INTRODUCTION
There are various ways in which we can encode stimulus inputs. It may be stored as a visual representation so that you form a visual image of either the printed word itself or a pictorial image of it, or you could form an acoustic representation by saying the written word aloud. Alternatively you could form a semantic representation of the word, this would depend on your knowledge on the meaning of the word. My aim for this coursework is to find out weather imagery is a better form of storing information than rote rehearsal.
Craik and Watkins distinguished between maintenance rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal.
- Maintenance rehearsal, in which material is rehearsed in the form in which it was presented (rote)
- Elaborative rehearsal, which elaborate the material in some way, e.g. by giving it a meaning or linking it with pre-existing knowledge
Many psychologists have done research to suggest the procesess of encoding information. Atkinson and Shiffrin proposed the multi-store memory model, it attempted to explain how information from one storage system to another. The multi-store model sees rehearsal as the key control process, which transfers which helps to transfer information from short term-memory to long-term memory.
The Brown-Peterson technique shows that STM’s duration is very short and in the absence of rehearsal. However, information can be held in long-term memory almost indefinitely through maintenance rehearsal.
Other Psychologists have tried to explain that imagery is a better technique for memorisation rather then rehearsal.
Some psychologists who have done this are: Wollen et al (72). Bower and Springston Richardson et al (74).
AIM
My aim is to replicate the research carried out by Bower and Winzenz. They found that the imagery is a better technique for memorisation rather then rehearsal and that the participants of their research recalled more words using the technique process of imagery rather then rote rehearsal. The aim of the research is to see if the my findings will be the same as Bowers et al.
HYPOTHESES
Experimental hypothesis: There will be a significant difference between the number of words recalled using imagery rather than rote rehearsal, participants will remember more words using the technique of imagery rather than rote rehearsal.
Null hypothesis: If any difference occurs between the number of words recalled using imagery and the number of words recalled using rehearsal, it will be due to chance alone
DISSCUSSION
From the experiment I found that recall was better when participants memorised the word using imagery. These results allow me to reject the null hypothesis, that all results will be due to chance alone and accept the experimental hypothesis. I have been able to fulfil my aim to find out if my findings will be the same or different as Bower’s, the results are similar: that imagery was a better form of memorisation then rehearsal.
Although this is true for the general results if we look at the individual results: participant 6 re-called three words using rehearsal but only one using imagery, this is true for several other participants. This could be due to the fact that the participants were actually using the imagery technique instead of rote rehearsal even though we had asked them not to. This is a point that needs to be taken into consideration if a repetition of the experiment is to be done. However it could be that rehearsal may actually be a better technique of memorisation, as some psychological research has found this to be correct.
Some psychologists who found rehearsal is better technique for recall are Atkinson and Shiffrin, they found that rehearsal was a better technique for memorisation rather then imagery. They believed that memory traces in STM are fragile and can be lost within about 30 seconds unless they are repeated (rehearsed), if this is done them the materials remain for a lifetime.
Richardson (72) supported the fact that imagery was a better technique compared to rehearsal.
I think there are several ways for me to improve the research that I conducted if I were to re-do it. Instead of using sixth form students I will use adults, as some of the participants were not taking it seriously enough, that way the response is more likely to be more accurate.
The research that I carried out did not take place in a natural environment so this could have affected the participants in some way, as they were aware this was an experiment. I could not have carried out my experiment in any other way, however if that was possible I would have had to break ethical issues such as consent and debriefing the participants: it would have been deception.
I carried out the research in school, even though it was a classroom with its doors closed the participants were still affected by the noise made by other students walking past the classroom who were not participating in the experiment.
Another limitation is that the number of participants involved was very small, to generalise I would need a much bigger sample as this way I would not be taking into account individual differences.
Implications of the research: I could re-do this experiment but test imagery with other memory aids such as mnemonics and colour coding. As even though generally participants did better using imagery there were still some participants who did not, so it would be interesting to explore if other methods of recall are even better then memory
Also I could use a much bigger participant sample, as this would allow mw to generalise my findings.
My findings support and strengthen bowers research but question other researchers such as Anderson and Atkinson and Shiffrin. More Research is needed to discover what is the best method for recall.
