Automatic and controlled processes: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:51, 30 September 2015

Revision as of 09:51, 30 September 2015

Line 1:

{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2015}}

'''Automatic and Controlledcontrolled Processesprocesses (ACP)''' are the two categories of cognitive processing. All cognitive processes fall into one or both of those two categories. The amounts of “processing"processing power”power", [[attention]], and effort a process requires is the primary factor used to determine whether it’sit's a controlled or an automatic process. An automatic process is capable of occurring without the need for attention, and the awareness of the initiation or operation of the process, and without drawing upon general processing resources or interfering with other concurrent thought processes.<ref name="Bargh">{{cite book|last=Bargh|first=John|title=Unintended Thought|year=1989|publisher=Guilford Publications|author2=James S. Uleman}}</ref> Put simply, an automatic process is unintentional, involuntary, effortless (not consumptive of limited processing capacity), and occurring outside awareness. Controlled Processes are defined as a process that is under the flexible, intentional control of the individual, that he or she is consciously aware of, and that are effortful and constrained by the amount of attentional resources available at the moment.<ref name=Bargh />

==Characteristics==

Line 6 ⟶ 7:

When examining the label "automatic" in social psychology, you find that some processes are intended, and others require recent conscious and intentional processing of related information. That being said automatic effects fall into three classes: Those that occur prior to conscious awareness (preconscious); those that require some form of conscious processing but that produce an unintended outcome (postconscious); and those that require a specific type of intentional, goal directed processing (goal-dependent).

Preconscious automaticity requires only the triggering [[proximal]] stimulus event, and occur prior to or in the absence of any conscious awareness of that event.<ref name=Bargh /> Because they occur without our conscious awareness they are unnoticeable, uncontrollable, and nearly effortless. Many previous studies suggest that the mere perception of the physical behaviors of others, as well as abstract categories (race, gender, role-related) that occurs passively in person perception results in increased tendencies to behave in the same way oneself.<ref name=Yale>{{cite journal|last=Bargh|first=John|author2=Kay L. Schwader |author3=Sarah E. Hailey |author4=Rebecca L. Dyer |author5=Erica J. Boothby |title=Automaticity in social-cognitive processes|year=2012|___location=Yale University, Department of Psychology}}</ref> So basically a stimulus may that be person, object, or an action will unconsciously effect your response and or behavior without you knowing. In a study they subliminally exposed one of the participants with an African American face or a Caucasian face before the participants engaged in a verbal game.<ref name="Chen + Bargh">{{cite journal|last=Chen|first=Mark|author2=John Bargh|title=Nonconscious Behavioral Confirmation Processes: The Self-Fulfilling Consequences of Automatic Stereotype Activation|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|date=2 January 2, 1997|doi=10.1006/jesp.1997.1329|volume=33|pages=541–560}}</ref> The study concluded that when participants were subliminally exposed to the African American faces they were significantly more aggressive in the verbal game than those exposed to the Caucasian face.<ref name="Chen + Bargh" /> In a study related to this the participants were required to play a video game that depicted a real-life situation that involved deciding to shoot a man with a gun. Participants were shown pictures of both Caucasian and African American men with or without a gun or another object in hand. The participants had to respond "Shoot" or "Not Shoot" within milliseconds. The results were that participants significantly decided to shoot faster when African Americans had a gun versus Caucasians.<ref name=Correll>{{cite journal|last=Correll|first=Joshua|author2=Charles M. Judd |author3=Bernd Wittenbrink |title=The Police Officer’sOfficer's Dilemma: Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially Threatening Individuals|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|year=2002|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1314|volume=83|pages=1314–1329}}</ref>

Postconscious automaticity depends on recent conscious experience for its occurrence.<ref name=Bargh /> This postconscious influence on processing can be defined as the non-conscious consequences of conscious thought.<ref name=Bargh /> The conscious experience may be intentional, or it may be unintentional, what is important is that the material be in awareness.<ref name=Bargh /> Most things we are aware of are driven by the environment, and one does not intend or control the flood of these [[perceptual]] experiences, yet they still result in postconscious effects. In other words, we need to consciously engage in something and depending on the experience we will unconsciously think, and or behave a certain way. In the classic [[Bobo doll experiment]] a child watches a video of an adult acting aggressive towards a Bobo doll. Later when the child is put in the room with that same doll, the child was more likely to also engage in that act, versus children who didn't watch the video. In a study participants were primed with the stereotype of professors by being told to imagine a typical professor for 5&nbsp;min and to list (a conscious act) the behaviors, lifestyle, and appearance attributes of this typical professor.<ref name=DJJ>{{cite journal|last=Dijksterhuis|first=AP|author2=Ad van Knippenberg|title=The Relation Between Perception and Behavior, or How to Win a Game of Trivial Pursuit|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|year=1998|___location=University of Nijmegen|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.865|volume=74|pages=865–877}}</ref> After they were primed they had to perform a general knowledge task. The results were that the participants in the professor condition outperformed those in the control conditions (those not primed at all).<ref name=DJJ />

Goal-dependent automaticity concerns skill and thought processes that require a goal to engage in them. This process is much similar to postconscious in that it requires conscious awareness to be initiated, but after that it can be guided outside of awareness by the unconscious mind. So a good example would be driving a car. In order to drive a car you need to consciously have a goal to drive somewhere. When engaged in driving (only with enough practice) one can almost operate the car almost entirely without conscious awareness.<ref name=Yale /> However more attentional control and decision making are needed when introduced to novel (reference) situations like driving through an unfamiliar town. The process needs to be learned enough that it can be automatic, requiring little conscious thought as to how to do it.

===Controlled processes===

Line 24 ⟶ 25:

Flow has been difficult to study, however, because it is difficult to produce in a controlled laboratory setting. Most experiments have relied heavily on correlating the presence of flow with various attributes of the task and the subjects' reported experiences. Of those correlations, subjects experiencing flow generally report that they perceive a good match between the task requirements and their skills (e.g. a professional basketball player in a professional basketball game.) Task structure and the clarity of the goal of the task are also thought to be related to when flow occurs.<ref name="Moller"/> All of these aspects of flow imply that there must be an opportunity to suppress other controlled processes, as well as inhibit certain types of automatic processes.

A study involving [[Video Game|video game]] performance showed that flow in participants (determined based on a self-report survey of flow characteristics) strongly correlated with performance in the game. A related study attempted to inhibit and induce flow by biasing the moods of participants. The experimenters found that flow could be inhibited by a negative mood, but could not be induced by a positive mood.<ref name="Moller"/>

"A person does not need to be told to pay attention to a stimulus that captures attention quickly and effortlessly.<ref name=Scneider /> In many cases, explicitly directing one’sone's own or another’sanother's attention is necessary due to the presence of another stimulus that more easily captures attention. In the case of flow, however, an action that would normally grab one's attention is ignored, and many automatic processes are either suppressed (such as stimulus-driven attention changes) or ignored (such as discomfort.)

On the other hand, situations in which autonomy is encroached upon (for example, if the individual must always control his/her actions to abide by rules imposed by the task) are thought to inhibit flow.<ref name="Moller">Moller, A. C., Meier, B. P., & Wall, R. D. 2010. Developing an experimental induction of flow: Effortless action in the lab. In B. Bruya (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 191-204191–204). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.</ref> This implies that another requirement of flow is to be free from constraints that force controlled processes to be used. Additionally, several areas of research indicate that during a state of flow an otherwise-controlled process becomes automatic allowing it to behave dominant over all other automatic processes.

==See also==

* [[Dual process theory]]

* [[Modularity of mind]]

* [[Cognitive Loadload]]

* [[Bobo doll experiment]]

* [[Unconscious mind]]