For this experiment I had to use cluster sampling, mainly because it is a group experiment and I used the participants in my class which were much easier to find.
Participants
The target population for this experiment will be for mixed sexes and between the ages of 16 and 17 years old.
Apparatus and Materials
The materials in this experiment used is stated below:
- 1 list of 24 random words.
- 1 list of 24 of the same words but in categories.
- A stopwatch for making sure the time is accurate.
- Pens, which I will supply so the participants cant, cheat.
- 1 sheet of blank A4 paper.
- 1 sheet of A4 paper with category names on.
- 2 groups of participants, 10 participants in each.
The equipment above is everything that I need so that the experiment can take place.
Procedure
Briefing:
This experiment is to test your long-term memory. I will be finding out if people can remember random words better if they are in a category or if they can remember random words better without the help of categories. The categories are used as cues to help you remember words.
If at any time you wish to withdraw from this experiment then please do so by raising your hand and telling me. If there is any questions then please ask now, if not the lets continue. Is everyone ok and wish to participate in this experiment? Ok here is a list of instructions.
Standardised Instructions:
I am going to give one group a word list with random words on it, and the other group a word list with specific words under each category the words belong to. The words on both lists are exactly the same. The categories are also known as cues. I will gibe each group one-minute to memorise as many words as possible. At the end of the one-minute mark, I will give the group with the random words (Condition A) a blank piece of paper which you will have to write down as many words as you can remember. And the other group with the cues (Condition B) a piece of paper with the category names on. You have two minutes to recall as many words as possible. Are there any questions? You may start.
De-briefing:
Thank you very much for taking part in this experiment. The results you have provided me with will be of use for my coursework, your names will remain anonymous.
I can now find out if cues helped remember words. Thank you for your time again.
After the experiment was conducted, I received twenty pieces of paper from both groups with the results. The results concluded that Condition B (cues), remembered a lot more words than Condition A (mixed up words). The highest number of words remembered from Condition A was 16, which is very impressive considering they had no cues, and the lowest of that group was 7. In Condition B, the highest number of words remembered was 23, which was one off the maximum number of words written. The lowest number of words remembered in that group was 13, which surprised me because they only really remembered three categories with every word associated with it. They forgot the other three categories.
The results have proved that my hypothesis is correct and that my null hypothesis was wrong. The results compared to the background material seemed to have had a similarity. Tulving and Pearlstone had results that the group with the cues remembered more words than the group without cues. My results correspond to exactly the results Tulving and Pearlstone had.
Above and on the previous page are the central tendencies, which allows you to see straight away the overall pattern of results.
The experiment that I conducted worked in the exactly the same concept as Tulvings’ did. The reason I say this is because the number of words remembered on the list with cues were greatly remembered more than the word list without cues to help remember
This experiment gave me a wide variety of results, which fits in with my hypothesis. My hypothesis was that “ The group with the cues remembered many more words than the group without cues. The results have also made my null hypothesis wrong. The null hypothesis was “ The group with the cues will not remember as many words as the group without cues. By looking at the results and the results in the appendix, you can look yourself.
After conducting the experiment I could have made the results a lot clearer. For example, I could have got a lot more participants in each group so I could get a better average and more convincing results.
The things which I could have been controlled better is the interruption when the experiment was being conducted. I could of gone in a more of a sound tight room, where this might of made the participants remember only a few more words and could of got a better and clearer result. Also I could of out a warning outside so that the people outside the room would of taking notice and would of kept the noise down.
I made sure that there weren’t any ethical issues in the experiment. For example, deception. I made sure I told all the participants everything about the experiment and told no lies, therefore no deception. Another ethical issue that was vital was the right to withdraw. I said in my briefing that if anyone wanted to leave at any time then please do. The last problem which i could of encountered was cheating, if anyone wrote down the words when they had to be memorising them, or helping the person next to them. To stop all of that I took away any pens from them and placed them separately on different tables. I checked that if there were any other ethical issues, I made them non-existent.
Suggestions for further research could have been made. For example, I could have got a bigger group and got more accurate results or I could have had more groups with more lists and words to get even better results.
There was apparently strong evidence for retroactive interference in total free recall (writing down words without the cues), because word recall from any given list decreased as the number of the other list intervening between learning and recall increased. This interpretation does not fit with the findings from total cued recall (writing down words with the categories). There was essentially no retroactive interference or forgetting when the category names were available to the participants. The forgetting observed in total free recall was basically cue dependent forgetting.
Overall the experiment achieved the right results and gave me a clear understanding and a clear conclusion that when given cues to memorise words, you can remember many more than when not given cues for specific words, like condition A.
References
Richard Gross, (2000) 2nd Edition Psychology a new introduction for A-Level. Hodder & Stoughton
Michael W. Eysenck (2000) Psychology A Students Handbook. Psychology Press
Mike Cardwell, Marion Murphy, Alison Wadeley (1988) A-Level Study Guide. Revision Express
