Many controlled processing essay topics are not given enough consideration by students. They might take the easy way out and choose a topic that is too broad, or they may simply choose their favorite subject to write about. The best controlled processing essays are those that have been well-researched and written with care.
Controlled procedures are attention processes that rely on one’s central cognitive resources, rather than on uncontrolled attention. This processing, therefore, necessitates concentration capacity that is serialized in nature, time-consuming and effortful to control. Automatic attention, on the other hand, doesn’t need you to use your central cognitive resources and so only needs a small amount of attention capacity.
Prices start at $12
Prices start at $11
Prices start at $12
Automatic processing includes activities that do not need attention, can be completed without conscious effort, and require parallel processing like driving a car while listening to the radio or reading. As a result, it’s crucial to remember that learning how to walk and learn how to drive are examples of processes that may become automatic with enough practice. When a youngster is learning to walk, they must pay close attention, but once they learn how to walk, it becomes an automatic process. A driver with years of expertise and who can effortlessly drive while listening to a radio broadcast at the same time is similar.
Distinction between automatic and controlled processing
Automated procedures, for example, as a skilled driver can shift a gear faster than a novice. It is also simple and requires less concentration or attention, such as switching gears and at the same time paying attention to a conversation rather than driving. Also, it’s out of reach of consciousness, such as a novice driver who might recall mainly his efforts to change gears during a lesson but can’t do so when a skilled driver is expected to perform the identical movement in the same manner. Last but not least, an automatic procedure is unavoidable since when we execute something repeatedly it becomes a habit and we can’t avoid doing it, for example, most drivers check behind them before passing.
On the other hand, triggered processing refers to activities that need conscious thought and control, such as driving a car for the first time. Controlled procedures are also sluggish since they are most useful in situations where we are not aware of how to respond quickly and efficiently. They are time-consuming and require a significant amount of concentration. As a result, the learner’s attention must be concentrated. Because so many conscious efforts are required for the new chore, there is complete consciousness in this processing.
Relevance to divided attention
Divided attention is concerned with our ability to pay attention to more than one thing at the same time. The degree of similarity between the tasks involved, as well as how expert we are at the task, is often used to determine this talent. The connection between both automatic and controlled processing is necessary for a discussion on divine attention to make sense. In the case of automatic processing, divided attention is beneficial. A task that has been well and frequently executed becomes automated, requiring little or no mental energy, making it possible to perform other things at the same time.
Furthermore, because no active memory or conscious attention is required, the task’s performance will not be hampered. However, if divided attention is attempted in the case of controlled processing, performance will significantly drop. This is due to the fact that there will be two tasks requiring controlled processing from one individual at the same time.
The term divided attention is used to explain how a computer can handle multiple tasks at once. In this chapter, we’ll look at what it takes to get your audience’s attention and keep them there throughout the message. We’ll also consider why using subtler tactics to pique their interest in your topic might help you better connect with them and encourage active participation in the discussion.
We are capable of focusing on more than one input at a time when we are skilled in the activity, according to Fulcher (2003), but it is easier to split our attention between dissimilar activities than parallel ones. The more frequently you practice, the less attention you need to devote to each activity. This is due to the fact that after performing the task without thinking about it, it becomes automatic.
Automated visual features, such as form and hue, may be recognized automatically. Joint features, such as form and color, nevertheless need directed attention. Automation appears to be completely automatic processes that might get in the way of activities requiring careful processing. People also make mistakes while executing automated procedures due to divided attention, for example by mixing up the stages of separate tasks or forgetting something you intended to accomplish and doing a different thing.
Finally, automatic processing refers to any activity that does not require attention or capacity and can result from doing things frequently. Parallel processing is also a form of controlled processing, as is multitasking. In new situations, it’s easy to notice controlled/manual processing since it requires deliberate attention.
Individual attention is the capacity to carry out many activities at once. As a result, automatic processing may be characterized as a way for individuals to have divided attention since the more we learn how to perform things, the easier they become and we can do them while performing other activities since we don’t need deliberative attention in doing them. In controlled processing, however, it is difficult to achieve divided attention.
The experiment’s objective was to investigate the attentional theory. A modified version of the Stroop effect was used in the study. According to the stroop effect, automatic and controlled thinking can interfere with one another, making it tough to focus on a specific activity. Participants were asked to indicate the color of ink in which each word was written.
The positive influence of music on attention was demonstrated in several studies. The results of the experiment indicated a significant difference in response times between both stimuli, further supporting the Stroop effect. The environment around us is full with an infinite number of sensations, and our brains cannot pay attention to all at the same time. It’s possible that humans have limited computing resources because to this reasoning, Kahneman (as cited in Edgar, 2007) says we aren’t aware of everything that goes on around us since our pool of resources is restricted.
According to the automaticity model of Schneider and Shiffrin (as cited in Gross, 2005), there are two types of processing: Automatic and Controlled. Automatic processing makes use of restricted mental resources and does not need conscious attention, resulting in an automatic reaction. Controlled processing demands a great deal of mental energy and necessitates a deliberate effort (attention) to concentrate on a subject
The ability to concentrate allows us to remove non-important data and focus on the important stuff at any given moment. The advantage of automatic processing is that it allows us to perform numerous activities at once due to its reliance on limited supplies. According to Kahneman (as cited in Gross, 2005), certain operations (those that have been done many times) become automated, requiring less mental horsepower, allowing other activities to proceed. When the process is automatic, it’s difficult to switch off. The Stroop test required participants to identify the color of ink for each word on a list using their best judgment rather than precisely as written in the color indicated such as ‘red’ was written in black ink. The objective was for them to pronounce the colour of each word as quickly as possible.
Participants in Stroop’s research found it difficult to ‘switch off’ the automatic process of reading in order to identify the color of the word. One explanation for the findings in Stroop’s study is that there was a battle between automatic and controlled processing of stimuli within the experiment. This idea has been examined in this study. Words that are connected with color were used as stimuli, whereas words that have no relationship with color were used as stimuli.
The goal of the study was to examine the response time of both conditions in order to see whether automatic processing (reading of the word) affects controlled processing ( recognizing the color). The research hypothesis was that there would be a difference in response times between the color-related condition and the neutral word condition. This is a two-tailed hypothesis. nThe method design was a within-participants design.
The independent variable was the manipulation of colors and words. Two conditions were used in this study. Participants were shown a list of colored words, the colored ink did not correspond to the word being presented, and neutral word stimuli, where identical hues were displayed but no relationship to the term was present. The time it took for each condition was measured. All of the participants received the same briefing package.
Participants completed both condition 1 and 2. The conditions were switched between participants to avoid any learning effect, and all participants utilized the same equipment. Volunteer nThe study recruited 20 individuals. Sixteen of these people were from the Open University or their relatives and friends. Four people were recruited by word of mouth from the experimenters family. All participants had no prior knowledge of the hypothesis of the experiment. The majority of participants were between 18 and 69 years old (18-69).
The study, published in the Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, was conducted by The College of New Jersey. It involved 15 female and 6 male participants. The experiment was announced to the participants. Subjects such as automatic processing, which is a topic in cognitive psychology, were mentioned to the participants. The experiment would take approximately 2-5 minutes to complete and 10 minutes to provide a debrief at the end. Participants were told that their information would remain confidential, but data collected (age, sex, and response times) would be included in the study.
Participants were asked if they had any impairments that might prevent them from completing the study, such as color blindness and visual difficulties. It was explained that this information was needed since the experiment required participants to look at colors and complete two conditions as fast as possible; and that individuals with impairments may find the experiment difficult due to the nature of the research. The experimenter was not informed of any limitations. Participants were informed that they had a right to withdraw from the study at any time without giving a reason.
Before taking part in the study, each participant signed a consent form. None of the responses from the participants was excluded from the analysis. All participants were given with identical instructions that were read out to them on A4 paper and time was measured using a digital stopwatch (Appendix 1). The recorded time was accurate to milliseconds. To record data, the experimenter used a response sheet printed on an A4 piece of paper (Appendix 2)
Two identical pieces of A4 paper were used to present the Stimuli. The two conditions were named “condition 1” and “condition 2,” and each had two columns. Each column in each condition contained 15 words, for a total of 30 words. The same color scheme was employed: red, orange, blue, purple, green, and yellow. In condition 1, the order in which each color was presented corresponded to the order in which they appeared in condition 2.
Condition 2 required participants to identify the colors of inks in which words were written (Appendix 4). . Procedure The participants were informed that they would be asked to name the colors of the ink in which words are written and that it would take around 3 minutes for them to finish. The experimenter stated that he or she would time each condition and keep track of the data on a sheet of A4 paper. For statistical purposes, the participants’ age and Sex were recorded. Each participant participated in the study alone.
Each person was given the same instructions. The participants were instructed to complete each group of items as quickly as possible. A duplicate of the first set of words was put in front of them face down on the table once it was verified that the participant understood the instruction. The participant was directed to turn over the paper and begin working. The experimenter then started timing. When the participant completed the activity, the experimenter stopped the stopwatch and recorded their response time on the response sheet.
The procedure was followed for the second set of words in the same way. There was no interstimulus-interval because the second set of words were presented right after completing the first task. To minimize the impact of practice, the order in which participants completed both sets of conditions was reversed. The experiment required an average of 2 minutes for completion, depending on how long it took each individual participant to finish each condition. After that, a debrief was given to explain the purpose of the study.
The participant was given further information on Automatic processing and the design of each condition was explained. Following the debrief, the experimenter acknowledged that her limited experience on this topic might prevent her from answering all of the questions posed. The study hypothesis was that there would be a difference in response times between the color-themed condition and the neutral word condition. The duration of data recorded during the experiment was measured in seconds (s).
Automatic processing and controlled processing The cognitive processes that affect perception are influenced by people’s methods and shortcuts to quickly perceive the social environment as accurately as possible. Automatic processing is one of these processes, which may be utilized to rapidly incorporate previously learned and experienced information into a person’s viewpoint of events in a fast and efficient manner (Bargh, 1989).
Controlled processing, on the other hand, is more time-consuming and laborious because it analyzes the situation step-by-step. When there isn’t much time or effort to devote to a problem, social perception becomes even more important. Automated processing uses numerous strategies to assist individuals interpret information quickly and easily; these are known as heuristics and schemas (Gigerenzer, 1991).
Heuristics are shortcuts that people don’t have to relearn how to read other people’s emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. It is made up of tangled processes that provide a foundation for social attention and interpretation. Social cognition is closely linked with social perception since it reveals the inner workings of the mind in relation to stimuli from the social environment. While these cognitive frameworks and methods are quite useful for quick judgments, they may lack a thorough knowledge of society, resulting in misperceptions.
We’ve all used a phone while driving and talked, read texts, or emailed. Switching from one activity to another without giving it any attention would be considered multitasking. Multitasking is the simultaneous performance of several activities. Let’s start with automatic processing, which is something we’re familiar with and can do without thinking about it. An everyday function is defined as an activity that we have done many times before and can complete successfully without thinking about it.
We don’t have to concentrate. The controlled processing process is methods that are performed in the same way regardless of our situation, such as the achievement test, identical questions, and the same amount of time for everyone; basically, we’re told to pay attention and put in the effort. So (How do these various sorts of activities differ in terms of whether or not they allow us to multitask effectively?) Delbridge (2001) defined multitasking as “performing many objectives during a similar general timeframe by “switching between individual tasks frequently.”
This is achieved by achieving only part of the objectives, but over a longer time period making progress on all of them. (Which of these two types can be carried out simultaneously with no loss of efficiency or quality?) This is based on the notion that tasks are done one after another rather than simultaneously, according to Dellridge. Controlled activities are believed to be slower because they necessitate complete effort control, thus they generally cannot be done concurrently with other controlled operations without task-switching or reduced performance.
Switching gears or between activities also necessitates a shift in attention and focus. Memory distraction is determined by whether the distraction is active, such as talking, counting, or singing, or passive, such as listening to music or dancing. According to Delbridge (2001), there are differences among people in multitasking performance, with some individuals being more susceptible to process losses produced by multitasking than others.
A new driver may not be able to drive and talk at the same time. This might put you in a hazardous position. A skilled driver can have an entertaining conversation with a passenger while driving, and not crash. When a procedure breaks down while one is engaged in a secondary activity, it’s called being imprecise (inefficient).
(Do we really do many things at the same time while performing two controlled processing activities and can they be done as well as separately?) We genuinely can’t focus on more than one thing at a time, but we can Switching from activity to activity is possible. It all depends on what we’re doing and how much concentration and thought are required.