory by stating that episodic memory recording down a list of events that occurred at a specific time (Sternberg, J. & Sternberg, K., 2012). The list that individuals learn in an experiment is linked to the experiment as a context for learning.
Both episodic and semantic memory form a part of declarative memory that is responsible for preservation of information concerning the world, in addition to personally experienced episodes. When an individual remembers meeting a friend at a specific time in a restaurant, this involves remembering an event, as well as the general knowledge concerning the event (Baddeley, Eysenck & Anderson, 2009). An illustration of semantic memory includes retrieving what kind of food that an individual took last evening.
The two approaches are differentiated by the subjective experiences, where recovery of information is not the same. While episodic memory involves a conscious recollection of the past, semantic memory lacks the sense of conscious recollection. Some neurological evidence indicated that both types of memory are differentiated by association and dissociation with particular brain functions. For instance, an individual with semantic memory loss often experiences a problem of remembering dates while an individual with episodic memory loss may fail to recount personal events, such as where he met her partner for the first time.
Child-directed speech involves engaging children at their typical level of attention, in addition to aligning one’s voice with their capacity to comprehend and respond (Chen, 2014). When adults talk to infants, they usually use high-pitched or elongated words, accompanied by facial expressions. In CDS, parents alter their speech as they converse to their children. CDS is exemplifies by a higher speech than the ordinary one. A higher-toned speech with exaggerated intonation enables the child to recognize a voice that is specifically directed to him/her. When using the CDS, an individual is compelled to use simple vocabulary, which is easy to understand.
A child-directed speech usually has prolonged descriptions of things that the child encounters in his/her immediate environment. The speaker needs to use words that match with most of the things that a child can recognize. Additionally, use of hand gestures and animated facial expressions helps the child to relate things that he/she sees with sounds. Utterances must be limited per turn to give the child tie to respond. CDS utilizes a limited range of words, as well as special forms of words.
Baby talk is considered a scientific phenomenon; hence, it plays an essential role in children’s language development. Child-directed speech helps in making the language acquisition easier for toddlers. Early experience with language enables children to develop the capacity for real-time language processing. CDS influences lexical processing efficiency, which is beneficial to the child’s language development (Newman, Rowe & Ratner, 2015). The more the child is exposed to CDS, the better the language outcomes. CDS is capable of capturing children’s attention, thus, making it exceeding easy to recognize emotions in an adult’s speech.
Insight Problem vs. Non-insight Problem
The solutions to various types of problems that individuals encounter tend to emanate from nowhere while in some cases, the solutions tend to be achieved through a long thoughtful process. An insight problem emerges out of the attempt to understand a particular cause and effect, based on a sudden realization that a particular circumstance needs a solution. An insight occurs without incorporating a process, and an individual is capable of offering a solution due to having a prior knowledge of problem solving. When encountering an ill-defined problem, the problem-solver may arrive at an impasse, which restricts him/her from proceeding in a systematic process (Wen, Butler & Koutstaal, 2013). Thus, the problem-solvers may find it hard to explain the process that assisted them to arrive at the solution, perhaps because the solution popped into the mind rapidly.
Conversely, a non-insightful problem involves finding a solution through analysis, systematic procedure, or through some arithmetic. Non-insight problems are handled through incremental process, instead of thinking outside the box. For instance, when a teacher notices that one of the students is extremely poor in algebra, he/she will make an arrangement of how the student would get assistance. By establishing a personal timetable, the student can have at least thirty minutes of personal discussion with the teacher, until the teacher is satisfied that the student is at par with others. When an individual has a schedule of how to handle a particular problem, he/she is in the process of solving a non-insight problem.
One of the assumptions of insight problems is that individuals utilize intuition and incubation to offer solutions to problems. Insight relates problem solving with a particular behavior, and since behaviors do not correspond with certain processes, problem solvers can employ intuition to offer solutions. Another assumption of insight problems is that individuals need to remove the mistaken assumptions concerning problems, in addition to eliminating eureka effect, which may confuse an individual that a given solution is true
Baddeley, A. D., Eysenck, M. W., & Anderson, M. C. (2009). Memory. Hove [England: Psychology Press.
Byrne, J. H. (2009). Concise learning and memory: The editor’s selection. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic.
Chen, D. (2014). Essential elements in early intervention: Visual impairment and multiple disabilities. New York, NY: AFB Press.
Newman, R. S., Rowe, M. L., & Ratner, N. B. (2015). Input and uptake at 7 months predicts toddler vocabulary: the role of child-directed speech and infant processing skills in language development. Journal of child language, 1-16.
Schacter, D., Gilbert, D., Wegner,D., Hood, B.(2016). Psychology: Second European Edition. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sternberg, R. J., & Sternberg, K.(2016). Cognitive psychology. Boston,MA: Cengage Learning.
Wen, M. C., Butler, L. T., & Koutstaal, W. (2013). Improving insight and non‐insight problem solving with brief interventions. British Journal of Psychology, 104(1), 97-118.