Discussion Board by Lessons Attention&Memory

2023-08-02 14:09:20 UTC

the late selection model supports scenario A, such that the the sudden flashes of words are registered and processed by the brain, just not fully registered by the person

Scenario A and B

2023-08-03 00:52:00 UTC

The early selection model supported selection A, as it means that people would not realise the messages, since it has been "filtered out" and not even seen - similar to the gorilla. However, the late selection model would be supported by scenario B since people would receive the subliminal message and it would affect their executive functions and decision making.

A,B explanations

2023-08-03 21:14:40 UTC

According to the Filter model, unattended information is filtered out early in processing. The subliminal messages would have been filtered out before reaching conscious awareness. Therefore, the increase in sales cannot be attributed to the subliminal messages, as they would not have been processed at a conscious level, supporting option B.

The late selection model supports scenario A as the subliminal messages were processed but ultimately filtered only later in the processing. Thus, the processing of these messages at the early stage must have influenced the consumers' minds.

2023-08-04 11:07:16 UTC

In early selection, information is filtered out at an early stage which has strengths of efficiency and enabling focus on important stimuli. However it may cause incomplete processing of the overall context and omit relevant details. The late selection model indicates all information is processed to some extent, allowing a more comprehensive understanding and greater flexibility in attending to unexpected stimuli. This may result in higher cognitive load.

The selection models do not support A.

2023-08-04 22:18:00 UTC

Early selection would mean that the sublimal messages would be filtered out early and hence sales would not increase from having focused attention on the flashed messages. Early selection would suggest B will occur.

Late selection on the other hand, suggests that all the information is processed and only filtered out at the later stages. This supports scenario A, whereby the sublimal messages are actually processed before being filtered out in focussed attention.

I do not understand the question.

2023-08-04 22:19:21 UTC

2-3 strengths/weaknesses meaning the strength of evidence supporting these models? or pros and cons of choosing one or the other?

2023-09-11 01:28:00 UTC

One weakness of Broadbent's Filter Theory would be that we can sometimes pick up unattended information based on the content. For instance, we may instinctively attend to a stimuli when our name is mentioned.

Treisman's Attenuation Theory helps explain for situations whereby we unconsciously receive a stimuli in our senses, and then choosing whether or not to strengthen and attend it.

One weakness of the Late-selection model would be that it implies that we have the capacity to analyse all stimuli for meaning, which would entail a lot of cognitive load.

2023-09-11 01:33:55 UTC

The Late Selection Model supports scenario A as it implies that all stimuli, even the briefest, was fully analysed for meaning. Viewers therefore were able to process the meaning of the messages.

The Early Selection model supports scenario A as only information worthy of notice passes through the filter. The unattended stimuli, being the messages, were thus disregarded and did not alter their behaviour.

2023-09-11 03:28:25 UTC

a strength of the early selection model is that it supports the efficacy of which we are able to process multiple pieces of information without feeling overwhelmed. this could also be linked to evolutionary reasons.

a weakness of the late selection model is that while the experiments show that humans are able to process more than 1 piece of information for meaning at the same time, it is most likely only relevant to simple pieces of information e.g. a single word (river) as compared to trying to listen to 2 documentaries concurrently and understanding even just 1 of them.

2023-09-11 13:33:06 UTC

The early selection models allows the learner to have a particular stimulus that becomes the main focus of their attention. However, it does not account for other stimuli that has the potential to offer information to better improve the particular task response required. The late selection model allows the learner to acknowledge all stimuli and then amplify the stimuli/stimulus that is deemed to be the most pertinent in relation to achieving the task response required. This however might result in overstimulation when too many stimuli are being processed at once, which might in turn result in no stimuli being processed at all.

2024-10-13 15:21:35 UTC

Early selection models are good at pointing out there is some kind of filter for each stimulus coming in, but they falsely claim that only one stimulus if fully processed after clearing out or attenuating the rest. The Late selection model is better at understanding that all stimuli are processed fully and based on the most relevant meaning we choose to focus on one of them. However if it was exactly that, then we would have been overloaded with information.

2024-10-13 23:26:39 UTC

The early selection models (Broadbent, Treisman) suggest that attention filters out irrelevant stimuli based on physical features before semantic processing. This efficiently prevents sensory overload, but struggles to explain real-life scenarios like the Cocktail Party Effect, where unattended stimuli can still capture attention. In contrast, late selection models (Deutsch & Deutsch) propose that all stimuli are processed for meaning, with selection occurring later. This accounts for phenomena like subliminal perception but may be less efficient, as it assumes the brain processes all incoming information, which could overwhelm cognitive resources.

2024-10-13 23:28:41 UTC

Early selection models, such as Broadbent’s, would support scenario B (sales didn’t increase) by arguing that subliminal messages are filtered out before semantic processing, meaning the brain wouldn’t register them, preventing any impact on behaviour. In contrast, late selection models, like Deutsch & Deutsch’s, could support scenario A (sales increased) by suggesting that all stimuli, including subliminal messages, are processed for meaning, allowing them to influence behaviour even if not consciously attended. However, the same late selection models could also challenge scenario A by questioning whether the subliminal stimuli were relevant enough to affect decision-making.

2024-10-14 10:26:39 UTC

The early selection method - the unattended information i.e. the message to eat popcorn and drink coke’ would have been disregarded by the brain as it would have been filtered out and disregarded so it would not increase sales - Scenario B

However, according to the late selection method, all the information has been processed by the brain so the information has been actively understood it would encourage some people to consider eating popcorn or drinking coke hence an increase in sales - Scenario A

2024-10-14 10:29:49 UTC

The early selection method - the brain would have disregarded unattended information as it would have been filtered out and disregarded. This is because the processing centres don’t deem it important. Weakness - But how can you distinctively categorise something as unimportant? What if it is the first time you encounter something?

However, according to the late selection method, all the information has been processed by the brain so the information has been actively understood it. Strength: Don’t ignore stimuli that could potentially be important. Weakness: Information Overload.

2025-10-13 10:43:47 UTC

Broadbent's early attention model would support the outcome B as those subliminal messages according to this model would not get past the selective filter and bottleneck. Therefore it would not be in people's memory so therefore not able to influence their future decisions. This is similar to the attenuator model (Treisman) as there is an assumption that an unattended message can't alter behaviour.

The Deutsch & Deutsch's model for late stage processing would support outcome A. As according to this model, the subliminal messages would still be processed for meaning and make it past the filter to enter short-term memory. Therefore, there would be a response and it would be able to influence behaviour.