Practical Flashcards
Describe the background of this practical with research that supports and refutes the aim.
- The rationale for this research is to investigate the role of rehearsal in the STM and its aid in forming LTM
- Peterson and Peterson (1959) told ppts to remember nonsense trigrams (e.g. BNV) and found that after 3 seconds 80% of trigrams were recalled but after 18 seconds less than 10% were recalled, which shows rehearsal aids memory however it can decay after an extended period
What was the aim of our practical?
To investigate the importance of maintenance rehearsal as a way of transferring information from the STM to the LTM using an interference task to prevent rehearsal.
What are the variables of our practical?
IV = Rehearsal vs no rehearsal DV = Number of words recalled Controls = The same word list, same order, same amount of time each word was displayed for
State the fully operationalised alternative hypothesis.
There will be a significantly higher number of words recalled out of 15 high frequency 4 letter words when there is a a 60 second pause for rehearsal compared to when rehearsal is prevented with an interference task of counting backwards in 3s for 60 seconds.
State the fully operationalised null hypothesis.
There will be no significant difference between the number of words recalled out of 15 high frequency 4 letter words after a 60 second pause for rehearsal compared to when rehearsal is prevented with an interference task of counting backwards in 3s for 60 seconds, any difference will be due to chance.
What sample did we use in our practical?
- 20 ppts
- King Edward VI College in Stourbridge
- aged 16-19 years old.
What sampling method did we use in our practical?
Opportunity
What was the method used in our practical?
Lab
Briefly describe the procedure of our practical.
- 20 ppts from King Edward VI College, Stourbridge.
- Were given a debrief of the aim of the experiment and what it would entail allowing ppts the right to withdraw whilst gaining informed consent
- All ppts were shown a list of 15 words, high frequency 4 letter words, projected individually on a screen for 3 secs each
- Ppts in the rehearsal condition (10 ppts) then paused for 60 secs to allow for rehearsal of the words
- After the 60 secs they were given time to write down all the words they could recall
- This was repeated with a second list of 15 different words in the rehearsal prevented condition projected individually on a screen for 3 secs each
- Ppts would then carry out an interference task in which they had to count backwards in 3s for 60 secs
- After the 60 secs they were given time to write down all the words they could recall
- After the experiment ppts were given another debrief explaining that they still had the right to withdraw
What were the results of our practical?
- With rehearsal a mean of 8 words recalled correctly
- Without rehearsal a mean of 7 words were recalled correctly
- The mode for both conditions was 7
- We therefore accepted our null hypothesis with any differences being due to chance
How did we analyse our results and what was the outcome of this?
- Using a Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test
- Our results were found to be not significant
- Used a level of 95% confidence that our results were not due to chance
- The critical value on the table read 35, anything below was considered critical
- Our T value was 56.5 which was higher and so not significant
- We therefore accepted our null hypothesis with any differences being due to chance
What can we conclude from our results?
We found no significant difference in the number of words recalled after 60 secs of rehearsal compared to no rehearsal due to an interference task of counting backwards in 3s for 60 secs.
This shows that rehearsal does not aid our short term memory.
How do our findings compare with background research?
- Our research found that a mode of 7 words were recalled in both conditions which rejects Peterson and Peterson’s (1959) research that 80% of trigrams were recalled after 3 secs
Evaluate the generalisablity using a high and low point.
A weakness is that there is low generalisability. This is because we only used a sample of 20 students, aged 16-19 who attend King Edwards College, Stourbridge, and so results are therefore ethnocentric and cannot be generalised to other ages, people who aren’t students, so is unrepresentative of wider society, reducing its usefulness.
Evaluate reliability using 2 high points.
A strength is the high levels of reliability. This is because we used a standardised procedure of a word appearing for 3 seconds each out of a list of 15. This means that the study is easy to replicate and test for consistency.
Are there any applications?
There are applications to society. The study demonstrates that maintenance rehearsal is not the best way of transferring information to the LTM. Students may not need rehearsal to improve memory and instead can use other methods such as elaboration rehearsal. Elaborative rehearsal is a memory technique that involves actively thinking about the meaning of new information and connecting it to existing knowledge in long-term memory. Unlike maintenance rehearsal, which is just rote repetition (like repeating a phone number to yourself), elaborative rehearsal helps deeply encode information, making it easier to recall later.
Evaluate validity using 2 low points.
A weakness is that there is Low task validity. This is because we used 2 lists of 15 words that appeared for 3 secs each to assess memory recall. This therefore lacks mundane realism as this is not how memory works in real life due to people not reciting lists of words often, so is not reflective of human memory, reducing mundane realism.
Evaluate an ethical advantage during our practical.
P - Ethical
E - Ppts received a briefing at the start and end which explained the aim of the experiment and what it entailed
E - Therefore ppts gave informed consent and had the right to withdraw at the start and end
Give 3 examples of how we can improve our practical for future research?
1) A more diverse sample
2) Improve memory task by changing it to reading a passage and answering questions about it
3) Improving ecological validity by carrying it out in a more natural environment
