Reply to Junjira

Reply to Junjira

Echoic memory refers to brief sounds recorded by the human mind after an auditory stimulus is enforced. Iconic memory, on the other hand, is about how the brain remembers and stores images we see (Crowder). Both memories serve us well but only in particular situations. Suppose you need to recall a specific point the lecturer said only in passing while discussing a broader concept? According to (Watkins and Watkins), it is far much easier to recall the last thing you heard as compared to the last thing you saw. It is referred to as the long-term modality effect. Many other scholars make good cases in support of this. The iconic memory is too transitory to have practical results in the recollection process (Averbach and Coriell). Studies also tend to imply that echoic information is most often stored in the pre-categorical acoustic storage (PAS) memory buffer. In so doing, every item heard when a list is recited, for example, is recorded un-categorically, making it much easier to recall. Anytime you listen keenly to something being said, and an additional disturbance occurs, it is fair to say that chances of remembering the former will be harder. (Crowder) refers to this as the suffix effect. It is a very selective effect that hampers one’s ability to recall the more critical item when a less important one comes last. Decision making generally needs a combination of the two types of memory. The two work best where the workload is slightly less. The suffix effect, which almost rarely happens (Galotti), should also be reduced.

Reply to Claire

Interviews can be awkward and dreadful, depending on the scene where it occurs. People are interviewed for several reasons, including for employment purposes. Philosophy has allowed us to take advantage of some of the human predispositions to become successful in interview sessions. Interference theory is hampering of recollection of something that has previously occurred. Specific situations like the job interview scenario one to be as proactive as possible. While you may not succeed in totally erasing your contender’s impact on the interviewer, we may need to better our resume and charm in a way that leaves a lasting impression. The recency effect, like the name suggests, is taking advantage of the fact that human memory is very short-term. An interviewee needs to be aware that making an impression is not the end of it. Timing is essential concerning how well you want to be received. Information is much better prioritized when one has not had the distractions of a busy day.

Reply to Esther

Piaget’s theory dictates that knowledge is acquired, constructed, and gradually put into use as one develops. It focuses on cognition, which refers to a child’s development when it comes to how they process information, their ability to retain it, language, and perception, among other variables. While many researchers tend to agree that this theory is quite comprehensive and is correct to many degrees, the Swiss psychologist has received some heat on the lack of inclusion of all necessary variables. He attributes what happens to a child to stages that they must undergo. He refers to the Sensorimotor (0-2 years), preoperational (2-7 years), concrete operational7-11 years), and the formal operational (11 years and above). Piaget rationalizes progressive development. He recognizes some of the limitations of his study, such as the fact that his description of development is not continuous. According to Piaget, information is both static and active. He terms them as operative and figurative, which leads to his two other basics of accommodation and assimilation.

Reply to Melissa

I agree with the notion that all variables must be extensively taken into account when carrying out any research. In so doing, everything is well accounted for, leaving little room for doubt and criticism. (Kail and Cavanaugh) seem to think that Piaget’s theory lacks evaluation of the socio-cultural and environmental aspect of it all. I tend to agree because humans naturally adapt to things they see or interact with daily. Exposure does affect one’s level of intelligence or, at most, even how that intelligence is perceived. The case study of the children in one home but exposed to different settings says it all. Intelligence is static and active as Piaget stated, but the omission of the fact that how it is manifested is biased by how and where we grow up is an undervaluing of the whole aspect.

Reply to Ben

Assimilation is our adaptation of foreign information. Accommodation, on the other hand, is changing one’s preexisting knowledge base to fit into one’s environment. It is all based on the assumption that the human brain is wired to follow preset stages. For one, this theory undermines a child’s mental capacity. It works on the idea that a fully-formed human brain tends to function better because it has been conditioned to do so since infancy. The question posed, however, is whether this child can gain a higher brain capacity or push it to do more if they are put in environments where they are more likely to want to perform better. It is true, as Piaget puts it, that many activities and conditions promote understanding. There are, however, limited ideas in his theory that make me comfortable that this is an inclusion of all variables. Piaget was a bit too general in terms of the assumption that children only think to a level constricted to their age bracket. It is only fair to assume that particular children are fairly more intelligent, assuming specific conditional changes such as environment are made until we can conclusively prove otherwise.