Levels Of Processing.

Craik and Lockhart (1972) proposed an alternative to structural models of memory, focusing instead on memory processes.
1. They suggested that information can be processed at different levels, and that the way in which information is processed can affect the likelihood of it being retried in the future. Depending on what we do with information at the time of encoding, processing can be shallow and superficial, or deeper and more meaningful.
  1. Craik and Lockhart argued that deeper levels of processing result in more long-lasting and more retrievable memories, whereas shallow levels of processing result in memories that are less long-lasting and less likely to be retrieved.
Tasks That Require Different Levels of Processing.
1. 1) Structural.
  1. An example of shallow, superficial processing would be looking at words and deciding whether the letters are upper or lower case, or whether the print is in one colour or another.
    1. E.g. 'BOY' Upper or Lower Case?
2. 2) Phonological.
  1. An intermediate level of processing would be making judgements about the sound of words, deciding whether or not one word rhymes with another.
    1. E.g. 'PARK' Rhymes with lark?
3. 3) Semantic.
  1. An example of deep processing would be looking at a word and judging whether or not it fits into a sentence, or sorting sets of words into different categories (e.g. vehicles, foods).
    1. E.g. 'TABLE' Fits into this sentence? 'The______ ran on ahead of the group.'
4. In order to complete the first type of task, it is necessary simply to process the word structurally, scanning the word visually.
  1. In order to complete the second type of task, it is necessary to carry out phonological or sound-based processing, mentally sounding out the words.
    1. In order to complete the third type of task, it is necessary to process the information semantically, thinking about the meaning of the word and relating it to the rest of the sentence, or putting it into a meaningful category.
  2. Craik and Lockhart's theory would predict that words which are processed for meaning (deep processing) will be remembered better than words processed for sound (intermediate processing) which in turn will be recalled better than words which are processed for superficial characteristics such as shape, size or colour (shallow processing).
Research Study: Craik and Tulving (1975).
1. This type of research technique is sometimes referred to as an incidental-learning task because the participants did not know that they would be required to recall the original words at the end of the procedure.
2. E.g. of the types of questions used by Craik and Tulving:
  1. 'Milk' Does it come from a cow?
  2. 'Sun' Does it rhyme with 'boat'?
  3. 'HEART' Is it in capital letters or small letters?
Although they emphasise process rather than structure, Craik and Lockhart do assume the existence of separate short-term and long-term and memory systems. However, they see the function of short-term memory in terms of the processes it carries out (Baddeley 1997).
Evaluation.
1. Craik and Lockhart's (1972) theory provided a realistic and credible alternative to the structural approach to memory.
2. They emphasised how processes which occur during learning affect the extent to which material can be retrieved from long-term memory (Medin et al. 2001).
3. The theory would explain why some things, e.g. deeply significant and meaningful events, can be readily remembered without rehearsal.
4. The theory also explains why elaborative rehearsal is more effective than maintenance or rote rehearsal (Craik and Watkins 1973). Elaborative rehearsal involves elaboration of the material to be recalled, perhaps by weaving a list of words into a story. Maintenance or rote rehearsal is simply repeating the information over and over. Since elaborative rehearsal involves thinking about the meaning of the material, it is a deeper level of processing and therefore leads to better recall. Elaborative rehearsal can add all kinds of extra images, associations and memories to enrich the material which has to be learned, resulting in better recall (Matlin 2002). Contrast this with the Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) view of rehearsal as simple verbal repetition.
5. A key problem for the theory concerned the way in which depth of processing was measured. There was no independent way of assessing whether processing was deep or shallow. Determining this relied on a circular definition which argued that if recall was good, then deep processing must have taken place, and if recall was poor, then the processing must have been shallow. However, just because the participants were asked to say whether or not a word was in capital letters, it should not be assumed that they did not engage in further deeper processing.
6. Lockhart and Craik (1990) have updated their model in response to criticisms and recent research findings. The basic ideas remain the same, but they accept that their original model was rather oversimplified, and agree that they had not considered retrieval processes in sufficient detail. In addition, Lockhart and Craik (1990) accepted that in some cases shallow processing does not lead to rapid forgetting.

Next up

Levels Of Processing.

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Stephanie Price over 11 years ago