DOODLING – Andrade

Aim
To find out whether doodling assisted
information processing by increasing
attentiveness or by enhancing memory.
Background
Research shows we perform less when our attention is divided. However,
doodling might aid concentration.
Wilson and Korn (2007) suggested that doodling may help to maintain
arousal as we are doing something physical while thinking.
Andrade defines doodling as sketching patterns or figures that are unrelated
to the primary task.
Research Method
Laboratory experiment (unnatural settings)
Research Design
Independent measures design implemented as participants were either in the
doodling or control group.
Sample
40 participants who were members of the Medical Research Council of the
Applied Psychology Unit were chosen through the method of opportunity
sampling. They were aged 18-55 years, mostly women, and were paid a small
sum for participation. In each experimental condition, there were 20
participants. They had just completed participating in a study and were about
to go home when they were asked if they could spare 5 minutes in Andrade's
study.
Procedure
All participants listened to a dull telephone call about a party for 2.5 minutes,
at a recorded speed of 227wpm (words per minute). The independent variable
was whether they doodled or not. The responses to the 2 tasks to measure recall,
was the dependent variable. They were in a dull quiet room.
Participants were told that they would be tested on the names of the partygoers
— Monitoring task. There was a surprise task where they were tested on the
names of places mentioned — Recall task. The order of tests were
counterbalanced to reduce order effects. The dependent variable was
operationalised as plausible mishearings were counted as correct; totally
wrong names as false alarms; other words relating to people were ignored. The
final score was the number of correct names minus the number of false
alarms.
The call had 8 names of partygoers, and 3 people and a cat who didn't attend.
8 place names were mentioned. Participants were given standardised
instructions. A4 sheets were given to participants in the doodle group with
alternating rows of squares and circles, ten per row. It had a wide margin on
the left to record targeted information. Participants were asked to shade while
listening to relieve boredom. Participants in the control group were given a
lined paper.

All participants listened at a comfortable volume. The experimenter apologised

for conducting a surprise task and then conducted the 2 tasks. New names
and the names mentioned on the tape as slurs were counted as false alarms.
Results
Doodle group — mean no. of shapes shaded was 36.3 from a range of 3-110.
No participants in the control group spontaneously doodled.
The control and doodling group made an average false alarm of 0.3 in the
Recall task.

Task 1: Monitoring Task Results

 Participants of the control group recalled a mean of 7.1 names. 5 people
made a false alarm.
 Participants of the doodling group recalled a mean of 7.8 names. 1
person made a false alarm.
Overall Results
 Doodling participants recalled a mean of 7.5 names and places, 29%
more than the mean of the control group (5.8).
 Recall for both tasks was better for doodlers, even when participants
suspected of demand characteristics were excluded.
Conclusions
1. Doodling helps concentration on a primary task as doodling participants
performed better than participants who only listened to the primary task.
2. Doodle group performed better on both tasks. There are 2 possible
explanations:
i) either doodling affected attention or,
ii) doodling improved memory by encouraging deeper information
processing.

However, without a measure of daydreaming, it is difficult to

distinguish between the 2 explanations. Daydreaming could have been
measured either through a self-report or by using brain scans to identify
reduced activation of the cortex. The cortex is associated with
daydreaming.
Strengths and Weaknesses
 Extraneous variables could be controlled as it was a lab experiment. For
example, people listened at a comfortable volume so there were no
differences in stress on words
 The standardised procedure made all participants equally likely to be
bored and therefore daydream. For example, the same monotonous
recording was used and all participants were sat in a dull quiet room.
This improves validity as differences in results were due to doodling or
not. There is high reliability as all participants were similarly bored.
  The operationalisation of doodling was standardised by using the
doodling sheets and this increases validity. The dependent variable had
been operationalised in terms of false alarms and score calculation.
 Participants' age ranged from 18-55 years thus, were representative.
However, they are from a recruitment panel and may be very similar. For
example, they all may be interested in psychology. This could bias the
sample, therefore lowers validity. Further, most of the participants were
females.
 The study collected quantitative data, the number of names and places.
This is an objective record of memory. It would have had been helpful to
ask participants for self-reports of any daydreaming to understand
whether differences in results were due to attention or daydreaming.
Ethical Concerns
Participants did not give informed consent fully for the recall task. This may
have caused psychological distress. However, participants were debriefed and
apologised to by the researchers.
Application to Everyday Life
When listening to a lecture, doodling might be advantageous. However,
deliberately drawing something may be counterproductive.
Individual vs. Situational Explanation for Behaviour
As doodling affected recall, this shows a situational effect on information
processing. However, people do not doodle in the same way. This shows an
individual difference behind doodling behaviour.
Eyes test Baron-Cohen et al.
Key Notes
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) = A neurodevelopmental disorder impairing
a child's ability to communicate and interact. Symptoms: repetitive behaviour,
little or no eye contact and can't recognise facial expressions. High Functioning
Autism is HFA.

Aspergers Syndrome (AS) = Autism spectrum disorder that affects language

and communication skills. Symptoms: restricted & repetitive behaviours and
trouble identifying facial expressions.

Autism Spectrum Quotient Test (AQ) = self-report questionnaire with scores

ranging from 0 to 50. A high score suggests that the person has more autistic
traits.

Theory of Mind (ToM) = the ability to understand the view of another.

The original study (1997)

The original study had numerous issues. Participants were presented with 25
photos showing different eye expressions and they chose the mental state shown
between 2 options.
Issues with the original study:
1. It had more female faces than male faces. Solution: equal no. of male and
female faces in the RET question.
2. Test had both basic and complex mental states. The basic ones were too
easy. Solution: Only complex mental states were used.
Aim
1. To test if the revised version of the 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' test would
be successful at differentiating participants with AS or HFA (High
Functioning Autism) from the general population.
2. To test if there is a negative correlation in a sample of normal adults and
between the RET and the AQ.
3. To test any sex differences on the RET when normal adults take the test.
Hypotheses
1. Participants with autism will score significantly lower in the RET than the
control group.
2. Participants with autism will score significantly higher on the AQ test.
3. Females in the 'normal' group (grp 2 & 3) will score higher on the RET than
males in those groups.
4. Males in the 'normal' group will score higher on the AQ measure than females.
5. Scores on the AQ and RET will be negatively correlated.
Background
Baron-Cohen suggested that people with autism have an undeveloped 'ToM'. To
measure the 'ToM' of individuals, Baron-Cohen came up with the 'Reading the
Mind in the Eyes' task where participants would be evaluated on their ability to
label others' emotions by observing their eye expressions on photos.
Sample
Group 1: 15 male adults with AS/HFA. Self-selecting sampling from the UK
National Autistic Society through a magazine advert. Average IQ of 115; from
a mix of socio-economic and educational backgrounds.
Group 2 - Comparative control group of adults: 122 adults from the adult
community & educational classes from Exeter and public library users in
Cambridge. 55 males and 67 females. From a broad mix of occupations and
education.
Group 3 - Comparative control group of students: 103 undergraduate students
from Cambridge. 53 males and 50 females. Assumed to have IQ higher than
other participants.
Group 4 - IQ matched controls: 14 randomly selected adults whose IQ matched
with that of group 1. Average IQ of 116.
Research Method, Design and Variables
Quasi-experiment.
Independent groups design
Independent Variables: Whether they had AS/HFA or were normal, and gender.
Dependent Variables: RET score, AQ score, and gender identification for group 1.
Procedure
A. Developing the Revised Eye Test (RET): Baron-Cohen and Wheelwright
originated target words and foils for 36 photos. It was piloted on 8 judges (4
males and 4 females). At least 5 judges had to agree on the target word and no
more than 2 judges could select any single foil word. If this did not happen, the
target word and or foil would be repiloted until the criteria were met for each.

In pilot tests, groups 2 and 3 achieved 100% on judging gender. The control
group were tested with 40 photos but 4 were eliminated, resulting in 36 items.
When results were being calculated, only the data for the 36 eye sets were taken.

B. Implementing the Tests: Each test was individually administered in a quiet

room at either Cambridge or Exeter. There was no time limit. Each participant
was given a practice test and then presented with 36 sets of eyes and 4 possible
target words. Group 1 judged the gender of each photo as a control task.
Participants in groups 1, 3 & 4 completed the AQ test. They read through the
glossary of terms and were asked to ask questions as needed; they could use the
glossary during the test.
Ethics
Participants' consent was taken and they knew the nature of the study. Group 1
participants had been diagnosed in specialist centres using APA criteria. The
data collected was anonymised.
Results
• Scores ranged from 17 - 35, with a mode of 24.
• Adults with AS/HFA performed significantly worse than other groups for the
RET (H1 supported).
• On the AQ test, adults with AS/HFA performed significantly higher than the
control groups (H2 supported).
• Females scored higher on the RET (H3 supported).
• There was a significant negative correlation (-0.53) between scores on AQ and
RET (H5 supported).

Conclusions
• Current study replicated findings that AS/HFA adults are significantly
impaired in identifying the emotions of others.
• Current study replicated findings that AS/HFA adults score significantly
higher on the AQ test than the general population.
• There were gender differences found on the RET as females performed better
than men. However, it would have been more significant with a greater sample.
The Revised Eye Test was a more sensitive measure of adult social intelligence.
Strengths and Weaknesses
S1:It was a lab experiment, so confounding variables could be controlled. Thus,
there is internal validity and it is easily replicable. Everyone saw the same set of
eyes.
S2:Improvements on the eyes test improved validity.
W1:The study lacks ecological validity as eye expressions in real life are quick,
and not static.
W2:The experimental sample (group 1) is small, so generalising results to those
with AS/HFA is not possible.
W3:Only the eyes were used, but normally we study the whole face (mouths are
expressive) therefore it lacks ecological validity.
W4:As this was a quasi-experiment, it wasn't possible to randomly allocate
participants to the conditions. This introduces a confounding variable as it
could be another factor causing the defence in scores between groups. Researchers
try to attend to this by having the IQ matched control group.
Application to Everyday Life
Programmes could be conducted to help people with AS/HFA in developing their
skills of interpreting emotions. The eyes test could be improved to help diagnose
individuals who may have underlying autistic disorders.
Individual vs. Situational Explanations
The AS/HFA group performed significantly worse on the RET than the 'normal'
group. This suggests that the ability to identify mental states is an individual
skill that is developed. The environment had been standardised (supports
individual explanation).
Children as Participants
Sophisticated words would not be appropriate for children. So, the 'Anne and
Sally' test was developed to understand the theory of mind of children.
LINE UPS – Pazzulo et al
PSYCHOLOGY BEING INVESTIGATED
•Line up
•False memory
•Eyewitness testimony
•False positive response
BACKGROUND
•Pozzulostudied child witnesses and recognized post event cognitive
effects
•Research from, (Pozzulo
and Lindsay 1997), showed that children were less likely than adults
to say ‘I don’t know
•Through witness information, a line-up is formed
•False positive response
•Social factors may explain why children may make incorrect
decisions in a line-up:
Have to choose a person rather than a choice to pick one
Child views the adult as the authority figure thus they tend to comply
Children are pressurized to choose as they fear they would get in
trouble otherwise
AIM
The aim was to explore the effect of social versus cognitive factors on
children’s performance as eyewitnesses. Pozzolu did this by
minimizing any cognitive effects that could impair the children’s
decision making.
The aims were to test four predictions.
METHOD
•Lab experiment
•3 independent variables:
age
: young children versus adults (IMD)
line-up
type: identification vs rejection (RMD)
level of cognitive demand: cartoon vs human (RMD)
•Identification Test
•Dependent variable: whether the participant identified the correct face if
present or the empty silhouette if not

SAMPLE
•59 child participants
•Aged between 4 and 7 years
•Mean age of 4.98 years
•21 females and 38 males
•Recruited from kindergarten classes in 3 private schools in Eastern
Ontario, Canada
•53 adult participants
•Aged 17-30 years
•Mean age 20.54 years
•36 females and 17 males
•Recruited from introductory psychology participant pool at Eastern
Ontario University
PROCEDURE
Human face targets
2 types of stimulus material:
•For the videos –6 second clip, a female brushing her hair and a male
putting his coat. Colored, no sound, 2-3 seconds of an individual’s face.
•For the photo-arrays –different clothes than video, 4 foil photographs
with only the face, neck and shoulders.
Cartoon face targets
2 types of stimulus material:
•For the videos-two 6 second clips; Dora the Explorer talking to the
audience and Go Diego Go! putting on safety gloves. Colored, no sound,
no other cartoons and showed 2-3 seconds of the target cartoons face.
•For the photo-arrays-still images of the cartoons plus 4 'foils' found
from the internet, 3 raters judged the similarity of approx. 10 cartoons
and the 4 most similar in terms of facial features, hair length and
color were chosen. They only showed the characters face.
•Target-present line-ups contained the target and 3 foils
•Target-absent line-ups contained 4 foils
•All line-ups contained a blank silhouette
•Line-up was shown to participants simultaneously
•Each target was randomlyplaced in the line-up except the 4thfoil of the
target-absent line-up
•All photographs were in black and white
•Each participant watched 4 videos in total
•Presented in a random order followed by a line-up
•The position of the target/foil was counterbalanced
•Videos and photo-arrays presented on 13-inch laptop screens
The following sequence was adopted for each participant:
•The 3 female experimenters were neatly dressed, wearing professional
yet casual clothing ( a sweater/blouse and dress pants).
•child and adult participants were tested separately, asked to pay
attention and told about being shown pictures and follow-up questions
after.
•Participants were asked a free recall fillerquestion (what did the
cartoon character look like?) Children were asked another question in
case they did not respond to the original question.
•The child P’s were asked to point to the target (if present) or the blank
silhouette (if not present) when shown the photo. Adult responses
recorded on a matching sheet.
•Procedure repeated with all 4 videos. The DV was whether the participant
identified the correct face or empty silhouette.
RESULTS
2 key differences investigated:
1.Difference between children’s and
adult’s identification and rejection
accuracy
2.Difference between children’s
identification and rejection accuracy
between cartoon characters and
humans
The table shows that adults were better than children at most tasks and
generally, responses to cartoons were more accurate than human
targets.
CONCLUSION
•As predicted, young children produced a significantly lower correct rejection
rate than adults for cartoon faces.
•As predicted, young children produced a significantly lower rejection rate than
adults for human faces.
•As predicted, young children and adults produced a comparable correct
identification rate for cartoon characters.
•As predicted, young children compared to adults produced a significantly lower
rate of correct identification for human faces.
STRENGTHS
•Lab experiment so high levels of standardization
•Quantitative data was gathered
•High internal validity as demand characteristics were controlled
WEAKNESSES
•Line-up was not real
•Low ecological validity
ETHICAL ISSUES
Ethical guidelines maintained:
•Informed consent was gained
•Right to withdraw granted
•Protection from psychological harm