Perceptual Differences Between Men and Women

In experiment 1, participants were instructed to press a key to determine if the stimulus was red, blue, yellow, or green. On the second half of the experiment, the stimulus appeared in grey with only one colored letter which was positioned randomly. Error rates for the experiment were below 2.5% for each condition, which is quite low. Experiment 2 was the same as experiment 1 except that there were 114 data collections instead of 288 and there were 36 practice trials instead of 72. According to experiment 1 and 2 it is suggested that the effect of

A total of 59 participants took part in this experiment. They were split into two independent experimental groups, one being the control group, and the other the experimental group. There were 30 participants in the control group, and 29 participants in the experimental group. The male to female ratio was fairly equal with

Differences related to gender in spatial memory are most widely described and studied of cognitive sex differences. In 1974 Maccoby and Jacklin established that males usually perform better than females in measures of spatial performance, and this discovery has been constantly replicated in multiple studies covering various developmental stages (McGivern et al. 1997; Lewin et al. 2001) and spatial tasks (Dabbs Jr. et al. 1998; Driscoll et al. 2005).

The purpose of the study was to measure the effect that the Flicker Paradigm had on visual perception. The Flicker Paradigm causes a distraction while there is a change made in the image. It was designed to test how long the groups took to react to a change in the visual field. The test is meant to show that the disturbance in the visual field made it much more challenging for the viewer to notice any changes that were made in the image. The hypothesis stated that the experimental group, the group using the Flicker Paradigm, would take longer to notice the change in the visual field than the control group, which had no flicker between the altered images. This is because the disturbance in the visual field caused the brain to miss the change that was made to the image because the information was deemed as unimportant. The majority of the perceived changes occurred in the background of the scene, and were considered minor in reference to the whole scene. This was proven true from the data collected, and coincided with previous tests. (Rensink, R. A. 2000). The data in tables 1.1 and 1.3 shows the individual participant data for the test with a flicker for both tests one and two. Tables 1.2 and 1.4 represent the individual results for the tests with no flicker, or the control group. Graphs 1.1 and 1.2 showed the relationship between the time taken to recognize alterations in the images. The data was taken from the average time to recognize the change from all

16. The participant population will consist of undergraduate students currently enrolled in psychology courses at Valdosta State University. Approximately 20 participants will perform the experiment. All participants will be at least eighteen years of age. Students will be asked to voluntarily participate in this experiment. If a participant refuses to participate in the experiment then he or she will not be bothered again.

Luck and Vogel's change detection experiment was made to determine exactly how much information can a person withhold from a quick flash of stimulus. They modified the previous change dtetction experiment alittle. Rather than asking the person if there was a change in the display only, they also ask the person to recall the amount of items

Researchers do differ on their perspectives on change blindness depending upon their method approach and background or field; however literature is largely in an agreed consensus as to what change blindness is and its effects on attention. Change blindness is studied by using the methodology of change detection, which is where participants are shown two stimuli that are

The trials for each of the six conditions were presented in a random order. The experimenter controlled for differences among participants by having them set their own equiluminant point for the cue stimuli and eliminated luminance differences by embedding the stimuli in a random luminance noise. The experimenter also controlled for outliers by eliminating response

The specific population chosen for this experiment were the male Year 11 students and a sample of 30

Each experiment had the same procedure among different participant groups. The participants in the first experiment was thirty-one undergraduate or graduate student from the University of Cambridge. For the second experiment, fifty-nine people were recruited by community advertisement. And in the last experiment, twenty-seven survivors from fatal motor vehicle accidents, who developed PTSD (PTSD+) or never suffered from PTSD (PTSD-), were recruited through newspaper advertisements and from local clinics. In each trail of the experiment, the participants need to complete a storage task, which required them to remember 4 to 7 words, and an operation task, which asked them to count the number of a specific shape before and after the present of words. The words and shapes was shown over a neutral or negative background. In each trail, the participants need to complete the task 6 times. In each task, over a background image, four shapes popped up with 250ms each, and a word would appear for 350ms, and the other three shapes would show up with 250ms each. After that, the background image disappeared and the participants need to answer a question about the number of a specific shape they saw. After repeat this for 7 times, the participants were asked to write down all the words they saw in the order they presented. The percentage they correctly recalled was recorded. In each experiment, the independent variables were the negative background

There have always been people saying that violent movies and video games harm children and make them more susceptible to display violent behavior. According to Albert Bandura’s Study called the “Bobo Doll Experiment” this is true. Through this experiment and a few other’s Bandura came up with the Social Learning Theory. The Social Learning Theory is the theory that Bandura used to describe a way of learning through observation or direct instructions.

Participants were given background information on the task, including journal articles and studies related to the topic. Under the background is instructions on how to complete the task in detail. In total, there are 6 trials. Each trial presents 15 words in one-second intervals.

It contributes because woman at times can multitask and are more able to see the bird’s eye view then man. Meaning woman can handle many task and get them all done while men can only focus one to maybe two or three task and become overwhelmed after that. The bird's eye view comes from the fact that women tend to read thru instruction fully then complete a task. Men read each instruction and act we believe in action, while women like to think more from the higher ground with a bird's eye view. There was a television show that put men against women with instructions, the winner was whoever got done first. The men read each instruction and worked thru one step at a time meaning an ant eye view. The woman read the instruction fully first

The VideoToolbox and PsychToolbox extension of the application MATLAB were used to produce the stimuli using an Apple Mac Mini (OS X) computer, while A 17-in. Viglen VL905T CRT monitor with a resolution of 1,024 x 786 pixels and a refresh rate of 100 Hz, was used to display the stimuli. Results in the form of accuracy and reaction time were gathered using a standard QWERTY keyboard, while the experiment itself took place in a consistently darkened room, while the participants sat in an adjustable chair at a distance of 60 cm away from the screen.

They presented shapes to their participants very quickly, almost so they could not see them and then asked which of three stimuli were presented to them. Many participants reported not seeing anything but their rate of correct answers was above chance level. This implies that the stimuli were processed pre-attentionally as the participants had no explicit recollection of seeing the stimuli and therefore did not pay attention to it. However, a criticism of this study is that it was conducted 80 years ago, which would mean that their equipment is not to the same standard as modern studies. This could have led to methodological problems including whether they presented each stimulus for the same length of time in every condition and to every participant.