RE: Discussion Question Assistance

Jun 18th, 2015
Price: $25 USD

Question description


Could you assist with the following questions?

A. Discussion Question – Chapter 11 – 150 word minimum Reference: Galotti, K. M. (2014). Cognitive Psychology In and Out of the Laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Hi Class:

I would suspect that for a few of you, some of this material is beginning to actually make sense from a "holistic" perspective?

Just last week the class spent time on memory and cognition.  This week we have turned our attention to problem solving.

In our text we read that one of the heuristics is called availability.  I suspect that most of us use this heuristic all the time without really thinking about it.

The definition of this heuristic is thisAvailability: "In other words, instances (for example, particular words, particular committees, or particular paths) that are more easily thought of, remembered, or computed stand out more in one's mind"(Galotti, p. 297, 2014).

So, in my mind it would go something like this,I am aware that I am feeling a great deal of anxiety over such and such a situation.  Upon further reflection, I am able to make sense out of why I am feeling this anxiety.  After this realization I can then review my own personal history for whether there is any basis for this feeling of dread that I am experiencing.  If I do not, then, can I mitigate this feeling based on not having an available memory of the possible outcome? 

If I do have a history of the outcome being congruent with the feeling, then do I have the available means to grapple in a more successful manner with this feeling of anxiety?

Take for example this course.  How did you feel at the beginning versus now.  What has changed?

I would like to hear some thoughts on this.


Galotti, K. M. (2014). Cognitive Psychology In and Out of the Laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

B. Discussion Question  - Reasoning Discussion (150 word minimum)

Reflecton the process associated with reasoning and discuss the following:

Consider the following choice. I will give you a free $5 bill, no strings attached. Optionally, I will allow you to flip a coin: heads you win $10, tails you win nothing. Do you want the $5, or do you want to flip the coin? What does expected value theory tell you that you should do? Does this accurately represent your feeling about the decision?

C. Discussion Question – Response to David Logan: Reasoning (150 word minimum)

If I was considering doing the gamble of the five dollars or take the flip for the ten dollars I probably would lake the flip for the ten dollars. because my expectancy level is high and I believe that the best decision for the most value would be to flip for the ten. Other individuals may not feel the same way. Social status, environment and ones rule of thumb ( heuristics) may lead an individual to make a different decision. Charles N Coffer's article states that behavior is a function of the expectancies one has and the value of the goal towards an individuals is working towards. Such and approach predicts that, when more than one behavior is possible the behavior chosen will be the one with the largest combination of expected success and value. ( Cofer 2014) From this I feel that the expectancy theory could only be gauged on a person to person basis.


Charles N Cofer, article motivation ( sep 9 2014) retrieved fromwww.britanica.comtopicmotivation/expectancytheory.

D. Discussion Question – Response to Devlin response to David (150 word minimum)

Hi David - Class:

David - I like the way you are opening this discussion further.

I cruised over to our library and found the following definition to the word heuristic.  This is a critical idea to me for this topic.

Here it is -

heuristicn.  A rough-and-ready procedure or rule of thumb for making a decision, forming a judgement, or solving a problem without the application of an algorithm or an exhaustive comparison of all available options, and hence without any guarantee of obtaining a correct or optimal result. The concept can be traced to the work of the US economist and decision theorist Herbert A(lexander) Simon (1916-2001) who first suggested in 1957 that human decision makers with bounded rationality use such procedures when thorough examination of all available options is infeasible. The concept was introduced into psychology in the early 1970s by the Israeli psychologists Amos Tversky (1937-96) and Daniel Kahneman (born 1934), and the most important heuristics initially identified and studied by them were theanchoring and adjustmentheuristic, theavailability heuristic, and the representativeness heuristic. Also called a cognitive heuristic. See alsobase-rate fallacy,cancellation heuristic,dual-process model,means-end analysis,regression fallacy,sample size fallacy,satisficing,simulation heuristic. Comparealgorithm. heuristicadj [From Greek heuriskein to find] (Apollo, 2015).

Galotti, (2014) is much more concise when stating "Tversky and Kahneman (1973) argued that when faced with the task of estimating probability, frequency, or numerosity, people rely on shortcuts or rules of thumb--heuristics--to make these judgments easier" (pg. 297).

It is my thought that most of us use these simple, yet from a cognitive standpoint, often quite complex 'tools' without too much conscious thought.

This is the part that ties into the other discussions for this week.

How might we use some of these ideas in our every day lives, especially amongst colleagues, friends, loved ones?

I look forward to your thoughts.


"heuristicn.A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009.Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Apollo Group. 17 June 2015

Galotti, K. M. (2014). Cognitive Psychology In and Out of the Laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

E.  Discussion Question : Life and GPS Discussion 150 word minimum Hi Everyone:

I have been reviewing what our text (Galotti, 2014) provides for us regarding this weeks' first discussion question.

Solving problems is a fairly complex cognitive process.  Each of us solve problems every day, often times without really giving too much thought to what is taking place.

"I'm hungry, what will I have for lunch"?

Solving problems between ourselves and others is somewhat more difficult sometimes.

Our author (Galotti, 2014) discusses something called General Problem Solver(s) (GPS).

What does everyone think about interpersonal conflict and these GPS's?  Does anyone have a thought about which ones may be better than others and why?

I look forward to your ideas.


Galotti, K. M. (2014). Cognitive Psychology In and Out of the Laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

E. Discussion Question (150 word minimum) Reference  Devlin Response to Marquita 

Thanks for picking up this thread on schemas!

I know some of the ways that schemas are detrimental to me.

An example would be known loosely as stereotyping.  This would be a good place to discuss some of the ways we can be 'trapped' by our schemas.

In fact our text (Galotti, 2014) writes about schemas and discusses this type of detrimental effect.

I suspect that all of us have been 'stereotyped' and have done so ourselves.

This could be considered a detrimental effect of schemas.

My question to the class is whether anyone else picked up on this too, and how have you caught yourself in a "schema" stereotype and turned it into an advantage or opportunity to learn, and if so, what was learned!


Galotti, K. M. (2014). Cognitive Psychology In and Out of the Laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Daniel C.
School: Cornell University

Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students

Review from our student for this Answer

Jun 19th, 2015
"Solid work, thanks. "
Ask your homework questions. Receive quality answers!

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1821 tutors are online

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors