Most people will be better at remembering the words that are in categories at recall as there’s a link between them. They should also remember at least half of the words in categories I will expect about six to seven words correct maybe eight and in random I will expect no more than six words correct.
Null Hypothesis
There will be smaller amount of words remembered from the random list and there will be a wider range of results in the random list of words.
Method
Design
The design is in Coloma School because it is convenient and representative as target audience lies within teenagers stated in sample and participants. There isn’t a correct place for this experiment but to try as much as possible to keep a quiet atmosphere so the candidate can be focused on looking at the words and allows no distraction from other people and sound. This allows the candidate able to say the words out loud as they are not under pressure as they would have been told what the experiment is before taking part. But I may also take the experiment out at home so I have male opinions too such as of my brothers.
Variables
There are various variables in this experiment that need to be contolled but the dependant variable can’t be controlled in most cases.
Dependent: to see how good the concentration of the person is and how good their memory is.
Independent: Whether the difference in age and sex affected it.
Sample and participants
I am going to use 20 people from ages 12-18 who are reliable so it is easy to get hold of them and it is convenient to use people in the school because I know I will see them everyday. I have a range of sex, the male members of my family I can use at home. I am going to use people I may know well and people I may not so it isn’t invariably biased.
Apparatus
-Chair so they can sit but not compulsory but may help them feel relaxed.
-4 bits of paper 2 with the categorized lists and 2 with the random lists
-Pencil to write with
-A stop watch so I can time how many they get in a minute to make it a fair test.
Procedure
-Firstly for the candidates to sit down on a chair.
-Then for the stopwatch to be timed for a minute to give them a chance to read the words on the categorized list.
-Then for them to repeat as much as they can remember
-Then the procedure is repeated with a similar but not identical list for only 30 secs and they again repeat as much as they can.
-Then the same procedure is repeated but with random words.
-Then the words remembered are counted up and the same procedure is repeated with the remaining nineteen candidates.
Controls
-To make sure the candidates know exactly what they are in for by telling them what they have to do before starting the experiment. This way they will make more of an effort and be more enthusiastic rather than being reluctant about doing the experiment for not being told enough information about it and will feel no pressure to reject the experiment.
- For the same experiment to be carried out for each candidate so it isn’t unfair on anyone.
-The words aren’t to be told to candidates until the experiment starts but they are to be basic words which they will know nothing too long to remember
-To try as much as possible to keep it in a quiet environment to relax the mood and allow them to concentrate on the experiment as much as they can and for the outcome to be as effective as possible.
Words used in my experiment for people to look at for a certain amount of time and recall them to me with as much time as they need in order to get all ten words
Annabel
Becky
Caroline
Debra
Evelyn
Felicity
Gemma
Hannah
Imogen
Jackie
Alex
Bob
Carl
Derek
Eddie
Fred
George
Harry
Ian
John
Purple
Annabel
Car
Door
Rocking
Green
Jackie
Lorry
Window
Going
Purple
Alex
Car
Door `
Rocking
James
Window
Green
Going
Tally of results
1)Girl’s names
6,6,6,6,8,8,8,8,9,9,9,9,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10
06:4
07:0
08:4
09:4
10:8
Mean:8.6
Median:9
Mode:10
Range:4
From these results I can say that the mean is closer to nine than eight but the mode is however ten. This is probably because of the range of numbers averaging to nine instead of ten. This shows that 4/5 of the people got at least eight out of ten words right showing that short term memory is very good.
2)Boy’s names
6,6,7,7,7,7,7,7,8,8,8,8,8,8,9,9,9,9,10,10
06:2
07:6
08:6
09:4
10:2
Mean:7.9
Median:8
Mode:7.5
Range:4
From these results I can say that the mean is more a less eight and the results are quite continuous with a wider range of results than the first test. This is rather unusual as you would expect similar or better results to the first test as it more a less the same test but using boys names. This shows that less time can effect results badly even so there was still 3/5 gaining eight to ten words right with only two people opposed to eight gaining all words correctly. This test had the worst results.
3)Random words
6,6,7,7,8,8,8,8,9,9,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10
06:2
07:2
08:4
09:2
10:10
Mean:8.8
Median:9
Mode:10
Range:4
From this I can say that ten is clearly a modal more people got all words correct in this test than the first test with both similar results which is quite surprising as these results is expected to be a dramatic change from the first test but is measured out to be quite similar with 4/5 still gaining at least eight words correct, This could be because they were less organised people took time over studying them and answered using good strategy’s in recall or because there were words which people noticed were in the past tests.
4)Random words 2
4,4,7,7,8,8,8,8,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,10,10,10,10
04:2
05:0
06:0
07:2
08:4
09:8
10:4
Mean:8.3
Median:9
Mode:9
Range:6
Like test 2 there is a wider range of results more so however as this is the only test where there appears to be any scores under six which isn’t surprising as this test is meant to have a dramatic change from the first two tests. It is unusual as it was not an improvement on test 3 as even though they are random words there is some words repeated and I expected a low score but an improvement on test 3. This again has 4/5 of results with eight to ten words correct. The time certainly gives a wider range of results but doesn’t effect the chances of still being able to get a high number of words correct.
Discussion
Implications of study
I expected my experiment to have similar results to Bowers because my experiment was very similar to one of his experiments and he found that random words were harder to remember and organised words are easily moved to the short term memory. I think the reason my experiment didn’t concur is because my organised words were in alphabetical order but not everyone picked this on it and sometimes the people who did decided too recall it differently and used different strategies to what I expected. The list of categorized lists I chose was names and I think maybe a category like furniture that people use everyday maybe more familiar to society and improve results to most probably be more similar to what I expected.
Miller used the idea of chunking words which I used not making the experiment any easier and semantics however my words had no symbolic meaning unless you know someone with that particular name. Unlike a chair which you can use you’re your inner eye to picture you can’t do with this names unless you know a certain person with this name.
Both Bower and Winzenz said that reading out loud (rehearsing) improves the recall. When given the experiment some people did this but not everyone out of the people who did this there are people who gained full marks. One person also used the strategy of making a story to the random words to make them just as easy to remember as the categories which gave her equal results whilst others answered more slowly in order to gain all words.
Validity of study
My experiment overall wasn’t as successful as I had hoped because even though I was able to find some findings I found that they weren’t what I had predicted in my hypothesis. Random words are dramatically lower finding that it was the time change which made the results lower. I had however predicted to have at least six to eight words correct in categories which happened but I found that there was a larger amount than this as there’s a great amount with all words correct in list one test two agreed to my hypothesis to the results but disagreed to the fact it was the lowest set of results out of all four tests. I also predicted no more than six correct in random I found that at least twelve people got all correct in random and categorized lists which is higher results to what I expected.
My null hypothesis was completely rejected, there was no common ground the results are similar in random words and categories and there is only a wide range of results in test 2.
The results obtained were not entirely valid as even though I tried to make the test as fair as possible I didn’t gain enough male opinions to have a difference in comparison to the female as the few people I did test had similar results. So if I did this experiment again I would have a large amount of male opinions simultaneous amount to the amount of women. I would also vary the age groups by using the elderly, small children, adults and teenagers to test and I won’t only compare them as a whole but will compare in their individual groups too and see if there is any distinct difference in gender or in age. So by changing these variables I hope to gain a better result.
I might use an even quieter destination and use the same place for each person so it is completely fair as I found that even thought they were on their own at most times they were in view of other people and objects which could of distracted them from the topic at hand as concentration is very important.
Reliability of study
The figures I found in my study aren’t reliable enough to make a general comment for the whole experiment they are only reliable enough to make a comment on each graph on its own. The only comment I could find was that time affected the experiment.
Enthusiasm seemed to lack when participants realised that the second of each test was simultaneous to the first and unusually didn’t lose concentration when realising random words is harder they just used strategies easier to remember such as making a story out of the words, grouping the similar words together. These strategies could however distract them from the experiment itself like a story could bring them off the topic at hand; they could run out of time thinking of a story. Some people might find it easier speaking faster or slower than their usual pace depending on how good their memory is which could come to some sort of conclusion but no one stood out speaking differently they all tended to repeat the words at their usual talking pace.
If I was to carry out the experiment again however it might be an idea to write out the words in recall to see if this helps the results table.
Also some of the experiment is held in a girl’s school so it’s likely that some people will study psychology and know of the experiments especially the girls aged 16-18 as it is not an option at GCSE level. This could make their results higher than other participants. So if I did the experiment again a different environment of young people may be more reliable than this. This is another reason why the age difference should vary to see if there is a difference in older teenagers to young or whether their results are similar and maybe a chart for psychology students could be carried out to see whether studying psychology makes them more aware and use better strategies for remembering.
Application to everyday life
This study is useful in application to everyday life because we use short term memory all the time whether it is just remembering a list of words, trying to describe an event we have just seen to a friend, remembering which way the sign said to go or what the speed limit says on a certain road when driving in a car. So therefore without short term memory we could be very lost and may end up in tricky situations without it therefore the quicker we rehearse items and push them into storage for long term memory the better.
