| Bemerkung |
Die Veranstaltung ist für Gasthörer_innen NICHT geeignet! Group 1: This expra will explore attentional explanations of the Simon effects. The Simon effect has been explained through a shift of attention focus. Our recent study (Baess et al, in rev) has shed some new light into the attentional shift explanation. Therefore, the current expra will continue to work in this direction by either replicating older works or set up experiments that test this attentional explanation. Group 2: this expra will explore the impact of movement on the Simon effect. Therefore, we will use the treadmill while performing the Simon task. While we did not find a difference in the Simon effect while standing or sitting (Fenske, Bermeitinger, Baess, 2026), the focus will now be on walking while doing the Simon task. Group 3: Memory researchers have long been aware that learning some information makes it more difficult to either learn or retrieve other information. This is termed interference. The amount of interference that occurs depends on many factors, including time between learning, similarity of material, etc. In this ExPra, we will investigate another factor: the task that is meant to be accomplished with the information learned. We will create different tasks, of differing levels of relevance to individuals, and investigate whether learning differing information within a task leads to more, similar, or less interfernce to learning similar information across different tasks. Group 4: One fundamental question in memory resarch has been how much control individuals have over their own ability to remember and forget what they learn. Previous research has shown that being told to forget information actually makes that information more difficult to remember on a later, surprise, memory test. This research has always relied on deception, i.e., informing the participants that they can forget the information, because it won't be relevant on a later memory test. The need for this deception has, however, never been explicitly investigated in long-term memory tests. In this ExPra, we will investigate whether typical directed forgetting effects are still found, even when participants are made aware that they will actually need to remember the information on a later memory test. Group 5: This expra will explore action control and cognitive conflict paradigms (e.g. Stroop, Simon paradigms). Group 6: Selection from the following topics (work in small groups):
(1) Research on the topic of goal disengagement – defined as the process of detaching from a goal that is no longer attainable or appropriate – has increased considerably in recent years. Various aspects of this process have been examined, leading to a number of important research questions.
a. Possible research topic 1a: This topic focuses on the question of whether disengaging from approach goals versus avoidance goals differs in difficulty, and whether this is associated with differences in measures of well-being.
b. Possible research topic 1b: Effect sizes for the relationship between goal disengagement and well-being vary greatly. One potential moderator could lie in the survey context, which might influence responses to the goal disengagement questionnaire. Another possible moderator could be the role of goal reengagement.
(2) Some studies suggest that a brief mindfulness exercise can enhance commitment to a self-chosen goal, mediated through improvements in mindfulness and positive affect. The reasoning is that mindfulness promotes present-focused, non-judgmental attention, which helps to clarify personal values, reduce distractibility, and increase positive emotions – all of which are conducive to goal commitment. Only a few studies experimentally investigate actual goal pursuit and compare it with an active control group. Moreover, it would be meaningful to explore the effectiveness of the intervention for assigned goals.
(3) Current empirical research refutes the assumption of the effectiveness of individual learning styles (e.g., visual, auditory, kinesthetic) as a basis for effective learning; that is, there is no sufficient evidence for learning advantages when teaching methods/materials are adapted to alleged learning types. Nevertheless, belief in the importance of learning styles remains widespread. This research topic focuses on the question of the extent to which the possibility of choosing instructional materials that match the supposed learning style influences metacognitive processes and learning outcomes. Group 7: This research group will focus on attentional biases toward visual stimuli, such as visually salient or emotional stimuli, and the mechanisms that inhibit responses when these act as distractors. The seminar will draw on theoretical models of visual attention and attentional control that describe the interaction between bottom-up stimulus-driven processes and top-down goal-directed mechanisms. Using standard behavioural methods, we will design an experiment to study attentional bias and inhibition. Group 8: Commitments to future generations are highly contested. For instance, civic groups who support future-oriented policies suffer from push back and and are devalued in political and societal discourse. However, people from the current generation often directly benefit from future-oriented policies, for instance, through healthier cities, better transportation or cleaner air. In this experimental project, we will investigate whether, why, and when expressing commitments to cooperate with future generations (e.g., political activist groups) may inadvertently create hidden psychological costs in the form of reduced cooperation and increased conflict among members of the present generation. Group 9: "Moralische Kompromissfindung: Individuelle vs. kollektive moralische Urteile". Obwohl moralische Urteile häufig aus sozialen Interaktionen hervorgehen (z. B. in Ethikkommissionen), hat sich die bisherige Forschung nur selten mit zwei grundlegenden Fragen befasst: (1) Unterscheiden sich individuelle moralische Urteile von kollektiven Urteilen (d. h. moralischen Urteilen von Gruppen)? (2) Verändert das kollektive Treffen moralischer Urteile nachfolgende individuelle moralische Urteile? Bisher existieren lediglich zwei Studien zu diesem Thema. Diese legen nahe, dass Gruppen im Vergleich zu Individuen die moralischen Konsequenzen von Handlungen stärker gewichten und Urteile fällen, die stärker auf die Maximierung des Wohlergehens der Mehrheit abzielen. Aktuelle Forschung aus der Arbeitsgruppe Sozial-, Organisations- und Wirtschaftspsychologie zeigt jedoch, dass die Ergebnisse dieser Studien möglicherweise grundlegend neu interpretiert werden müssen. Hier setzt das wissenschaftliche Praktikum an. Ziel ist es, das Forschungsfeld rund um moralisches Urteilen in Gruppen zu verstehen. Darauf aufbauend wird eine Studie durchgeführt, die die Forschung aus der AG-SOW repliziert und offene Fragen adressiert. Dabei werden zentrale praktische Fähigkeiten vermittelt, die Forscher:innen auszeichnen: kreatives, methodisches und theoriebasiertes Arbeiten. Zudem wird vermittelt, wie gute, transparente und verlässliche Forschung umgesetzt wird. |
