'Answering questions\r'

'2-A. Recently, a comedian on a television show remarked that he nonion it was funny that people turn the car intercommunicate off when they be looking for a dwelling syndicate trope in a strange neighborhood. What scheme of guardianship is this comedian adhering to?\r\nThe comedian based his remarks on the theory of sh ared out attention. This theory states that attention end be divided into two separate states, wherein unitary can attend to two things or stimuli at the same beat, without sacrificing the quality of attention given to every of the two stimuli (Reisberg, 2001). Thus to the comedian, one can stick around listening to the communicate and at the same time look for the house number, and it perfectly makes sense to him that a person can do both of it since it does non really require an intense concentration.\r\nHowever, a drive in point is that looking for a house number in a long wrangling of houses may be quite a challenge task, one that requires conc entration and selective attention. Yes, it can be state that keeping the radio on would non make any difference but to those who pick out to look closely and to be able to do so steady-goingly would naturally turn their radios off. dependable imagine yourself driving slowly in a street you are unfamiliar with and keeping the radio on would mask the noise of incoming relations or tear down pedestrians.\r\nBesides, when a person is select-to doe with in one task, manage looking for a house, then one instinctively attends to it and disregards the other sounds, sights and disturbances in the immediate environment. Divided attention is very real, we ensnarl it once in a while specially if we multi-task but we could do so in a limited period, for ex axerophtholle think of how you can perchance manage to entertain questions from an officemate at your table and at the same time talk to someone on the mobilize, you could do both for a maximum of 2 minutes, but eventually one sti muli takes greater attention and we must give our full attention to it.\r\nOn the other hand, with training, anybody can make use of divided attention, but its contributions and benefits in engaging in it rest to be adjoinn since much research has to be make in this area.\r\n2-B. Based on what you energize knowing somewhat perception and attention, do you think it’s safe\r\nfor people to talk on cellular environs while they are driving?\r\nLearning about how we perceive the world around us gives us a die way of understanding how composite the human mind is and how even a stave that we often take for granted can have a profound impact in our mundane lives. Perception refers to a complex litigate of how we secure a stimuli, how our brain process the stimuli, and how our mind tells us what to do and how to react to the stimuli (Reisberg, 2001).\r\nIt can be said that a disruption of any of the lines of our perception may have adverse consequences; sometimes it can b e bizarre, like when a person cannot recognize the case of love one but instead are able to say that they look like a family member. Taking our study of perception into our daily activities, a debated issue like â€Å"is it safe to talk on the cell phone while driving” is better explained.\r\nI still believe that it is not safe to talk on the cellular phones while driving. impetuous already entails a number of processes and is quite demanding of our attention, like when you are in the freeway, one has to be assured of incoming traffic, cars at you back, the speed limit of the highway, and even looking out for possible mishaps in the road, on top of which, the driver must be witting of the cars fuel level, brake fluid and tire conditions. So how could anybody be able to talk on the phone while driving?\r\nTalking on the phone besides demands attention; we have to perceive and process what the other person is saying, and to even think of the hold response to what they are saying. Theories on perception have stated that our mind works overtime on the nose to process and be able to respond to outer stimuli, and that each jump of the brain is involve in different ways just to come up with the correct processing of information (Reisberg, 2001), like macrocosm able to recognize faces of family members.\r\nPerceptual illusions demonstrate that what we shape may not be true or real, hence while driving we may not be able to accurately tell how farthermost we are from the car ahead of us or how near we are to the railings without our full concentration. Reports have shown that galore(postnominal) people die on the road or in car accidents than any disease. Perceptual fleece legislates when we drive and talk on the phone, based on previous researches (Reisberg, 2001), perceptual overload makes us falsely perceive our surroundings and hence we may becharm what is not there, or we may not see what is really there.\r\nWhen we overload our senses it wou ld mean that one part of the brain or our faculties might be sacrificed to plow for the attention we give to another stimulus. And in an bodily process like driving which in itself is a spoiled behavior, we need complete control of our faculties, thus talk of the town on the cell phone is not advisable.\r\n2-C. compose a 200 word summary and circumstantial analysis on Rayner’s obligate. Discuss what the oblige is basically about, its strong and weak points, how convincing (or unconvincing) you visit its arguments, and how it might be followed up (e.g., if you think the article suggests any promising, new ideas for future research, describe what they are and how they might best be pursued.)\r\nThe article â€Å" nerve centre Movements in Reading: Recent Developments” by Keith Rayner (1993) presents the up-to-the-minute development in the study of eye faeces in the interpret process. The strength of the article is that it gives a background of what has been d iscovered so far in the field of study, the article argues that studying eye bowel parkway is important for it help build theory and also used to infer perceptual and cognitive processes during tuition thus the objective of the article. It also presents a number of theories that have used new methods in studying eye achievement.\r\nWhat was weak about the article was that it was not able to connect how the new methods of studying would contrite to a better understanding of the cognitive processes that occur during reading. The article basically was not convincing when the originator says that much remains to be seen when researchers realize how fire a research data eye movement can be. The article does not arouse this absorb and simply goes on to say that eye movement is a natural consequence of reading, which contradicts his claims earlier in the introduction part. The article was also too proficient for the average reader even if the reader is interested in eye movement.\ r\nReferences\r\nRayner, K. (1993). Eye movements in reading: Recent developments. Current Directions in\r\nPsychological Science, 2 (3): 81-85\r\nReisberg, D. (2001). Cognition: Exploring the science of the Mind, 2nd ed. New York: W.W.\r\nNorton & Company, Inc.\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n'