• 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

Investigate into the Primacy and Recency effect

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Table of Contents Abstract 2 Introduction 2 Experimental hypothesis 2 Null hypothesis 2 Method 2 Materials used 2 Procedure 2 Experiment 1 - With Interference task 2 Experiment 2 - Without Interference task 2 Results 2 Discussion 2 Conclusion 2 References 2 Appendices 2 Appendix A - Sheet given to participants Appendix B - Results (Interference) Appendix C - Results (Non Interference) Appendix D - Calculations Appendix E - Graph 1 Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate into the Primacy and Recency effect. The study was based on Glanzer and Cunitzs research (1966) who suggested that when remembering words, if given an interference task, the recency effect will be virtually eliminated. It was therefore predicted that when a group of participants were recalling words after having an interference task there would be little, if no recency effect. However it was also predicted that when an interference task was not involved there would be both a primacy and recency effect. The experiment was conducted on two groups of participants, 20 in each group. They were all students between the age of 16 and 18. This was an independent experiment. The findings form this study indicated that there was less of a recency effect when using an interference task then when not. Introduction The aim of this investigation to find out whether people remember material at the beginning of a list better than material at the end. A further aim is to show that when participants take a memory test with the involvement of an interference task there is no recency effect. ...read more.

Middle

Experiment 1 - With Interference task 1. Participants were asked if they were willing to participate in a psychological investigation. 2. Participants were than given verbal instructions as to what to do. They were told that they would be given a sheet of paper with a list of words on that they had to memorise. They were told they had forty seconds to memorise the words. See appendix A 3. When the time limit was over the sheet of paper was taken by one of the experimenters and the participants were than instructed as to what to do next. They were told to count backwards in threes from one hundred in one minute. 4. Once step three had finished the participants were given a blank sheet of paper. The participants were then told that they had exactly one minute to write down as many words from the list that they could remember. The paper was then collected by one of the experimenters 5. Participants were debriefed as to the purpose and aims of the investigation Experiment 2 - Without Interference task 1. Participants were asked if they were willing to participate in a psychological investigation. 2. Participants were than given spoken instructions as to what to do. They were told that they would be given a sheet of paper with a list of words on that they had to memorise. They were told they had forty seconds to memorise the words. 3. When the time limit was over the sheet of paper was taken by one of the experimenters. ...read more.

Conclusion

It can also be argued that the words with a similar meaning or related words can be remembered easily through categorising. An example of this are the words 'door', 'window', and 'glass', all used in the experiment. A further problem is demand characteristics, a problem that often in occurs in psychological investigations. This is a problem because many of the students that took part could have also been studying psychology at college and thus know what the aims of the investigation were. This is then likely to change the outcome of the investigation. Another problem is confounding variables. For example the time of day participants took the experiment. Certain individuals work better in the evening than others, and so if a participant took the experiment late in the evening, there results may be different to if they took the experiment in the early morning. To make improvements to the experiment, better choice of words would be needed. The words chosen must not be related or sound like each other in anyway, as this will affect the final outcome. By doing this the results would become more accurate and so therefore more accurate conclusions could be drawn from them. Conclusion The findings showed that the primacy and recency effect existed when recalling a list of data. The findings also showed that an interference task reduces the recency effect. In conclusion it can be seen that the stated hypothesis was supported by the results and that the results were found to be significant at the 0.01 level of significance (p<0.01). The null hypothesis can therefore be rejected. ...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. SHORT TERM MEMORY

    I ........................... have read and understand the information above and any questions I have asked have been answered to meet my satisfaction. I agree to participate in this research knowing that I can withdraw at any time without consequence. I have been given a copy of this form to keep.

  2. An experiment to investigate the effect of interference on memory recall

    This was chosen because the same participants are tested in both experimental conditions and control conditions. "Therefore all participants are exposed to the IV and tested on the DV." (C Flanagan '97) Another method which could have been used was counter balancing but as this experiment was carried out at

  1. Primacy and Recency effect

    This shows that the Primacy and Recency effect did occur. Introduction Memory is the storage of information in our mind, it refers to the mental processes that are used to encode, store and retrieve information. The encoding of information occurs in different forms such as visual, semantic, smell and auditory.

  2. The Stroop Effect

    For this research 20 participants were used; 12 of these were boys while 8 were girls Procedure The researcher printed off six colour lists; three inconsistent and three consistent with the words. They then printed off the "answers" to the word list (to ensure the participant is saying the correct colours).

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

    The null or alternative hypothesis will be retained depending on whether proactive interference occurred in condition 2 by the results being less than those in condition 1. HYPOTHESES The alternative hypothesis is that proactive interference will have a negative effect on memory recall of the word lists.

  2. Investigating the short-term memory

    No one participating in the study was harmed physically, emotionally or mentally also. To ensure this, participants were constantly reminded in the experiment that they could withdraw at any stage, which ensured the legitimacy of the experiment. It is a strength also that almost all research obtained supports the relevant

  1. Stroop Effect

    Null hypothesis There will be no difference between naming the colour words presented in conflicting colours and naming the common nouns presented in different colours. The level of significance is 0.05. If that level is found then investigation can be accepted.

  2. How interference affects memory recall

    I chose to use music as my interference because the participants will listen to it and so by that they are not rehearsing what they have just learnt. Procedure Firstly I will approach my participants in the 6th form common room I will ask them for consent and tell them that they can withdraw at any time.

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