CBBSG presents Abigail Csik and Julaine Zenk

-

Location: 378 Corbett Family Hall

This coming Monday, April 8th, two graduate students will be giving a talk at CBBSG 12-1pm in Corbett E378: Abigail Csik, a third year in GA Radvanksy's Memory Lab, and Julaine Zenk, a fourth year in Chuck Crowell's eMotion and eCognition Lab.  Details about their talks are below. Free food (Papa Vino's) for attendees will be served from 11:50 am.  
 
A Novel Study of Memory and Patterns of Forgetting
Abigail Csik
 
This study examined the form of forgetting of multiple dimensions of long-lasting memory for the complex events described in four well-known novels. Eligible participants (N = 222) answered 116 four-answer multiple-choice questions about one of those novels. These questions assessed memory for different aspects (e.g., time, entity, causality, intentionality, location) of the events occurring throughout the novel. Long-term memory for events in these novels could be described well by a power or linear forgetting curve, and memory was stronger for events in the beginning of the novel compared to later events. The current study contributes to our ability to predict memory for complex sets of information over very long periods of time.
 
Trolley Dilemma in the Sky: Content Matters when Civilians and Cadets make RPA Decisions    
Julaine Zenk
 
Crews operating remotely piloted aircrafts (RPAs) in military operations may be among the few that truly experience tragic dilemmas similar to the famous Trolley Problem. In order to analyze decision-making and emotional engagement of RPA operators within Trolley-Problem-like dilemma situations, an RPA simulation was created which varied mission contexts (rescue vs. killing) and the social “value” of a potential victim. It was found that participants (Air Force cadets vs. civilian students) were less likely to make the common utilitarian choice (sacrificing one to save five), when the value of the one increased. However, in the rescue context, this decision pattern was much less pronounced. The results demonstrate behavioral and justification differences when people are more invested in a particular context despite ostensibly similar dilemmas.