For example if you had this set of letters – QPALZMWOSKXNEID – Miller would say that 15 letters is too much for the 7 +/- 2 slots of short term memory to hold. But if we chunk the letters into smaller groups – QPA LZM WOS KXN EID – it gives five chunks of information which is within the range of the short term memory.
In summary Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968,1971) introduced the idea of the multi-store memory modal with its three main processes. Much earlier than this Ebbinghaus discovered that the short term memory could hold six or seven pieces of information. Miller said the short term memory could hold 7 +/- 2 pieces of information and took this further to say that the short term memory could hold more items of information if that information had been chunked. So Miller disagreed with Ebbinghaus’s earlier idea that the short term memory could only hold six or seven pieces of information.
The aim of this experiment is to see whether chunking does improve the amount of information the short term memory can hold. In this investigation I am supporting Miller’s theory of the chunking method.
The hypothesis is that participants will recall more information using the chunking method than without the chunking method.
The hypothesis is in a test of short term memory recall involving 10 participants who had to remember and recall 5 chunked mobile phone numbers and 5 un-chunked mobile phone numbers. Participants who used the chunking method will score higher than participants who didn’t use the chunking method.
The null hypothesis is in a test of short term memory recall involving 10 participants who had to remember and recall 5 chunked mobile phone numbers and 5 un-chunked mobile phone numbers. Participants who didn’t use the chunking method will score higher than participants who did use the chunking method.
Method
Design
The nature of my research is an experiment.
The independent variable is whether the mobile numbers are chunked or un chunked. Chunked means that the mobile numbers will be read out in smaller groups rather than all eleven numbers at once. So I will be reading the numbers out in 1 group of 5 and 2 groups of 3. There will be slight pauses in between each group of numbers. Un-chunked means that the numbers will simply be read out without any breaks in between each number. The dependant variable is how much of the mobile number is recalled in the right order.
The extraneous variable is that when I read the numbers out to the participants my voice might change pitch between each participant. I might not be able to keep exactly the same amount of time between each number as I read them. I will control this by recording my voice speaking all 10 chunked and un chunked numbers and then playing this recording back to each participant. They will all hear the same recording which means there will be no change in pitch, tone of voice and time in between each number.
Participants
The target population is 16-18 year old students studying A levels. The sampling method I will be using is opportunity sampling which means that the sample is selected on the basis of who is available at the time of testing and willing to take part. I am using this sampling method because it is the quickest and easiest way to take a sample. I will simply ask people who are available to do my experiment. I will use this sampling method because it is convenient, low cost and fits my situation as I am doing a school coursework experiment not an official experiment.
Task and Materials
Materials I will need for my experiment are:
- 1 pen – For me to record results on my record sheet
- Record sheet – For me to record the results
- Tape recorder – To record and play back my voice speaking the mobile phone numbers.
The participants have the task of recalling 11 digit mobile phone numbers. 5 of these mobile phone numbers will be chunked and another 5 will be un-chunked. They have to listen to the voice recording of the mobile phone numbers being read out one at a time and then try and recall the numbers in the correct order aloud after each one is read out.
Procedure
Each participant was sat down on a bench in an empty patio outside. This was the only available space to conduct my experiment where there were no other people. I then briefed the participant on what they would have to do in the experiment. Participants where assured of confidentiality, see briefing in appendix. I then began the test by first playing the 5 un-chunked numbers one after the other with gaps in between each mobile number so the participants could say their answers. Then I played the chunked numbers one after the other with gaps in between each mobile number so the participant could say their answers. I wrote sown their answers as they said them. At the end of the test I thanked the participant and asked them if they had any questions. After that they were free to go.
Confidentiality – Before each participant does the experiment I will explain that their results will be taken attached to their results. I will also say that if at any time they decide to withdraw from the forward in confidence and none of their personal details e.g. name, date of birth, will be at experiment then they can do so and their results will be destroyed.
There was an ethical brief and debrief before and after my experiment. The wording for the brief and debrief can be found in the appendix along with instructions for the task.
Results
The two line graphs display the results of the chunked and un-chunked mobile phone numbers. As shown on average the chunked results show a higher amount of correctly recalled digits than the un-chunked. The mean score for un-chunked results was 21.3 and the mean score for chunked results was 25.5. Therefore the chunking method was more successful. Although participant 2 scored better in the un-chunked mobile phone numbers than the chunked but this could be down to boredom or loss of concentration as the chunked numbers were done second.
My hypothesis can be accepted there was a better level of recall when the numbers where chunked rather than un-chunked. So I succeeded in my aim of investigating whether chunking can improve the amount of information the short term memory can hold and found that it does. I have supported Miller’s theory. My results prove Ebbinghaus was wrong with his idea that the short term memory could only hold six or seven pieces of information as some of the participants in my experiment held more than that. My experiment also supports Attkinson and Shiffrin’s idea that information is not rehearsed then it is forgotten.
Summary and Conclusions
My research could be taken on and used in the real world. For example
A limitation of my experiment was that I only tested British people between the age of 16-18. Therefore my results haven’t got a very broad variety of different ages or cultures and are not very representative. These results only represent a very small group of people.
I could have improved my experiment by drawing from a wider variety of different people. Testing people of all different ages and ethnic persuasions would have given me a broader and more representative set of results.
Further research you could carry out following my experiment is whether recall was better when hearing a recording of a woman’s voice a opposed to a mans voice. This would be interesting research as participants 1,2,4,5 and 10 on average got lower scores on both chunked and un-chunked than participants 3,6,7,8,and 9. Participants 1,2,4,5 and 10 were male and participants 3,6,7,8 and 9 were female. So on average the girls got higher test results than the boys. Maybe this was because the girls found listening to a man’s voice more appealing and therefore found it easier to remain focused. Maybe the male participants found the man’s voice less appealing as opposed to a woman’s voice and therefore found it more difficult to remain focused. So would the male participants overall recall improve and the females recall overall deteriorate if it was a recording of a woman’s voice?
References
- AS Level Psychology for AQA specification B - Erica Cox.
- Psychology, The science of the mind and behaviour, Fourth edition – Richard Gross.
Appendices:
Brief
Thank you for agreeing to take part in my experiment. It is a simple memory test on mobile phone numbers. I will play you a voice recording of ten different 11 digit mobile phone numbers. After each mobile phone number is played there will be a pause for you to recall and speak as much of the mobile phone number as you can remember. I will then record your results on this sheet. No personal details will be attached to your results and they will be treated with strict confidentiality. If at any time during the test you would like to withdraw from the experiment you can do so and your results will be destroyed.
Instructions
You will hear ten 11 digit mobile phone numbers one after the other. In between each mobile phone number I will stop the tape to give you time to recall and speak as many of the digits you can remember in the correct order. As you speak the digits I will record your results onto a results sheet. When I have finished writing your results down I will restart the tape and the next mobile phone number will be played.
Debrief
Thank you for taking part in my experiment. Do you have any questions?
The abstract is a single paragraph, prose, extremely brief statement of what is to be found in your report. It has to mention seven things: Main study under review, aim, hypothesis, research method, whether you were able to accept your hypothesis, what comment you have made about your key research as a result, and lastly what real world conclusion you have made. Everybody does the abstract badly, so I will want to see it in order to comment on it. The abstract should be the first page after the title page. It should be SHORT.