When two groups of participants were each shown a different set of results based on a experiment with rats, both groups reported that the results shown to them were obvious outcomes. This suggests that sometimes things appear to be more obvious than they should. Which cognitive phenomenon can explain this effect?

Related Mcqs:

1. Stroebe and Diehl (1994) conducted a clever piece of research into why brainstorming does not appear to enhance individual creativity. They hypothesized that, during a brainstorming session, because may speak at a time, other group members have to keep silent, and may be distracted by the content of the group discussion or forget their own ideas. Storebe and Diehi termed this phenomenon ‘production blocking’, because the waiting time before speaking and the distracting influence of others ‘ idea could potentially block individuals from coming up with their ideas. The result of their subsequent study were clear-cut: participants generated approximately twice as many ideas when they were allowed to express their ideas as they occurred than when they had to wait their turn. But which two of the following can we infer from these results?
   1.That ‘production blocking’ does not occur in interactive brainstorming groups.
   2.That ‘production blocking’ is an important factor explaining the inferiority of interactive brainstorming groups.
   3.That it may be more effective to ask group members to develop their ideas in one group, and than express them to another group.
   4.That it may be more effective to ask group members to develop their ideas separately, and then express them in a subsequent joint meeting.

   A. 1 & 2
   B. 2 & 3
   C. 1 & 3
   D. 2 & 4

2. Stroebe and Diehl(1994) conducted a clever piece of research into why brainstorming does not appear to enhance individual creativity. They hypothesized that, during a brainstorming session, because may speak at a time, other group members have to keep silent, and may be distracted by the content of the group discussion or forget their own ideas. Storebe and Diehi termed this phenomenon ‘production blocking’, because the waiting time before speaking and the distracting influence of others ‘ idea could potentially block individuals from coming up with their ideas. The result of their subsequent study were clear-cut: participants generated approximately twice as many ideas when they were allowed to express their ideas as they occurred than when they had to wait their turn. But which two of the following can we infer from these results?
   1.That ‘production blocking’ does not occur in interactive brainstorming groups.
   2.That ‘production blocking’ is an important factor explaining the inferiority of interactive brainstorming groups.
   3.That it may be more effective to ask group members to develop their ideas in one group, and than express them to another group.
   4.That it may be more effective to ask group members to develop their ideas separately, and then express them in a subsequent joint meeting.

   A. 1 & 2
   B. 2 & 3
   C. 1 & 3
   D. 2 & 4

3. Watson and Rayner (1`920) conditioned “Little Albert’ to fear white rats by banging a hammer on a steel bar as the child played with a white rat. Later, it was discovered that Albert feared not only white rats but white stuffed toys and Santa’s beard as well. Albert’s fear of these other objects can be attributed to:

   A. the law effect
   B. stimulus generalization
   C. stimulus discrimination
   D. an overactive imagination

4. In an effort to prevent participants in an experiment from trying to confirm the researchers’ predictions, psychologists sometimes:

   A. treat information about individual participants confidentially
   B. deceive participants about the true purpose of an experiment
   C. allow subjects to pick whether they are in the experimental or control group
   D. allow people to decide for themselves whether they want to participate in an experiment

5. Tolman’s experiment with rats in the maze was aimed to study:

   A. Operant conditioning learning
   B. Trial-and-error learning
   C. Latent Learning
   D. Classical conditioning learning

6. Which TWO of the following statements are true of blocking?
   1: The phenomenon of blocking provides an interesting and much-studied instance of failure to learn, in spite of contiguous presentations of the CS and the US
   2: In a blocking experiment, animals receive training with what is termed a compound CS (Phase 2)
   3: The experimental group has first received a phase of training in which the US alone is conditioned (Phase 1)
   4: The experimental groups shows no (or very little evidence of learning about the CS that is presented in Phase 1

   A. 1 & 2
   B. 2 & 3
   C. 3 & 4
   D. 1 & 3

7. Theories explain results, predict future outcomes and:

   A. rely only on naturalistic observations
   B. guide research for future studies
   C. rely only on surveys
   D. rely only on case studies

8. Dr. Jamshed wants to see if person’s IQ changes as they get older. To do this he takes three groups of subjects. Group i is made up of 10 years old, and Group III of 25 years old. Dr. Jamshed tests all three groups of their IQ level. The design of this experiment is called:

   A. longitudinal study
   B. more information is needed to determine the design of the experiment
   C. Gesell’s dome
   D. cross sectional study

9. Solomon Asch designed an experiment in which participants made judgements about the length of lines. He was studying_________?

   A. Compliance
   B. Obedience
   C. Rule making
   D. Conformity

10. In one experiment, most of the participants who viewed a videotape of men tossing a basketball remained unaware of an umbrella-toting woman sauntering across the screen. This illustrated:

    A. Retinal disparity
    B. Stroboscopic movement
    C. Perceptual constancy
    D. Inattentional blindness