Evolutionary Perspectives on Cognition. By Chelsea Cowley, Kelsey Ito, and Lindsey Mascheroni. Introduction. Topic: Evolutionary Perspectives on Cognition Memory is a vital part of cognition, so we focused on that aspect Our article studies source memory, a specific type of memory.
By Chelsea Cowley, Kelsey Ito, and Lindsey Mascheroni
Topic: Evolutionary Perspectives on Cognition
Memory is a vital part of cognition, so we focused on that aspect
Our article studies source memory, a specific type of memory
Bell and Buchner (2009) tested the hypothesis that “behavioral history on source memory is restricted to facial stimuli”
Names instead of faces were used in order to test this hypothesis
Participants had to decide how trustworthy a person’s photo was based off a description provided by the researchers
Information about cheating was linked with better source memory rather than
Cheaters were less likable than other persons (test-phase likability ratings)
Trustworthy persons were more likeable than persons with irrelevant behavior
Names associated with cheating were less likeable than other names
Names associated with irrelevant behavior and trustworthy behavior weren’t different
Old-discrimination of names does not differ as a function of whether names were originally associated with cheating, irrelevant behavior, or trustworthiness
Source memory for names of cheaters is better than source memory for other types of names
Enhanced source memory for faces of cheaters observed is due to more general mechanisms that serve to increase the probability that the cheating context is remembered regardless of whether it is paired with a face or a name
It can be adaptive to have good source memory for names of cheaters, because it could help to avoid cheaters in social encounters
You have been studying hard for an exam coming up tomorrow. Your roommate who is in the same class has not studied at all.
During the exam, your roommate constantly nudges you to show her your answers.
You do so, because you feel bad.
When the exams are returned, your roommate received a better score than you did.
1. Do you think that one reason cheating is remembered more often than cooperation because it happens less often? If cheating happened as often as cooperation in every day life, would we still remember those who cheat more than those who cooperate?
2. How severe do the negative/threatening stimuli have to be in order for us to learn from source information to stay away from the cheater? Is this completely subjective?
3. Now that we know that we are able to detect cheaters from source information, but much of the time today, we tolerate cheaters long after we know they have cheated us. Why do you think that is? What could be a possible advantage of tolerating a cheater?
Bell, R. & Buchner, A. (2009). Enhanced source memory for names of cheaters. Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 317-330.