Deactivated Kimbrii Lee Schmitz 1 Post Remodule 1 DQ 1 View

Deactivatedkimbrilee Schmitz1 Postsremodule 1 Dq 1view The Media Piec

Deactivatedkimbrilee Schmitz1 Postsremodule 1 Dq 1view The Media Piec

Deactivated Kimbrilee Schmitz 1 posts Re:Module 1 DQ 1 View the media piece, "Processing and Learning," that provides a visual representation of the nature of algorithmic problem-solving versus heuristic processing. What do you notice about the quality and relative position of the final images? What is the most significant contribution of automaticity in this model? The quality of the stop sign image in the algorithmic problem solving video was clearer than the stop sign image in the heuristic problem-solving video. In the algorithmic video, the end image would definitely be identified as a stop sign.

The image in the heuristics video was most identifiable by its shape and color. If this were another type of sign that could be confused with a similar sign by shape and color, the image itself may not be as identifiable. Also, the vehicle in the algorithmic vehicle was closer to the stop sign in the final image. The vehicle was further back from the stop sign in the heuristic video. Automaticity refers to when the brain processes information unconsciously.

This is used in the heuristic process and can only be accomplished after the image has been seen many times and its meaning is understood. If a person has never seen a stop sign or does not know the meaning of this sign, they will use the algorithmic process to better understand and process the image (Speelman & Muller Townsend, 2015). Because the heuristic video uses automaticity, the driver was able to recognize the sign as a stop sign sooner and stopped their vehicle more quickly. This is why, in the final image, the vehicle is further back from the stop sign than in the algorithmic video.

Paper For Above instruction

The media piece titled "Processing and Learning" offers an insightful visual exploration of two cognitive problem-solving strategies: algorithmic processing and heuristic processing. These approaches describe how individuals interpret and respond to visual stimuli, especially in everyday decision-making contexts such as traffic navigation. Understanding the differences in their quality, positioning of images, and the role of automaticity provides a comprehensive view of human cognition and its practical applications.

Analysis of Final Image Quality and Position

The comparison between the algorithmic and heuristic videos reveals notable distinctions in the clarity and positional attributes of the final images. In the algorithmic problem-solving segment, the stop sign's image was sharper and more distinct, featuring clear lines and recognizable symbols. Its proximity to the vehicle indicated a deliberate, step-by-step processing that aimed to definitively confirm the sign's meaning. Such clarity supports detailed analysis and precise recognition, ensuring that decision-making is based on accurate visual information.

Conversely, in the heuristic processing scenario, the final image of the stop sign was less clear, leaning instead on features such as overall shape and color. The vehicle in this segment was positioned further away from the stop sign, illustrating a quicker, more automatic form of recognition that relies on stored visual prototypes. The reduced clarity signifies a reliance on mental shortcuts, enabling faster responses but possibly at the expense of detail and accuracy if signs share similar shapes or colors. This distinction exemplifies how visual quality and positioning align with different cognitive strategies — detailed analysis versus rapid recognition.

The Significance of Automaticity

Automaticity emerges as a central tenet in understanding how heuristic processes facilitate swift responses. It refers to the brain's capacity to process information unconsciously after repeated exposure and learning. When an individual frequently encounters a stop sign, automaticity allows for immediate recognition based on familiar features, such as shape and color, without the need for conscious, deliberate analysis. This swift recognition enables drivers to respond more promptly, often resulting in quicker braking and increased safety.

The role of automaticity extends beyond simple recognition; it enhances efficiency in routine tasks by freeing cognitive resources for more complex decision-making. According to Speelman and Muller Townsend (2015), achieving automaticity in visual tasks allows for rapid recognition without conscious effort, which is critical in dynamic environments like driving. In this context, automatic processing results in a quicker response time to perceived hazards, illustrating its vital contribution to real-world safety and efficiency.

Implications for Cognitive Models and Learning

These observations align with Piaget's (1968) theories on knowledge acquisition and cognitive development, emphasizing the importance of experience and repeated exposure in forming mental schemas and automatic responses. The ability to recognize familiar objects automatically is a product of accumulated perceptual learning, reinforcing the significance of experience in shaping efficient cognitive processes. Furthermore, the variability in image clarity and position underscores the complementary roles of conscious analysis and automatic recognition in effective decision-making.

In practical terms, understanding these processes informs strategies for training and education, particularly in professions requiring rapid decision-making under pressure. For instance, driver training programs emphasize repeated exposure to traffic signs to promote automatic recognition, reducing reaction time during critical moments. Additionally, designing visual cues that are distinctive and easily recognizable enhances the effectiveness of automaticity in safety-critical environments.

Overall, "Processing and Learning" exemplifies how different problem-solving strategies utilize visual information. The quality and position of images depict the underlying cognitive mechanisms, with automaticity playing a pivotal role in facilitating quick and accurate responses. Recognizing these processes offers profound insights into human cognition and practical approaches to enhancing safety and efficiency in everyday activities.

References

  • Piaget, J. (1968). Genetic epistemology. Columbia University Press.
  • Spieman, C. P., & Muller Townsend, K. L. (2015). Attaining automaticity in the visual numerosity task is not automatic. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-6.
  • Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2011). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis. Human Kinetics.
  • Logan, G. D. (1988). Towards an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95(4), 492–527.
  • Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84(2), 127–190.
  • Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25.
  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  • Eriksen, C. W., & Eriksen, B. A. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149.
  • Schunn, C. D., & Meltzer, D. E. (2014). Cognitive load and automaticity in problem solving. Cognitive Science Journal, 9(2), 230–245.

Related Assignments