An investigation into the effect free and cued recall has on the retrieval of information
An investigation into the effect free and cued recall has on the retrieval of information.
Contents
Abstract
Introduction
Aims
Hypothesis
Method - Design
Participants
Materials
Procedure
Results
Discussion
References
Appendix 1 - Brief, Standardised Instructions and Debrief.
Appendix 2 - Word list
Appendix 3 - Cued recall sample answer sheet
Appendix 4 - Free recall sample answer sheet
Appendix 5 - Full results and calculations
Abstract
This is an experiment investigating the effects cues have on the recall of information based on the investigation by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966). In their investigation participants were given a list of words comprising 12 categories with 4 words under each category to study and then to recall as many words as possible. The participants were either given a blank sheet or a sheet with category titles on it.
Cues can be used as a way to trigger memory and to remember information. The hypothesis to be proved is whether the participants remember more words from the word list if they are given cues. The participants used are students from Exeter College, during college hours. The participants will be male and female between the ages of 16-19. There were 10 students in each condition.
The investigation was carried out using independent measures design and the participants were gathered using opportunity sampling.
The experiment itself was a sheet of A4 paper with 48 words written on it. The participants were given a set amount of time to study the sheet before it was taken off of them. They were then given an answer sheet that varied on whether they were using free or cued recall. If they were participating in the cued recall the answer sheet would have the category titles available, if the participant were using free recall the answer sheet would be blank.
The results showed a significant difference in that the participants using cues scored better than the participants not using cues, as there were no memory triggers.
This shows that not all memory is lost but simply cannot be retrieved. When cues are used this triggers the memory to release more information.
Introduction
It cannot be denied that memory plays a very important role in a person's life; it relies on our ability to store and retrieve information.
The basis of learning and memory consist of the three stages: encoding, storing and retrieving information. Encoding is the process by which information is extracted from a stimulus to form memory trace, storing is the process of keeping memories for retrieval and retrieving is remembering information by bringing it from long-term memory into short-term memory or working memory.
One theory names retrieval failure as a cause or explanation for memory loss from long-term memory. This theory suggests information is stored but simply cannot be retrieved, as the retrieval cues are inadequate and need to be related with some aspect of the stored memory trace. This idea has been termed the encoding-specificity principle (Tulving & Thompson, 1973).
One of the key features of this is that it assumes a relationship between encoding and retrieval. However, Baddeley (1997) points out that the encoding-specificity principle is impossible to test experimentally as it argues that if a stimulus leads to the retrieval of memory, then it must have been encoded with the memory. On the other hand, if the stimulus does not lead to retrieval of a memory, then the principle claims that it cannot have been encoded.
It must also be pointed out that there is no doubt about the importance in retrieving information from our memory, and Tulving's research into retrieval cues forms an important and impressive body of work. (Baddeley 1997)
In a study of retrieval failure and memory by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966) participants were presented with 48 words, comprising 4 words from each 12 different categories. The words were followed by the category title.
In the recall phase of the study, there were two different conditions. In one, participants were asked to recall as many words as possible ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
It must also be pointed out that there is no doubt about the importance in retrieving information from our memory, and Tulving's research into retrieval cues forms an important and impressive body of work. (Baddeley 1997)
In a study of retrieval failure and memory by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966) participants were presented with 48 words, comprising 4 words from each 12 different categories. The words were followed by the category title.
In the recall phase of the study, there were two different conditions. In one, participants were asked to recall as many words as possible (free recall); in the other condition, participants were given the category titles as retrieval cues (cued recall). The results showed the difference between the two conditions was considerable. In the free recall condition, participants recalled approximately 40% of the words, whereas in the cued recall condition, participants recalled over 60% of the target words.
Aim
The aim of this study is to investigate the influence retrieval cues have on the recall of information. This will be done by partially replicating the study by Tulving & Pearlstone (1966). From the investigation evidence will be gained that will either support or reject the influence retrieval cues have on memory. It is expected there will be a significant difference from the 2 conditions; it is likely the participants in using cued recall will recall more words than those in using free recall, the results from the Tulving and Pearlstone study suggests this is to be expected. This is because the presence of cues will trigger the memory and allow the participant to recall more words from the list.
Hypothesis
Experimental: Participants given a cued recall answer sheet will recall a higher number of words from the list than the participants given a blank sheet to use free recall.
Null: There will not be a significant difference in the number of words retrieved in either condition, with participants using free or cued recall.
Method
Design
This experiment is conducted using independent measures design, as the scores would be affected if the participants partook in both conditions. The participants are selected using opportunity sampling, as it is the most time and cost efficient method.
Participants
The target population was 20 students of Exeter College, the age range being 16-19 years of age and being either male or female.
The participants were chosen using opportunity sampling. The participants used were students approached, as they were available at the time. Opportunity sampling was the most time efficient method available as potential participants were approached when they were passing, this saved time by not having to organise random sampling from a register.
Variables
The independent variable is whether the participant was given either a blank sheet or a sheet with the category titles on it, which would suggest they would be using free or cued recall.
The dependent variable is how many words are recalled correctly from the word list. A possible extraneous variable that could affect the conclusions drawn up by this experiment would be the location of where the experiment took place or how tired the participant is, if the environment was too loud or busy the concentration of the participant would be affected, which in turn could affect the outcome of his/her results. To overcome this, the experiment was taken at the same time of the day, around midday so the participant was neither too tired from waking up or too tired from the day and at a time when there were not too many other students around.
Materials
The question sheet consisted of 12 randomly selected categories, with each category containing 4 words. The list of 48 words was presented to participants, who were then asked to study the words for 60 seconds, after that time the question sheet was taken off them and replaced by the answer sheet and a pen. The answer sheet differed depending on which condition the participant took part in. in the cued recall condition the answer sheet showed the category titles whilst the free recall answer sheet was blank. All participants were given the same standardised instructions and were all briefed and debriefed. (See appendix)
Ethical issues
Before the experiment took place, the participant was briefed and made aware that they were free to leave the experiment at any time, permission was asked to use their results and that they would remain confidential. A set of standardised instructions was used. At the end of the experiment the participants were fully debriefed and given an opportunity to ask any questions. This was done to make sure the participants understood their right to withdraw and that they gave an informed consent of taking part in this study. (See appendix for the standardised instructions, brief and debrief.)
Procedure
Participants were approached on the Exeter College; Hele Road site outside the reception and asked if they would not mind taking part in a psychological experiment. Those who agreed were sat in a reasonably quiet area outside and were briefly explained what the experiment was investigating and that they were free to leave at any time. The participant was given the word list with the 48 words on it and told they had 60 seconds to study the world list. The time was measured using a countdown watch. After the 60 seconds had gone, the word list was taken off them and replaced with the answer sheet and a pen and asked to write down as many words that they could remember from the list in any order. The participant had unlimited time to recall the words. The score sheet would be different depending on which condition the participant was taking part in.
After the experiment had taken place, the participant was fully briefed and asked if they had any questions.
Scoring procedure: Participants were scored for each correct word written on their answer sheet including any spelt incorrectly and in any order. Words were ignored if they were repeated or wrong.
Results
Mean Score of Words Recalled.
Free Recall
Cued Recall
Mean number of words recalled
7.2
36.5
These results show a clear difference in the number of words recalled between participants using free and cued recall. The mean score has a difference of 19.3. This is a large difference and shows a considerable insight to the input cues have on the recovery of information from the memory. It accepts the encoding-specificity principle by Tulving and Thompson (1973). It also accepts the experimental hypothesis; the participants given retrieval cues did recall more words from the list than participant using free recall.
These results reflect those gained from the study by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966)
(Calculations in appendix)
Discussion
The results show that a person will remember more words when an appropriate cue is available as shown in the graph thus accepting the experimental hypothesis.
The participants using cued recall received a mean average of 36.5 words recalled. The range from 22-43 whilst the participants using free recall received a mean average of 17.2 words recalled, with the range from 13-21. This shows that anomalies have not affected the result.
One way in which the experiment was limited and could have been affected by is the environment it was conducted in and the participants used. The participants were all Exeter College students and have chosen to further their education, their brain is still being trained so may be more susceptible to remembering information. Many students are often asked to take part in experiments so may have been using demand characteristics, which means they might have known the study is about retrieval failure and might already have known the study that was being partially replicated. Knowing this the participants would have known how to react.
If this experiment were to be conducted using members of the public the results may have been different but the outcome would be the same. This is because results from the Tulving and Pearlstone study suggests this but also anyone given cues are likely to recall more information than if they are not given cues.
A way to improve this study would be to conduct it in a controlled environment, free of any distractions so that the participants were concentrating solely on the experiment. This experiment was conducted using opportunity sampling, often in busy locations. This could have affected the results by diverting the participant's concentration and other information would have prevented the participant from rehearsing the words.
As future research one suggestion would be to concentrate on whether there was a pattern relating to the participants sex and the score they gained.
To conclude, the results show that the recall of information is greatly improved when retrieval cues are available, a significant difference in the amount of words is visible. This agrees with the results gained from the investigation by Tulving and Pearlstone (1966). This study provides evidence that the free recall group knew more than they could recall, this can be stated as both groups experienced the same conditions during the learning phase and yet the cued recall group could recall far more words.
Reference
Tulving, E & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behaviour, 5,381-391
Tulving, E & Thompson, D.M. (1973). Encoding specificity & retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373
Baddeley, A.D. (1997). Human memory: theory & practice. Hove. Psychology Press.
Brief
Hi, I am a student here at Exeter College, would it be possible for you to take a few minutes and partake in a Psychology experiment?
The experiment is investigating memory and the effect cues have on the retrieval of information.
You will be free to leave at any time and if after completing the experiment you do not wish to take part your results will not be used and they will be destroyed in front of you.
Do you have any questions?
Do you agree to take part?
Signed
Date
Instructions
I will hand you a sheet of paper, on the paper there will be 12 category titles with 4 words under each category. You will have 60 seconds to look at the sheet. After 60 seconds I will take that sheet away and replace it with either a blank or a sheet with the category titles on it. You will then have as much time as you need to recall as many words as you can, in any order. Do you still wish to continue?
Debrief
Thank you for participating, do you still agree to your results being used, confidentially, in this experiment?
This experiment was conducted to investigate whether retrieval cues have an effect on the recall of information. It is expected that the participants will recall more words if they are given cues, as this should trigger the memory.
Do you have any questions?
Thank you,
Signed
Date
Table showing all scores gained from the investigation
Participant - Free Recall
Number of words recalled (Free)
Participant - Cued Recall
Number of words recalled (Cued)
20
39
2
9
2
42
3
5
3
40
4
3
4
22
5
6
5
39
6
21
6
41
7
5
7
32
8
9
8
43
9
8
9
30
0
6
0
37
Total
72
365
Calculations for mean score.
72/10 = 17.2
365/10 = 36.5
Word list
Food Drink Animals Transport
Sausage Water Meerkat Car
Potato Beer Hedgehog Train
Pepper Vimto Elephant Bike
Radish Vodka Squirrel Walk
Bike Colour Shape Body Part
BMX Red Circle Leg
Mountain Yellow Square Arm
Racing Purple Triangle Head
Stunt Blue Rectangle Feet
Car Material Music Artist
Vauxhall Glass Rock Van Gogh
Peugeot Metal Punk Turner
Ford Wood Pop Klimt
BMW Cotton Rap Picasso
Appendices
By Jess Howell
