• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14
  15. 15
    15
  16. 16
    16
  17. 17
    17

Cue dependent Forgetting. This experiment investigates Tulvings theory of cue dependent forgetting, with a directional hypothesis stating that context of the encoding setting would act as a cue to participants accessibility to memory, and allow the

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Foundation Psychology Coursework Cue Dependent Forgetting Contents Page Abstract ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Page 3 Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 4-5 Method and Design ---------------------------------------------------------- Page 6-7 Results --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 8-9 Discussion ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 10-11 Reference------------------------------------------------------------------------ Page 12 Appendices List --------------------------------------------------------------- Page 13 Abstract This experiment investigates Tulving's theory of cue dependent forgetting, with a directional hypothesis stating that context of the encoding setting would act as a cue to participants' accessibility to memory, and allow them to recall more words. This study emulated a previous study done by Abernathy (1940), which used an experimental method to test whether the recall accuracy is higher in the same environment of encoding and retrieval. In this study, the sample size included 8 mixed gender participants, between the age of 18 and 24, with a difference of 7% higher recall rate in the different context as information was learnt, the null hypothesis has been retained, stated that there is no significant relationship between context of the encoding setting and participants' recall rate. Due to insufficient sample size used, the true relationship between two variables may not be evident. Introduction Aim The aim of this study is to find out whether being in the same classroom at the encoding and retrieval of words acts as a context cue for memory to help recall words. Directional Hypothesis Participants in the same at both encoding and retrieval will remember significantly more words, from list A than participants who will be asked to recall in a different context. Null Hypothesis: The is no significant relationship between the different environment and the amount of words recalled by participants. Directional Hypothesis is used in this study to test the effectiveness of the context acting as a cue for memory retrieval, presuming ...read more.

Middle

The participants have to be debriefed about the aims of the study after they have participated. The participants were allowed to ask questions about the experiment. The participants were informed that they could withdraw their data at anytime. Results Summary table Table to show how many words out of 8 participants in Sheet A, encoding and retrieval of the words in same place, and Sheet B, retrieval of words in the hall, got correct. Measure of central tendency Same environment Different environment Mean number of words remembered 11 (78.5 % recall rate) 12 (85.7 % recall rate) Mode number of words remembered 12 (85.7 % recall rate) 14 (100% recall rate) Median number of words remembered 12 13 Range number of words remembered 9 6 The table shows in List A, participants recalled words at the same environment of encoding of words remembered less words than List B, where participants retrieved words in a different environment from the setting where the encoding took place. The mean for List A is 78.5 %, and the mean for List B is 85.7 percent. This shows around 7% percent difference, with List B being higher. The results show that List B, who recalled words in different environment performed better on the cue dependant memory test than List A, who recalled words in the same environment as where encoding took place. The mean for List B (12) is higher than the mean for Sheet A (11). The results show that participants recalled more words from List B than from List A. The results refute the hypothesis. The mode for Sheet A is 85.7 percent, and the mode for Sheet B is 100%. ...read more.

Conclusion

Here is a piece of paper with 14 words on it. 2. You will be given 2 minutes to learn these words 3. You will take a 2 minutes gap in silence. For List B, you will be relocated during the 2 minutes gap, also in silence to avoid distractions. 4. After 2 minutes has passed you will write down the 14 words previously learnt. 5. I will remind you throughout the experiment the next thing you have to do. 6. At the end of the experiment you have the right to withdraw your results. Appendix 2 Word list given to participants List A List B Harm Plant Cars Care Bike Love Desk Chair Ruler Table Heat Pencil Distress Emotion Signs Carpet Heron Hate Sadness Share Kiss Door Raise Warm Heater Market Chart Money Appendix 3 Debriefing You have just taken part in a study to investigate whether the setting at encoding and retrieval of a list of words acts as a context cue to the memory. The results will be available if you wish to view them. All data collected will be kept confidential. Appendix 4 Raw Data Sheet A retrieval and encoding at same setting Sheet B retrieval in different location How many words in each group the participants got correct F 13 M 12 F 10 F 4 F 13 M 12 M 10 M 12 14 12 13 14 14 13 8 10 Total 86 98 Appendix 5 Thank you for considering taking part in this study. I would like to ensure you that you will not be harmed in this experiment. You have the right to withdraw at any time. Your results will remain anonymous. By taking part in this experiment you have given consent. You will be debriefed at the end of the experiment. Signature _____________________________ Iu, KYBenny May 10th 2011 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Cognitive Psychology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Cognitive Psychology essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Define short-term memory and describe the main factors that influence the number of items ...

    4 star(s)

    Peterson and Peterson (1959 [1]) put the results into a line graph for the times they prevented their participants from rehearsing the items and for the interval periods from three to eighteen seconds, the line formed was named as the 'forgetting curve'.

  2. SHORT TERM MEMORY

    It can also be labelled as a weakness that the mean averages share little difference, this is a bad point as it was expected that the added distraction would have more of an effect on the results. This makes it difficult to come to a clear conclusion based on the findings of the investigation.

  1. Summarise the aims and context of Bennett-Levy & Marteau (1984) Fear of animals: What ...

    This scale was included because it was assumed that participants would be only 'quite afraid' or 'very afraid' of a small percentage of the animals given. Where the animals might have been thought of as being harmful, for example, grass snake and jelly fish, the instruction 'not harmful' was written

  2. An investigation about retrieval failure in memory (retrieval cues) whether participants can recall more ...

    Participants may also not be able to hear the words read out. To control this I am going to do the experiment at a suitable time when students will be in lessons and not on the corridors making noise. The experiment will be in a classroom as far away from

  1. Carry out an experiment on participants to investigate proactive interference on memory recall, using ...

    And the null hypothesis for this experiment is that proactive interference will make no significant difference on memory recall of the word lists. METHOD DESIGN For the experiment a laboratory method was used, this is most scientific because manipulation of the independent variable indicates cause and effect and it increases accuracy and gives the experimenter great control of the variables.

  2. the affect interference has on the recall of words

    The third concept is proactive interference. Something learned earlier may also impair one's ability to recall something learned more recently. If, for example, one is less able to recall a woman friend's married name by virtue of having learned her maiden name at an earlier time, one is suffering from proactive interference I will be testing retroactive interference.

  1. Will participants have a better recall of words when they are presented in an ...

    The study again suggests that material presented in logical categories is more easily stored and recalled from memory. Other investigations have been undertaken into whether memory is improved by participants organising material into categories themselves. Wittrock and Carter (1975) used lists similar to those used by Bower but the ordering of the words was in a random format.

  2. To see whether giving people a displacement activity before recalling the words would affect ...

    rehearsed so they wouldn't have gone through to the short term memory and as the short term has a limited capacity the middle words would have been lost. They would have been displaced by the other words coming after them in the list.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work