The Memory Processing of Information Influences the Impact of Important Cognition Tasks - Research Paper Example

Introduction Intelligence is perhaps one of the most fascinating characteristics possessed by humans and that have widely been studied by almost all disciplines. Human life seems to increasingly progress towards systems founded on complex intelligence that appreciates this fact. In computer science and engineering for instance, artificial intelligence is synonymous with the functionality of the systems designed to serve a more advanced lifestyle. In all of these systems, a striking commonality is the pillar of intelligence that they centrally rely on such that they can almost not function without; memory. For sustained integrity of such systems, particularly the human system on which this study is based on, memory failure is therefore an issue of a grave concern. Apparently, psychological studies have been inspired by the gravity of this reality and researchers have tirelessly worked on memory issues. One of the commonest memory issues is distraction that occurs on a daily frequency affecting memory capacity. Research has previously been conducted to facilitate unravelling of how distraction affects daily memory functioning, sometimes causing serious threats to personal safety and that of those around us. Human brain operates in a systematic way that can accommodate information processing for later use in the future. The most important tasks of the brain that facilitate the storage of information for use in the future are encoding, storing and retrieving of information. When the brain is capable of performing these processes, particularly the last task, the brain is said to handle memory. According to Cherry’s Overview of Memory (2005), memory is a composite process that is supported by the acquisition, storage, retaining and readily retrieval of certain information in the brain. In order to understand how various memory theories are formulated, researchers therefore have to dissect how these main tasks are compromised to cause a breakdown of the composite process; memory. In another perspective by the author (Cherry, 2011) titled Explanations for Forgetting, it is clearly demonstrated how a failure in some of these main brain tasks causes forgetting. As such, researchers attempt to illustrate how memory failure is occasioned by problems in the effective memory structure. In this discourse, a research proposal is outlined to the effect that it using acceptable memory structures, it is possible to unravel memory failure. Using distraction-conflict theory flanked by other relevant cognitive theories, this study proposes a research model that attempts to illustrate how the memory process is broken down. With consequences of such failures in memory being highlighted, the importance of this theory can not be overestimated since safety is everyone’s responsibility. This study is divided into various sections that will facilitate a systematic explanation to theoretical inferences and demonstrate how practically reliable they can be. On the first segment, the research question is formulated and a theoretical link equally designed using the above briefly mentioned theory framework. Rationale and predictions follow the first segment in an illustration attempt of the applicability of the proposed theory. The method and actual design are visited as complemented by other segments that include; participants, procedure, materials, and analysis. Research Question This study will attempt to find a solution to the research question of the importance of distraction in memory functioning. As mentioned before, memory incorporates a conglomeration of tasks that the brain undertakes to complete the process of recalling. Memory failure in this context will not exclude application of failure processes subject to memory such as comprehension, learning and reasoning (Zajonc, 1965). Rationale and Predictions The rationale of the research is based on the premise that failure in memory is a cognitive condition that is occasioned by compromising certain psychological parameters that facilitate the relevant processes. To this end, it is scientifically tenable to draw inferences from events involving cognitive processes and make predictions thereon. In light of such settings, it can be predicted that human memory will respond to experiment set to unravel its failure using theoretical background. Method Using a naturalistic observation technique, the research will attempt to create a link between road accidents and distraction of the drivers in a considerable proportion of the reported cases. Using a few case study scenarios, the study will demonstrate the complexity of distraction in the context of cognitive response in the human brain processing. The link will be created to the effect that the accident is caused due to the loss of the driver’s control of the vehicle upon a major distracter. Design The main research study will involve two research approaches; a naturalistic observation flanked by a case study infusion on one side and a second approach that includes an experimental phase using a high constraint research on the other hand. The importance of these two perspectives is to explain the practical explanation of the intricacy of cognition failure that is captured by theory rather technically. As this discourse shall reveal below, the experimental section has been included in detail as a laboratory evaluation of the research design. Participants Ideally, cognitive distraction must involve an attention demanding task where participants get disoriented by involvement in an equally attention demanding task while in the middle of another. Participants in this research will be drivers on one hand by virtue of the gravity of consequence that distraction to the driving task can cause. On the other hand, laboratory illustration will involve an equally attention disorienting scenario by distracting an ongoing cognitive task with another. Materials Recording material after access to case road accident causes data for analysis will be needed for the naturalistic study. The laboratory intensive case will require projectors, computers, questionnaires, and email instructions. Naturalistic perspective of the study will be a low constraint research perspective that does not require a lot of materials. Procedure As Graziano and Raulin (2000, p16) postulate, there is no specific procedure in low constraint research perspective such as naturalistic observation, therefore the first segment of the research does not have a procedure. However, the research question will guide the isolation of two illustrating case studies. The procedure for the laboratory experimental phase is included below in the evaluation segment. Analysis The data expected shall point at the relationship between distraction and memory process failure. Using the case study analysis, the research study will have been served since the gravity of the consequence of distraction is evident in the accident. Evaluation: Procedure In the evaluation technique, laboratory technique involving randomly picked college students as subjects solving mentally involving tasks are involved as follows under the effective stimuli. Adopting the technique applied in Nicholson et al (2005), six settings on a 3 x 2 full factorial experiment is used. Two separate computer based tasks (simple-ST and complex-CT) involving problems solving tasks at two different levels are involved, while the subjects are subjected to three different distraction conditions (no distraction-ND, low distraction-LD and high distraction-HD). The six settings include: ST-ND,LD,HD; CT-ND,LD,HD. HD distractions involved Byrnes and Griffit (1969) model of Similarity-Attraction Theory was applied in designing the distraction where gender balanced distraction of social conversation nature was used. A discussion of student’s weekend experience was priory recorded and played in the task. LD has world news tape played in the background while ND did not have any organized distraction during the computer based questions. CT and ST had varied complexity of a computer application task instructed to the students and conditioned in the beginning. Different results must be reported to illustrate the impact of distraction on cognition. Themes In the laboratory setting, the research question will be addressed in an experimental involvement of cognitive tasks to subjects. The distraction will be introduced at some instance of the cognitive processing of information that the subjects will be subjected to. Extrapolating the involvement of a driver’s attention during driving can be used as a point of incorporation of the accident inference into the study. Memory processes going on during driving can be used as the main line of attention, while distractions can be used as a reason of a breakdown of the effective responses needed for appropriate to evade an accident. Since an accident follows, this is a reason enough to illustrate how a distraction can disorient an individual to such an extent that vital reflex to stimuli can be compromised. This inference borrows from the fact that memory is a composite process and involves perception, storage and retrieval which impact on comprehension, learning and reasoning (Zajonc, 1965). Alternatively the setting of the experiment takes account of all factors influencing the expected response such as cognition load. Taking into consideration factors such as cognition load will eliminate blanket inference of accident probability in all cases of distractions since this is not the case. The importance of this theme in the evaluation is to act as a control explanation where distraction happens but memory or cognition is not affected. Application of cognition load as the minimum threshold to be exceeded in order for distraction to cause failure in the cognition system is the only plausible way to explain why some tasks cause system failures while others don’t. Justification According to Kunda (2001), human cognition is subjected to several distracters during the process of an attention intensive task. According to the author, what determines the success of either the individual prevailing over the initial task or the individual succumbing to attentively concentrating on a secondary task thereby causing a breakdown depends on two factors. On one hand, the task attention demand of the task is definitive of the result while the nature of the distracter on the other hand becomes influential to resulting distraction. Evidence Distraction-conflict theory is based on the differential magnitude of varied complexity of various attention intensive tasks. There are a host of tasks that do not involve much attention and remain unaffected in cases of distractions which only disorient individuals in the middle of executing attention consuming tasks. On separate experiments, scientists have applied more technical research methodology to unravel the impact of distractions as excessive stimuli that occasion termination of cognition processes of a task that is underway. In separate studies, Just (2010) illustrates how brain studies on cognition input can be applied to offer a solution during driving distraction usually resulting in accidents. The author uses the research to draw conclusions on which risk factors are likely to result in an accident when they distract drivers based on their cognitive load demands. Just and Kelller (2001) published a paper showing that the temporal and parietal regions of the brain cortex showed differential activity under two different tasks, with much activity observed when both tasks were handled concurrently. According to the authors, the act of performing two tasks compels the individual to slow down in reaction time which reduces cognitive efficiency. In a separate but similar study, Nicholson et al (2005) reported that when individuals are subjected to concurrent complex cognitive tasks, adverse results are experienced under distraction. Comparing naturalistic approach and lab approach Naturalistic inferences were motivated from earlier observation that some nature of accidents were likely to be caused by a certain factor that the drivers were exposed to. Following this likely factor in all some of these accidents, a distracter was found common setting up the research question of the psychological origin of such accidents. An example of such research is given in the Virginia Tech in collaboration with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the USA (Novotney, 2009). In the study, it was found out that distractions caused over 80 percent of the sample of accidents followed. In the laboratory experiment, deliberate introduction of distraction in the middle of an attention consuming task resulted in disorientation of the task bearer to affect output of the subjects. Tasks that included high performance input were most affected by distractions illustrating the cognitive load impact in the distraction. In both research perspectives, it is expected that the results will coincide with premise that disorientation causes interference with cognitive processing of information. As such, various other related research studies such as the mobile phone usage control by drivers for road safety policy formulation have been undertaken (Novotney, 2009). Conclusion According to Baddeley (n.d), the response of memory processes assist in transforming stimuli into an action that enables an individual to deal with different events in the environment. According to the author, distractions of the memory processing of information between the short term memory and long term memory can influence the impact of important cognition tasks such as those involved for visual and spatial interpretation. In of the breakdown of the information breakdown towards execution of important activities such as driving, distraction can be said to be a fatal outcome. According to Norman and Shallice (1986), behaviour control can facilitate the necessary intervention that can reduce incidences occasioned by distraction during major tasks. Miller (1956) reaffirms the fact that there is an inherent capacity for human beings to only support certain limit of mental execution when it comes to heavy cognitive input tasks. References “Psychology 101: Memory and Forgetting,” AllPsych.com, Retrieved from: http://allpsych.com/psychology101/memory.html Bains, M., Chapman, P. & Crundall, D. & Underwood, G. (2005) “Regulating Conversation during Driving: a Problem for Mobile Telephones?” Transportation Research Part F, 8:197–211 Baddeley, A. D. (2002) “The Psychology of Memory,” Department of Psychology, University of York, UK, Retrieved from: www.media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/1X/.../047009141X.pdf Bunge, S. A., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Jacobsen, R. B., & Klingberg, T., (2000) “A Resource Model of the Neural Basis of Executive Working Memory,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 2000 97:3573–3578 Byrne, D. & Griffitt, W. (1969) “Similarity and Awareness of Similarity of Personality Characteristics as Determinants of attraction,” Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 3:179-186 Cherry, K. (n.d) “An Overview of Memory,” Retrieved from: http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/a/memory.htm Cherry, K. (n.d) “Explanations for Forgetting,” Retrieved from: http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/tp/explanations-for-forgetting.htm Crouch, D. J., Drews, F. A. & Strayer, D. L., (2006) “A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver,” Human Factors, 48:381–391 Cynkar, J., Just, M. A. & Leller, T. A. (2007) “A Decrease in Brain Activation Associated with Listening to Someone Speak,” Brain Response, 12(75):20-85 Drews, F. A. & Strayer, D. L., (2007) “Cell-Phone Induced Driver Distraction,” Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16:128–131 Graziano & Raulin (2000) “Naturalistic Observation and Case Study Research,” Retrieved from: http://www.abacon.com/graziano/ch06/sld001.htm Just, M. & Keller, T. (2001) “Interdependence of Non-Overlapping Cortical Systems in Dual Cognitive Tasks,” NeuroImage, 14(2):417-426 Kunda, Z., (2001) Social cognition: making sense of people, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Nicholson, D. B., Nicholson, J. A., Parboteeah, D. V. & Valacich, J. S. (2005) “Using Distraction-Conflict Theory to Measure the Effects of Distractions on Individual Performance in a Wireless Mobile Environment,” Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Retrieved from: www.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2005/2268/.../22680033c.pdf Norman, D. A. & Shallice, T. (1986) “Attention to Action: Willed and Automatic Control of Behaviour,” in Davidson, R. J. & Shwarts, G. E. & Shapiro, D. (eds), “Consciousness and Self-Regulation.” Advances in Research and Theory, 4:1-18 Novotney, A. (2009) “Dangerous Distraction,” American Psychological Association, 40(2):32 Nunes, L. M. & Recarte, M. A., (2000) “Effects of Verbal and Spatial-Imagery Tasks on Eye Fixations while Driving,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6:31–43 Nunes, L. M. & Recarte, M. A., (2003) “Mental Workload while Driving: Effects on Visual Search, Discrimination, and Decision Making,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 3(9):119–137. Peter, H. (1987) Human factors Psychology. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. Shea, C. (2010) “Focus! The Psychology of Distraction,” Retrieved from: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2010/02/focus_the_psych.html Zajonc, R. B. (1965) “Social Facilitation,” Science,149:269-274 Read More