Sin título

Evidence of Practice

1. Aim

   • To investigate if the depth of processing affects recall, by using an experient based on Craik and Tulving's, but involving a free recall task rather than a recognition task

2. Experimental hypothesis

   • It is predicted that participants will recall more target words when processed semantically than when processed structurally, due to deeper processing

3. Null hypothesis

   • It is predicted that there will be no difference in number of target words processed semantically than when processed structurally. Any change will be due to chance factors

4. Topic

   • The LOP model by Craik and Lockhart proposes the durability of a memory depends on how deeply the memory is processed and what is done to it during encoding
   • Craik and Tulving did an experiment to test this, where participants were shown a list of 60 words then being asked questions about the words which led to different levels of processing
   • Participants were then asked to pick out the target words from a list of 180 words

5. Procedure

   • Sampling
     • Opportunity
     • We will select participants from those studying in the ILC at the time of the study
     • Quick and easy
     • 10 participants aged 16-19
   • Design
     • Repeated measures
       • Participants take part in both conditions simultaneously
       • Minimises order effects (eg. practice effect)
   • Process
     • Approach students in the ILC and, using standardised procedure, will ask them to complete a sheet
     • If they agree, read further instructions explaining the task
     • The sheet will ask questions related to a word, which willfocus on structural or semantic processing, and they will answer either yes or no
     • Upon completion, a displacement activity will be completed
     • Then as many words as possible will be recalled
       • Free recall, where process differs from that of Craik and Tulving

6. Results

   • For both the median and mean, the recall of structural processing was considerably lower than that of the phonetic
   • One set of results deviated from this trend

7. Conclusion

   • Words processed semantically are processed more deeply than those processed structurally
   • This agrees with the levels of processing model
   • Deeper processing does lead to better recall

8. Evaluation

   • Validity
     • Ecological
       • Not a real life situation
       • May not show how we would process more relevent information in a real life situation
     • Population
       • Only students from the north east of England
       • Different interlectual levels but all still in full time education
       • Cannot be generalised to the whole population as it is a small sample
     • Experimental
       • Participants didn't know the true nature so this allowed for more accurate results
   • Ethics
     • Participants were decieved, unethical, however they were debriefed
     • Right to withdraw was given
     • They didn't give informed consent as they didnt know the true nature but this was essential to the study
     • There were no harmful elements to the study
     • All information was kept private