Information Processing Model: The Information Processing Model is a framework used by cognitive psychologists to explain and describe mental processes. The model likens the thinking process to how a computer works.

Just like a computer, the human mind takes in information, organizes and stores it to be retrieved at a later time. Just as the computer has an input device, a processing unit, a storage unit, and an output device, so does the human mind have equivalent structures.

In a computer, information is entered by means of input devices like a keyboard or scanner. In the human mind, the input device is called the Sensory Register, composed of sensory organs like the eyes and the ears through which we receive information about our surroundings.

As information is received by a computer, it is processed in the Central Processing Unit, which is equivalent to the Working Memory or Short-Term Memory. In the human mind, this is where information is temporarily held so that it may be used, discarded, or transferred into long-term memory.

In a computer, information is stored in a hard disk, which is equivalent to the long-term memory. This is where we keep information that is not currently being used. Information stored in the Long-Term Memory may be kept for an indefinite period of time.

When a computer processes information, it displays the results by means of an output device like a computer screen or a printout. In humans, the result of information processing is exhibited through behavior or actions - a facial expression, a reply to a question, or body movement.

The Information Processing Model is often used by educators and trainers to guide their teaching methodologies.

Information Processing ModelsIn sport we have to learn and perform a wide range of perceptual motor skills and to select the appropriate skill action for a given situation. Galligan et al (2000)[3] identifies the way we make that skill selection is through our information processing system. This system is known as the DCR process - we Detect information, Compare it with previous experiences and then React.

Models

Two of the better known models which are generally referred to are Welford's (Welford 1968)[1] and Whiting's (Whiting 1969)[2]. Both models reflect the same process although they use slightly different terminology. The process is:

stimulus identification stage response identification/selection stage response programming stage

Welford's Model

Welford's model suggests that we:

take in information through our senses and temporarily store all of these inputs prior to sorting them out the inputs that are seen as relevant to the decision are then stored in the short-term memory

a decision is made by comparing the information in the short-term memory with previous experiences stored in the long-term memory

with reference to the long term memory for the required action the decision is carried out the action and the results are stored for future reference the whole process then begins again

Sensory input

The sensory information relevant to the situation is stored in the short term memory. The information is taken in through the senses prior to a decision being made in three main ways. These are:

what we see (vision) what we hear (auditory) what we sense (proprioception)

Short and long term memories

All information gathered from the various sensory inputs is stored for a split second in the short term memory before it is processed. It is suggested that the short term memory can only hold up to seven pieces of information and that it is retained for less than a minute.

The long term memory, which appears to have limitless capacity, contains information relating to past experiences.

Decision process

The decision process takes place by comparing the current situation, held in the short term memory, with previous experiences, held in the long term memory, to determine an appropriate action.

Action

The action is performed with reference to the movement pattern stored in long term memory. Once the action is completed, the situation and result are stored in the long term memory for future reference.

Whitting's Model

Whiting identifies three stages:

Perceptual mechanisms (sensory input) Translator mechanisms (decision process) Effector mechanisms (action)

Referenced Material

1. WELFORD, A.T. (1968) Fundamentals of skill. London: Methuen2. WHITING, H. (1969) Acquiring ball skill. London: Bell3. GALLIGAN, F. et al. (2000)Acquiring Skill In: GALLIGAN, F. et al., Advanced PE for Edexcel. Bath:

Bath Press, p. 116

Page Reference

The reference for this page is:

MACKENZIE, B. (2006) Information Processing Models [WWW] Available from: http://www.brianmac.co.uk/infomodel.htm [Accessed 14/8/2012]

Michael OreyDepartment of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, University of Georgia

Review of Information Processing

Contents[hide]

1 Introduction 2 Sensory Registers 3 Short-term Memory 4 Long-term Memory 5 References 6 Instructional Scenarios

o 6.1 Language Learning o 6.2 Teacher Practice

7 Bibliography 8 Additional Resources 9 Citation

Introduction

Figure 1. The Inspiration web above shows how Information Processing can be likened to the model of a computer. The Sensory Register would include input devices like CDs. Short Term Memory includes the Central Processing Unit. Long Term Memory would be viewed as the hard drive or storage. By Tiffany Davis, Meghann Hummel, and Kay Sauers (2006).

Information processing (IP) is a cognitive processing theory (see, Ashcraft, 1994). While other theories in this e-book are learning or instructional in nature, IP theory seeks to explain how the mind functions. Learning components such as rehearsal and elaboration are associated with IP; however, most emphasis is placed on understanding how information is processed rather than how learning happens.

Another aspect of this theory is that it is explicitly analogous to a computer's processor. The basic IP model has three components: sensory register (SR), short-term memory (STM) or working memory, and long-term memory (LTM). The corresponding components of the computer are input devices or registers, the CPU, and hard drive storage, respectively. This metaphor is superficially valid, but as it is taken to its limits, the mechanical comparison breaks down. However, knowing that this model is a cognitive processing model and knowing that the model is based on an explicit metaphor with a computer is helpful in understanding IP theory.

Let's start with the model and an example. As I write this, I see my cup on my desk. Let's follow this image through the system. The model is depicted below and shows the cup being processed. In the narrative that follows, I will refer back to this cup as it is being cognitively processed.

Caption: The illustration above represents my coffee cup example. Light reflects off the cup and into the eye. The image is then transferred through the optic nerve to the sensory register. From the sensory register, the image is moved into Short-term Memory (STM) as information about the cup is drawn from Long-term Memory (LTM). The process of elaboration occurs when information is retrieved from the LTM in order to link to the new information. I would like to thank Liyan Song for her work on the Flash model shown above.

Sensory Registers

The best understood of the sensory registers (SRs) are for hearing (echoic) and seeing (iconic). Very little is known about tactile (touch), olfactory (smell), and gustatory (taste) SRs. In the cup example, light reflecting off the cup hits my eye; the image is transferred through my optic nerve to the sensory register. If I do not attend to it, it fades from this memory store and is lost. In fact, my cup is on my desk most of the day, and I see it without really "seeing" it many times during the day. Each memory stage has four attributes: representation, capacity, duration, and cause of forgetting. For the visual sensory register, for example, representation is iconic-- limited to the field of vision, and lasts for about 250 milliseconds. The main cause of forgetting is decay. Representation in the auditory register is echoic (based on sound); its duration is 2-3 seconds, it is only limited to the sounds we actually can hear and decay is the primary cause for forgetting. As previously mentioned, much less is known about the other three register types.

Short-term Memory

Short-term memory (STM) is also known as working memory, and is where consciousness exists. In the cup example, if I attend to the cup, it will be moved into STM. At this point, it is difficult to talk about the cup in STM memory without referring to long-term memory (LTM). For example, I might attend to the cup and think, "That's my cup. It has coffee in it. I poured that coffee 3 hours ago." Each of those statements draws on LTM. I know it is my cup because it is the one that a potter friend of mine made for me. I know it has coffee in it, because I remember getting it this morning. I know that I poured that cup at 9:00 am. The statement that the coffee is 3 hours old required me to look at the current time, and retrieve from LTM that subtracting the current time from pouring time tells me how old the coffee is. Performing the subtraction used no STM processing space, because experience in doing arithmetic allows me to do this automatically.

STM is where the world meets what is already known, and where thinking is done. You perceive and attend to stimuli; that information is then actively processed based on information stored in LTM. In terms of the characteristics of this memory stage, the representation is echoic. It is limited to 5-9 items, and it lasts only about 20 seconds. Interference is the principal cause of forgetting. The most important of these characteristics is the 5 to 9 items. A common example of this is calling information for a phone number. After the operator gives you the number, you begin repeating it to keep it in STM. This repetition is termed rehearsal. Rehearsal can also be used to get information into LTM, but it is very inefficient. Rehearsal primarily serves a maintenance function; it can be used to keep information in STM. In the phone number example, if someone interrupts you to ask you a question while you are rehearsing the number, responding interferes with rehearsal, and the phone number is lost. You must call information again.

Long-term Memory

The final stage in the IP model is long-term memory (LTM), which is typically termed call memory. LTM is everything we know and know how to do. For most cognitive psychologists, the world of LTM can be categorized as one of three types of memory: declarative, procedural or episodic. Declarative knowledge can be defined as knowledge needed to complete this sentence. "Knowing that..." By contrast, procedural knowledge is, "Knowing how..." These two types of knowledge,account for most of what is learned in work and school. The remaining type of knowledge is episodic which might also be called anecdotal. This is memory for specific events in one's life: a memory of your first kiss or of your graduation. The personal stories in our lives comprise episodic memory. While this makes for a neat tautology, some have suggested that it is incomplete.

Figure 2. This Inspiration web illustrates that Long Term Memory consists of declarative knowledge ("I know that...even numbers end with the digits 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8!"), procedural knowledge ("I know how& to pronounce and comprehend new vocabulary!"), and episodic knowledge ("I remember when& I graduated from high school!"). By Tiffany Davis, Meghann Hummel, and Kay Sauers (2006).

Pavio (1980) has asserted that memory for images differs from memory for words. He offers a dual coding hypothesis asserting that when we see an image, both the image and a label for that image are stored in memory.

He has extended the hypothesis, suggesting that dual codes may exist for the other senses as well. For example, the smell of an orange is stored along with its label, "orange."

Others have suggested that there are mechanisms that control thinking and learning. These control processes are called metacognition. Metacognition often takes the form of strategies. For example, learners attempting to master a complex topic might choose to use a strategy such as drawing pictures to help them understand the complex inter-relationships of the various components of the topic. Strategic readers might stop and mentally summarize what they have just read in order to ensure comprehension.

The 1970s saw great expansion of understanding of human learning. It became clear that there was no one method of teaching that ensured successful learning. Many researchers, especially in the field of second language (L2) acquisition, recognizing this fact, turned their attention to learners, attempting to answer the question, "Why is it that some learners succeed in learning regardless of the methods used to teach them?" Joan Rubin (1975) and H.H. Stern (1975) formulated lists of the characteristics and strategies that "good" language learners use in their study; Rubin and Thompson (1982) offered guidance to foreign language students on how to make themselves better learners. Extensive study of this notion of learning strategies in the 1980s led Michael O'Malley and his associates (1985) to formulate a list of 24 strategies used by English as a Second Language (ESL) students in their study. Perhaps most important, the strategies were classified into three categories, as follows:

Metacognitive strategies is a term borrowed from IP theory. These strategies, according to O'Malley et. al. (cited in Brown,1987), "indicate an 'executive ' function...that involve planning for learning, thinking about the learning process as it is taking place, monitoring...and evaluating learning (p. 94)..." Metacognitive strategies might include using advance organizers, self-planning, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation.

Cognitive strategies are more task-specific, and often refer to "direct manipulation of the learning material itself (Brown, 1987)." Examples of cognitive strategies are note-taking, repetition, guessing meaning from context, or using mnemonic devices.

Caption: The animation illustrates the use of cognitive strategies to help solve a mathematical equation. The FOIL method, when used as a mnemonic, will take the student through the appropriate steps to solve the problem. The student has used a cognitive strategy to recall the mnemonic that is most useful in this situation. By Mari-Amanda Grigsby, James Holden, Aron Scott Foster, and Lucas Amaral (2006).

Socioaffective strategies refer to strategies that use association with or input from teachers or peers.

caption

O'Malley and his colleagues have gone on to suggest that these strategies can be overtly taught to learners, facilitating one of the most important goals of learning, learner autonomy.

Finally, there is another viewpoint that offers the notion of concepts. For example, there exists a concept called "bird," which can be reduced to declarative statements such as: "It has feathers," "It has wings and flies," "It lays eggs," and the like. The concept of "bird" can also include our episodic experiences with birds--the parakeet I had when I was a child, the sparrow I found dead by the fence one morning, etc. It can also include the hundreds of images that we have seen of birds, as well as all instances of real birds we have seen. All of this collectively is what we know of as "bird." It is the concept of bird, the tightly woven collection of knowledge that we have for birds.

In the end, there are five types of knowledge in LTM--declarative, procedural, episodic, imagery, and strategic knowledge; there also exists one collective type called conceptual knowledge. For the LTM stage, the

representation is semantic (based on meaning). Capacity and duration are considered unlimited in LTM, and the cause of forgetting is failure to retrieve.

The final issue regarding the IP model is how information gets into LTM. This primarily takes place through a process called elaboration. When I think about teaching learners, I need to know what they already know so that they can relate the new information to their existing knowledge. This is elaboration. While teachers can do some of that for learners, elaboration is an active process. The learner must be actively engaged with the material that is to be learned. This does not necessarily mean that the learner must be physically active; rather, it implies that they should be actively relating this new piece of information to other ideas that they already know. LTM is often regarded as a network of ideas. In order to remember something, ideas are linked, one to another until the sought-after information is found. Failure to remember information does not mean that it has been forgotten; it is merely the procedure for retrieval has been forgotten. With more elaboration, more pathways to that piece of information are created . More pathways make retrieval of the information more likely. If it is found, it is not forgotten.

References

Ashcraft, M.H. (1994). Human memory and cognition (2nd Ed.). NY: Harper Collins. Brown, H. Douglas (1987). Principles of Language Teaching and Learning (2nd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall.

O’Malley, M., and Chamot, A., 1994. The CALLA Handbook. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

O'Malley, Michael, Chamot, Anna U., Stewer-Manzanares, Gloria, Russo, Rocco P., and Kupper, Lisa (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly 19:557-584.

Pavio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. NY: Oxford Press.

Rubin, Joan (1975). What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESOL Quarterly 9:41-51.

Stern, H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? The Canadian Modern Language Review 31:304-318.

Instructional Scenarios

We have two educational stories to help you, the reader, understand how information processing, particularly metacognition, can be applied in the classroom.

Language Learning

Focuses on a scenario in a language arts class in a suburban American high school: Language Learning

Teacher Practice

Focuses on a scenario incorporating metacognitive strategies in teaching: Teacher Practice

Bibliography

Additional Resources

Here is a nice chapter from a book by Lloyd Rieber about the IP model and graphics. The title of the chapter is, "Psychological Foundations of Instructional Graphics" Lloyd has also made a nice interactive model for the dual coding theory. You can get to that module by clicking here.

Cognitive Learning Theory http://faculty.soe.syr.edu/takoszal/Thailand_Workshops-Su05/web-links/cognitivism_overview_04.pdf

The Information Processing Approach http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/infoproc.html

Information Processing Theory http://tip.psychology.org/miller.html

Reciprocal Teaching http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/atrisk/at6lk38.htm

Citation

APA Citation: Orey, M. (2001). Information Processing. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved <insert date>, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

The Information Processing Approach to Cognition

Citation: Huitt, W. (2003). The information processing approach to cognition. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved [date] from, http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cogsys/infoproc.html

Return to: | Overview of the Cognitive System | EdPsyc: Courses | more in-depth paper |

Overview

As stated in the introduction to this section, cognitive psychology represents the dominant approach in psychology today. A primary focus of this approach is on memory (the storage and retrieval of information), a subject that has been of interest for thousands of years. The most widely accepted theory is labeled the "stage theory," based on the work of Atkinson and Shriffin (1968). The focus of this model is on how information is stored in memory; the model proposes that information is processed and stored in 3 stages. In this theory, information is thought to be processed in a serial, discontinuous manner as it moves from one stage to the next. This theory is discussed in more detail below.

In addition to the stage theory model of information processing, there are three more that are widely accepted. The first is based on the work of Craik and Lockhart (1972) and is labeled the "levels-of-processing" theory. The major proposition is that learners utilize different levels of elaboration as they process information. This is done on a continuum from perception, through attention, to labeling, and finally, meaning. The key point is that all stimuli that activate a sensory receptor cell are permanently stored in memory, but that different levels of processing (i.e., elaboration) contribute to an ability to access, or retrieve, that memory. Evidence from hypnosis and forensic psychology provide some interesting support for this hypothesis. This approach has been extended by Bransford (1979) who suggests that it is not only how the information is processed, but how the information is accessed. When the demands for accessing information more closely match the methods used to elaborate or learn the information, more is remembered.

Two other models have been proposed as alternatives to the Atkinson-Shiffrin model: parallel-distributed processing and connectionistic. The parallel-distributed processing model states that information is processed simultaneously by several different parts of the memory system, rather than sequentially as hypothesized by Atkinson-Shiffrin as well as Craik and Lockhart. Work done on how we process emotional data somewhat supports this contention (see Goleman, 1995). The stage-theory model shown below differs slightly from the original Atkinson-Shriffin model in order to incorporate this feature.

The connectionistic model proposed by Rumelhart and McClelland (1986) extends the parallel-distributed processing model. It is one of the dominant forms of current research in cognitive psychology and is consistent with the most recent brain research (see Scientific American, 2000). This model emphasizes the fact that information is stored in multiple locations throughout the brain in the form of networks of connections. It is consistent with the levels-of-processing approach in that the more connections to a single idea or concept, the more likely it is to be remembered.

Even though there are widely varying views within cognitive psychology, there are a few basic principles that most cognitive psychologists agree with.

General principles

The first is the assumption of a limited capacity of the mental system. This means that the amount of information that can be processed by the system is constrained in some very important ways. Bottlenecks, or restrictions in the flow and processing of information, occur at very specific points.

A second principle is that a control mechanism is required to oversee the encoding, transformation, processing, storage, retrieval and utilization of information. That is, not all of the processing capacity of the system is available; an executive function that oversees this process will use up some of this capability. When one is learning a new task or is confronted with a new environment, the executive function requires more processing power than when one is doing a routine task or is in a familiar environment.

A third principle is that there is a two-way flow of information as we try to make sense of the world around us. We constantly use information that we gather through the senses (often referred to as bottom-up processing) and information we have stored in memory (often called top-down processing) in a dynamic process as we construct meaning about our environment and our relations to it. This is somewhat analogous to the difference between inductive reasoning (going from specific instances to a general conclusion) and deductive reasoning (going from a general principle to specific examples.) A similar distinction can be made between using information we derive from the senses and that generated by our imaginations.

A fourth principle generally accepted by cognitive psychologists is that the human organism has been genetically prepared to process and organize information in specific ways. For example, a human infant is more likely to look at a human face than any other stimulus. Given that the field of focus of a human infant is 12 to 18 inches, one can surmise that this is an important aspect of the infant's survival. Other research has discovered additional biological predispositions to process information. For example, language development is similar in all human infants regardless of language spoken by adults or the area in which they live (e.g., rural versus urban, Africa versus Europe.) All human infants with normal hearing babble and coo, generate first words, begin the use of telegraphic speech (e.g., ball gone), and overgeneralize (e.g., using "goed to the store" when they had previously used "went to the store") at approximately the same ages. The issue of language development is an area where cognitive and behavioral psychologists as well as cognitive psychologists with different viewpoints have fought many battles regarding the processes underlying human behavior. Needless to say the disussion continues.

Stage Model of Information Processing

One of the major issues in cognitive psychology is the study of memory. The dominant view is labeled the "stage theory" and is based on the work of Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968).

This model proposes that information is processed and stored in 3 stages.

Sensory memory (STSS) . Sensory memory is affiliated with the transduction of energy (change from one energy from to another). The environment makes available a variety of sources of information (light, sound, smell, heat, cold, etc.), but the brain only understands electrical energy. The body has special sensory receptor cells that transduce (change from one form of energy to another) this external energy to something the brain can understand. In the process of transduction, a memory is created. This memory is very short (less than 1/2 second for vision; about 3 seconds for hearing).

It is absolutely critical that the learner attend to the information at this initial stage in order to transfer it to the next one. There are two major concepts for getting information into STM:

First, individuals are more likely to pay attention to a stimulus if it has an interesting feature. We are more likely to get an orienting response if this is present.

Second, individuals are more likely to pay attention if the stimulus activates a known pattern. To the extent we have students call to mind relevant prior learning before we begin our presentations, we can take advantage of this principle.

Short-term memory (STM) . Short-term memory is also called working memory and relates to what we are thinking about at any given moment in time. In Freudian terms, this is conscious memory. It is created by our paying attention to an external stimulus, an internal thought, or both. It will initially last somewhere around 15 to 20 seconds unless it is repeated (called maintenance rehearsal) at which point it may be available for up to 20 minutes. The hypothalamus is a brain structure thought to be involved in this shallow processing of information. The frontal lobes of the cerebral cortex is the structure associated with working memory. For example, you are processing the words you read on the screen in your frontal lobes. However, if I ask, "What is your telephone number?" your brain immediately calls that from long-term memory and replaces what was previously there.

Another major limit on information processing in STM is in terms of the number of units that can be processed an any one time. Miller (1956) gave the number as 7 + 2, but more recent research suggests the number may be more like 5 + 2 for most things we are trying to remember. Because of the variability in how much individuals can work with (for some it may be three, for others seven) it is necessary to point out important information. If some students can only process three units of information at a time, let us make certain it is the most important three.

There are two major concepts for retaining information in STM: organization and repetition. There are four major types of organization that are most often used in instructional design:

Component (part/whole)--classification by category or concept (e.g., the components of the teaching/learning model);

Sequential -- chronological; cause/effect; building to climax (e.g., baking a cake, reporting on a research study);

Relevance -- central unifying idea or criteria (e.g., most important principles of learning for boys and girls, appropriate management strategies for middle school and high school students);

Transitional (connective) -- relational words or phrases used to indicate qualitative change over time (e.g., stages in Piaget's theory of cognitive development or Erikson's stages of socioemotional development)

A related issue to organization is the concept of chunking or grouping pieces of data into units. For example, the letters "b d e" constitute three units of information while the word "bed" represents one unit even though it is composed of the same number of letters. Chunking is a major technique for getting and keeping information in short-term memory; it is also a type of elaboration that will help get information into long-term memory.

Repetition or rote rehearsal is a technique we all use to try to "learn" something. However, in order to be effective this must be done after forgetting begins. Researchers advise that the learner should not repeat immediately the content (or skill), but wait a few minutes and then repeat. For the most part, simply memorizing something does not lead to learning (i.e., relatively permanent change). We all have anecdotal evidence that we can remember something we memorized (a poem for example), but just think about all the material we tried to learn this way and the little we are able to remember after six months or a year.

Long-term memory (LTM). Long-term memory is also called preconscious and unconscious memory in Freudian terms. Preconscious means that the information is relatively easily recalled (although it may take several minutes or even hours) while unconscious refers to data that is not available during normal consciousness. It is preconscious memory that is the focus of cognitive psychology as it relates to long-term memory. The levels-of-processing theory, however, has provided some research that attests to the fact that we "know" more than we can easily recall. The two processes most likely to move information into long-term memory are elaboration and distributed practice (referred to as periodic review in the direct instruction model).

There are several examples of elaboration that are commonly used in the teaching/learning process:

imaging -- creating a mental picture; method of loci (locations)--ideas or things to be remembered are connected to objects located in a

familiar location; pegword method (number, rhyming schemes)--ideas or things to be remembered are connected to

specific words (e.g., one-bun, two-shoe, three-tree, etc.) Rhyming (songs, phrases)--information to be remembered is arranged in a rhyme (e.g., 30 days hath

September, April, June, and November, etc.) Initial letter --the first letter of each word in a list is used to make a sentence (the sillier, the better).

Organization (types) of knowledge

As information is stored in long-term memory, it is organized using one or more structures: declarative, procedural, and/or imagery.

Declarative Memory (generally refers to information we can talk about)

Semantic Memory-- facts and generalized information (concepts, principles, rules; problem-solving strategies; learning strategies)

o Schema / Schemata -- networks of connected ideas or relationships; data structures or procedures for organizing the parts of a specific experience into a meaningful system (like a standard or stereotype)

o Proposition -- interconnected set of concepts and relationships; if/then statements (smallest unit of information that can be judged true or false)

o Script -- "declarative knowledge structure that captures general information about a routine series of events or a recurrent type of social event, such as eating in a restaurant or visiting the doctor" (Stillings et al., 1987)

o Frame -- complex organization including concepts and visualizations that provide a reference within which stimuli and actions are judged (also called "Frame of Reference")

o Scheme -- an organization of concepts, principles, rules, etc. that define a perspective and presents specific action patterns to follow

o Program -- set of rules that define what to do in a particular situation o Paradigm -- the basic way of perceiving, thinking, valuing, and doing associated with a

particular vision of reality (Harman, 1970) o Model -- a set of propositions or equations describing in simplified form some aspects of our

experience. Every model is based upon a theory or paradigm, but the theory or paradigm may not be stated in concise form. (Umpleby in Principia Cybernetica Web, no date)

Episodic Memory-- personal experience (information in stories and analogies)

Procedural Memory-- how to (driving a car, riding a bike)

Imagery -- pictures

Concept formation

    One of the most important issues in cognitive psychology is the development or formation of concepts. A concept is the set of rules used to define the categories by which we group similar events, ideas or objects. There are several principles that lend themselves to concept development:

name and define concept to be learned (advance organizer)a. reference to larger categoryb. define attributes

identify relevant and irrelevant attributes (guided discovery) give examples and nonexamples (tie to what is already known -- elaboration) use both inductive (example/experience --> definition) and deductive reasoning (definition --> examples) Name distinctive attributes (guided discovery)

 

USING THE INFORMATION PROCESSING APPROACH IN THE CLASSROOM

Principle Example

1. Gain the students' attention. Use cues to signal when you are ready to begin. Move around the room and use voice inflections.

2. Bring to mind relevant prior learning.

Review previous day's lesson. Have a discussion about previously covered content.

3. Point out important information. Provide handouts.

Write on the board or use transparencies.

4. Present information in an organized manner.

Show a logical sequence to concepts and skills. Go from simple to complex when presenting new material.

5. Show students how to categorize (chunk) related information.

Present information in categories. Teach inductive reasoning.

6. Provide opportunities for students to elaborate on new information.

Connect new information to something already known. Look for similarities and differences among concepts.

7. Show students how to use coding when memorizing lists.

Make up silly sentence with first letter of each word in the list. Use mental imagery techniques such as the keyword method.

8. Provide for repetition of learning.

State important principles several times in different ways during presentation of information (STM).

Have items on each day's lesson from previous lesson (LTM). Schedule periodic reviews of previously learned concepts and skills

(LTM).

9. Provide opportunities for overlearning of fundamental concepts and skills.

Use daily drills for arithmetic facts. Play form of trivial pursuit with content related to class.

 

Heuristic-systematic model of information processingFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (December 2010)

This article may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (December 2010)

Heuristic-Systematic Model of Information Processing, or HSM, is a widely recognized communication model by Shelly Chaiken that attempts to explain how people receive and process persuasive messages. The model states that individuals can process messages in one of two ways: heuristically or systematically. The guiding belief with this model is that individuals are more apt to minimize their use of cognitive resources thus affecting the intake and processing of messages. HSM is quite similar to Elaboration Likelihood Model, or ELM. Both models were predominately developed in the early-to-mid 1980’s and share many of the same concepts and ideas.[1]

Contents

1 History 2 Heuristic Processing 3 Systematic Processing 4 Choosing Systematic or heuristic processing 5 Practical Application 6 Direction of Future Research 7 Criticisms 8 See also 9 References

History

Early research investigating how people process persuasive messaging focused mainly on cognitive theories and the way the mind processed individual inputs. One of the early guiding principles of underlying motivations of persuasive communications came from Leon Festinger’s (1950) statement that incorrect or improper attitudes are generally maladaptive and can have deleterious behavioral, affective, and consequences.

In 1953, Hovland, Janis, and Kelley noted that a sense of "rightness" accompanies holding opinions similar to the opinions of others. In 1987, Holtz and Miller reaffirmed this line of thought by noting, “When other people are perceived to hold similar attitudes, one's confidence in the validity of one's own attitude is increased.” [2]

Another concept that contributed to the HSM was the Sufficiency Principle. This principle reflected widespread notions that people use limited cognitive resources, or use an “economy-minded” approach to information processing when presented with persuasive information. Based on this thought, early assumptions said people were at least partially guided by the “principle of least effort.” This principle stated that in the interest of economy, the mind would often process with the least amount of effort (heuristic), and for more detailed information processing would use more effortful processing (systematic). This was the major difference when compared with the ELM, which described the two different ways information was processed, through central and/or peripheral processing.[3]

Ideas contributing to the development of both persuasion models continue to be refined, “Although people want to hold correct attitudes, the amount and nature of issue-relevant elaboration in which they are willing or able to engage to evaluate a message vary with individual and situational factors." [2]

The developer and main researcher of the HSM was Dr. Shelly Chaiken, a now-retired social psychologist. She first received her BS from the University of Maryland, College Park in 1971 for mathematics. She later earned her MS (in 1975) and her PhD (in 1978) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in social psychology. In her last position before retiring, Chaiken worked as a professor of psychology at New York University.

Under her direction, the HSM has undergone several major revisions. As she noted in 1980 and 1987, the model specified the two modes of heuristic and systematic processing. Then, Dr. Chaiken (et al.) noted in 1989 that the model was extended to specify the psychological conditions for triggering the modes of processing in terms of the discrepancy between actual and desired subjective confidence. In 1986, Dr. Chaiken, and others, updated the model to include underlying motivations.[4]

Heuristic Processing

Heuristic processing uses judgmental rules known as knowledge structures that are learned and stored in memory.[5] The heuristic approach offers an economic advantage by requiring minimal cognitive effort on the part of the

recipient.[6] Heuristic processing is governed by availability, accessibility, and applicability. Availability refers to the knowledge structure, or heuristic, being stored in memory for future use. Accessibility of the heuristic applies to the ability to retrieve the memory for use. Applicability of the heuristic refers to the relevancy of the memory to the judgmental task.[5] Due to the use of knowledge structures, heuristic information processors are likely to agree with messages delivered by experts, or messages that are endorsed by others, without fully processing the semantic content of the message.[7] In comparison to systematic recipients, in judging the validity of messages and rely more on accessible information such as the identity of the source or other non-content cues which exert more impact on persuasion than message characteristics. Heuristic views de-emphasize detailed information processing and focuses on the role of simple rules or cognitive heuristics in mediating persuasion.[6]

Systematic Processing

Systematic processing involves comprehensive and analytic, cognitive processing of judgment-relevant information.[5] The systematic approach values source reliability and message content, which may exert stronger impact on persuasion, when determining message validity.[6] Judgments developed from systematic processing rely heavily on in-depth treatment of judgment-relevant information and respond accordingly to the semantic content of the message.[5] Recipients developing attitudes from a systematic basis exert considerable cognitive effort and actively attempt to comprehend and evaluate the message’s arguments. Systematic recipients also attempt to assess their validity as it relates to the message’s conclusion. Systematic views of persuasion emphasize detailed processing of message content and the role of message-based cognitions in mediating opinion change. While recipients utilizing systematic processing rely heavily on message content, source characteristics and other non-content may supplement the recipients’ assessment of validity in the persuasion message.[6]

Choosing Systematic or heuristic processing

Both Heuristic and Systematic processes may occur independently; it is also possible for both to co-occur in an additive fashion or in a way that the judgmental implications of one process lend a bias nature to the other.[5] The Heuristic-Systematic Model includes the hypothesis that attitudes developed or changed by utilizing heuristic processing alone will likely be less stable, less resistant to counterarguments, and will be less predictive of subsequent behavior than attitudes developed or changed utilizing systematic processing.[6]

Recipients may sometimes choose to accept message conclusions they might otherwise have correctly rejected, or vice versa, had they properly invested the time and effort needed to receive and scrutinize the message.[6] When the recipient views the argumentation judgment as being inconsequential, the recipient will likely place greater value on economical concerns than reliability concerns.

When economic concerns are predominant, the recipient will likely employ heuristic processing when formulating argumentation judgment. Reliability concerns are influenced by the level of the recipient’s issue-involvement or response-involvement.

When reliability concerns are predominant, the recipient will likely employ systematic processing when formulating argumentation judgment. When recipients perceive significant importance in formulating highly accurate argumentation judgment, the recipient will likely employ a systematic processing strategy. Source credibility affects persuasion under conditions of low, but not high, issue-involvement and response-involvement. [6]

Practical Application

Research into information processing, especially in persuasive messaging, has a natural application in advertising, specifically medical awareness. A 2004 study by Suzanne K. Steginga, PhD, and Stefano Occhipinti, PhD, Queensland Cancer Fund and the School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia, investigated the utility of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model as a framework for the investigation of

patient decision making. A total of 111 men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer were assessed using Verbal Protocol Analysis and self-report measures. The results showed: “Most men (68%) preferred that decision making be shared equally between them and their doctor. Men’s use of the expert opinion heuristic was related to men’s verbal reports of decisional uncertainty and having a positive orientation to their doctor and medical care; a desire for greater involvement in decision making was predicted by a high internal locus of health control. Trends were observed for systematic information processing to increase when the heuristic strategy used was negatively affect laden and when men were uncertain about the probabilities for cure and side effects. There was a trend for decreased systematic processing when the expert opinion heuristic was used. Findings were consistent with the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model and suggest that this model has utility for future research in applied decision making about health issues.[8]

The model is also used in Internet webpage considerations. In a 2002 study by Wathen & Burkell, they proposed a theory that separated the evaluation process into distinct segments. In the theory, the process began with low-effort examinations of peripheral cues (e.g., appearance, design, organization, and source reputation) then continued to a more high-effort analysis of the content of the information source. The proposed research also drew on social psychological theories of dual-processing, which stated that information processing outcomes were the result of interaction between a fast, associative information-processing mode based on low-effort heuristics, and a slow, rule-based information processing mode based on high-effort systematic reasoning. Wathen and Burkell proposed (but did not test) that if an individual determines that an online source does not meet an appropriate level of credibility at any one stage, then he or she will leave the site without further evaluation. They theorized that this “easy to discard” behavior was indicative of information-rich environments, where the assumption is that many other potential sources of information exist, and spending too much time on any one source is potentially wasteful.[9]

Direction of Future Research

Originally the heuristic-systematic model was developed to apply to “validity seeking” persuasion setting in which peoples’ primary motivational concern is to attain accurate attitudes that square with relevant facts.[6][7] Chaiken assumes that the primary processing goal of accuracy-motivated recipients is to assess the validity of persuasive messages, and that both heuristic and systematic processing can serve this objective.[7] Other motives beyond the validity-seeking persuasion context were identified by Chaiken and colleagues (1989) who proposed an expanded model that posits two additional motives that heuristic and systematic processing can serve; defense–motivation and impression-motivation.

- Defense-motivation is the desire to form or defend particular attitudinal positions.

- Impression-motivation is the desire to form or hold socially acceptable attitudinal positions.

Contrary to previous viewpoints, the Heuristic-Systematic Model and the Elaboration Likelihood Model should be treated as complementary models to create a dual-processing framework for use in future research for understanding a variety of social influence phenomena.[7]

Future research should seek to link persuasion more closely with impression formation, which has previously focused on impressions based on agents' behaviors. An example would be to test if perceived expertise of a communicator is more stable over time and more resistant to counter-factual evidence if it is based on systematic processing than when it is based on a short description. Research has revealed that two-sided messages might not only be more persuasive but might also enhance the perceived credibility of a communicator.[10]

Criticisms

A major criticism of HSM is that the model closely relates to ELM, which is also a dual-processing model discussing paths to persuasion. The main similarity between the two models is that they both discuss two routes of

persuasion, which either examines central or systematic processing in particular. The differences between HSM and ELM are that ELM discusses two main routes of persuasion processing: central route processing and peripheral route processing unlike HSM. These two routes of processing define related theories behind attitude change. The central route is reflective and requires a willingness to process and think about the message. The peripheral route occurs when attitudes are formed without extensive thought, but more from mental shortcuts, credibility, and appearance cues. The route of persuasion processing depends on the level of involvement in the topic or issue. High involvement or elaboration increases central route processing especially when motivation and ability in the message exists. Therefore, low involvement increases peripheral route processing when motivation and ability conditions of persuasion do not exist. However, if the topic or idea is irrelevant to the individual, then the message takes the peripheral route.[11]

HSM specifically examines “validity seeking” persuasion settings concerning people’s motivations within the social environment (p. 326).[7] The limitation of HSM exists in the inability to define the specific motivations of persuasion, which is why Chaiken expanded HSM to illustrate that heuristic and systematic processing can “serve defense-motivation, the desire to form or defend particular attitudinal positions, and impression- motivation, the desire to form or hold socially acceptable attitudinal positions” (p. 326).[7]

Major assumptions exist with both HSM and ELM, which is why both models have generated debate and are often misconstrued. Systematic processing assumes that persuasion has been “mediated by the recipients understanding and cognitive elaboration of persuasive argumentation” (p. 327).[7] In addition, researchers hypothesize that systematic processing actually requires and “consumes cognitive capacity, whereas heuristic processing makes few capacity demands” (p. 328).[7] Furthermore, both HSM and ELM assume that “capacity and motivation are important determinants of systematic process” which results in biased modes of processing (p. 327).[7] With heuristic processing, there is less need to process information and cognitively in comparison to systematic processing. Heuristic processing occurs when people simply form immediate decisions and conclusions based on the information available versus analytical processing of information given that obviously requires more cognition. Heuristic processing as defined by HSM, illustrates that people can formulate decisions utilizing basic rules such as “experts’ statements can be trusted” and “consensus implies correctness” to establish validity within messages (p. 327).[7] Therefore, individuals who process messages through heuristic processing routes of persuasion, likely formulate decisions based on experts’ opinion and what the consensus believes opposed to fully processing the message in its entirety.

This leads to another similarity between HSM and ELM, as attitudes and opinions developed through heuristic processing will tend to be “less stable, less resistant to counter-propaganda, and less predictive of behavior’ in comparison to attitudes and opinions formed through detailed information within systematic processing (p. 327).[7]

The main assumption is that HSM postulates that heuristic and systematic processing can influence both “independent” and “interdependent” effects on decision making by occurring simultaneously (p. 328).[7] Unlike HSM, ELM does not postulate whether central route processing and peripheral route processing can co-occur or not. Another assumption by Chaiken and her colleagues is that systematic processing does in fact provide people with more “judgment relevant information” in comparison to heuristic processing of information, which does not account for any weaknesses in expert subject matter material, which can exist (p. 328).[7] Therefore, while systematic processing may be prevalent within many social environments, HSM, unlike its model counterpart ELM, does illustrate “the possibility that heuristic processing can exert a significant and independent influence on persuasion” (p 329).[7]