Categories
Psychology

How did you know that the words drink and order were the same thing?

Looking for some help? We have it all. Great price and impressive quality

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order

Unit 5
Knowledge Representation and Manipulation
INTRODUCTION
For all its triviality, the joke below illustrates some of the complexities of human thinking. Knowing the words and reading them are only minor parts of what it takes to understand the joke.
A neutron walks into a bar and asks for a drink. The bartender fills the order and places it in front of the neutron. The neutron asks, “How much will that be?” The bartender responds, “For you, no charge” (Anonymous).
First, how did you know it was a joke? Did you find it amusing? Why or why not? How did you know that the words drink and order were the same thing? How did you know that places it in front meant, most likely, put the drink on the bar? How did you know that the neutron’s question about how much referred to the cost of the drink? How did you know that there were two meanings for the word charge? Is it necessary to know that a neutron has no electric charge?
Also, how is it that you can identify a group of words as a specific type of sentence (in this case, a joke), rapidly process what it means on several different levels, and explain how and why it is funny? (An assumption is being made here.) Furthermore, how did you do all of this without any perceptible effort?
Next, remember the first time that you visited a new city and had to find your way around. You may know the basics that would allow you to navigate (that there are four cardinal directions and, perhaps, basic landmarks). Yet, navigating in a new city (despite all of your knowledge about spatial navigation) is incredibly difficult. Why are some cognitive processes so effortful while others are so effortful? This unit explores processes that are easy and difficult—and the crucial way that affective processing can impact cognition.
In this unit, consider the following questions:
What theories, models, and hypotheses are used to explain how knowledge is represented in the mind?
What are some of the characteristics of mental imagery?
What are analogical images and symbolic propositions?
How do spatial skills develop?
Learning Components
This activity will help you achieve the following learning components:
Investigate how theories, principles, and evidence-based best practices related to memory, language, and representation, organization, and manipulation of knowledge, can be applied in professional practice.
Investigate how knowledge is represented within the mind.
Investigate what ethical issues might arise in application of theories and principles related to problem-solving, creativity, reasoning and intelligence.
Examine how the theories and principles related to memory, language, and representation, organization, and manipulation of knowledge apply to culturally diverse populations.
Investigate how affect may impact organization, and manipulation of knowledge.
***ASSIGNMENT***
Mental Maps – Effects of Misconceptions
During the course of learning, individuals modify their theories and develop schemas that facilitate more advanced thinking. Learners are not always attempting to discover new thoughts but are, instead, trying to integrate currently held views about the world with their own experienced perceptions.
Misconceptions are conflicts between a learner’s experienced perception of some fact or event and the currently accepted belief about the same fact or event. Therefore, misconceptions are not really errors, but the underlying source for errors. Misconceptions become problematic when they are not confronted by the learner because they stand in place of accurate knowledge representations.
One of the reasons learners develop misconceptions is that a discrepancy exists between what seems intuitively reasonable and what is real. For example, Strauss (1982) showed elementary school children two identical beakers of water and explained to them that the water in each beaker was 10 degrees Celsius. The water from the two beakers was combined and the children were then asked the temperature of the combined beakers of water. Most of the children claimed that it was 20 degrees Celsius.
Researchers Donald Peck and Stanley Jencks (1988) argue that misconceptions may not always be detectable using common forms of evaluation. They visited a sixth-grade classroom where all of the students had just passed a test on reducing fractions and were ready to move on. One of the exam problems was to reduce 18/24 to its least common denominator, 3/4, which the students were able to do. In reference to this problem, the researchers asked the class to consider this question: “Which would be the most cake, then, 18/24 or 3/4 of it?” They report the children’s responses as follows:
The children were immediately divided into three camps. One portion said that 3/4 was the most cake because the pieces are bigger. Another group said that 18/24 was more because there were more pieces. One boy thought they were the same. A look of incredulity, however, led him to quickly join the 3/4 is larger group.
Misconceptions are not limited to young children’s thinking. Some adults have misconceptions about concepts of space, time, and motion, for example. A short test available in the resources, the Mental Maps Quiz, may (or may not, depending on your understanding of lines of latitude and longitude) unveil misconception in adult thinking. After taking the test, write a brief description of your experience and then tie it into the information from the readings. As a psychologist or teacher, how might you help your clients or students give up their intuitively held yet erroneous beliefs about the world?
For this discussion, refer to and integrate ideas presented in your text and any supplemental readings. Cite outside resources if necessary to make your point.
References
Peck, D. M., & Jencks, S. M. (1988). Subject matter preparation: Key to educational improvement. In Proceedings of the Holmes Group: Far West Regional Meeting, (pp. 173–183). Boulder, CO: Homes Group.
Strauss, S. (1982). Introduction. In S. Strauss & R. Stavy (Eds.), U-shaped behavioral growth. New York, NY: Academic Press.
***(Instructions, Chapter Readings, and photos of map attached)***

Looking for some help? We have it all. Great price and impressive quality

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order

Leave a Reply