FIRST YEAR (PSY911) LAB REPORT
LAB TWO – VERBAL MEMORY LAB
Convenor:
|STUDENT ID: 1810710 |

|Lab Class Attended |Tuesday 13th October 2009 |
|(Day & Date): | |

An Investigation to discover whether the primacy and recency effects changes depending on whether the words in the list are high frequency/ high imagery, high frequency/ high imagery with a semantic link or low frequency/ low imagery words.

INTRODUCTION:
Memory is a complex area within psychology and many different psychologists have found different ways of segregating the brain into different components. One of the first ways was the multi-store model of memory created by Atkinson and Schiffrin in 1968.
The multi-store model of memory splits the brain into 3 core segments: • Sensory memory • Short term memory • Long term memory
In this experiment the main segments that will be looked at are: the short-term memory and long-term memory. The multi-store model says that the short term memory has a capacity of 7(2 items and that it can hold this information for up to 30 seconds, this is because only the information that we are currently processing is held in the short term memory. It is due to the short term memory that we get recency effect, because the words at the end of the list are still in short term memory so are still being processed by the brain.
The multi-store model says that the long-term memory has an unlimited capacity and that it can hold memories forever. Once information from the short-term memory has been fully processed it is then transferred to the long-term memory. It is because of this that we get primacy effect because the words from the start of the list have been rehearsed and therefore transferred to the long-term memory.
Because of this words at the start of the list are remembered well (primacy effect), and the words at the end of the list are remembered well (recency effect) the words in the middle of the lists are usually forgotten.
A study by Murdoch (1962) aimed to discover if primacy/recency effect existed
To do this the experimenter read a list of words to the participants at a rate of 1 per second. They were then asked to recall the words. He found that the words at the start and end of the list were remembered better than the words in the middle of the list. The study found that the words at the beginning of the list were rehearsed and encoded into LTM. This is called primacy effect; the words at the end of the list were still in STM and had not yet been forgotten. However the middle words were not in either store, therefore they were forgotten. This study supports the idea of the primacy recency effect.
The study, apart from investigating primacy/recency effects also looks at the recall when different types of words are used, whether the words are used frequently or not, whether they have high or low imagery and whether they have a semantic link. This semantic link comes from an idea by Craik and Lockhart, which suggested that deeper levels of processing meant that information was better remembered. They learnt that visual processing was the shallowest level of processing followed by acoustic processing and finally semantic processing which was the deepest processing, meaning it should be better remembered. Semantic processing is when a meaning is found in the word, for example if you were asked if a word is written in capital letters it would be visual processing but if you were asked to fit the word into a sentence then you would need to know the meaning, and therefore the processing would be deeper.
The experiment being carried out is to discover whether primacy/ recency effect is increased of decreased depending whether the words are common or uncommon and whether having a semantic link between the words aids recall.

Experimental hypothesis: there will be a difference in the number of words recalled depending on whether there is a semantic link between the words and whether they are words that are frequently used or not, and that most of the words recalled will be from the first and last few words in each condition.

Null hypothesis: there will be no difference in the number of words recalled depending on whether there is a semantic link between the words and whether they are words that are frequently used or not, and the placing of the words on the list will have no effect on which words are recalled. Any difference is due to chance factors.
METHOD:
Participants:
49 participants in total
All 1st year psychology students at Stirling University
Both male and female participants
Mix of race
Mix of age

Apparatus: • Pen • Paper • Stopwatch • Computer with Microsoft Office software • Psychology laboratory to perform the experiment in • 3 different stimulus lists: 1. High frequency/imagery words with no semantic link 2. High frequency/imagery words with a semantic link 3. Low frequency/imagery words with no semantic link

Procedure: • The experimenter gave participants a brief outline of the study and what they would be required to do. • They were then told to get a pen and paper ready and told that the experimenter would soon read a list of words. • They had to listen to the experimenter read the list of 14 words at a rate of 1 per second, followed by the word recall. • Once the experimenter said recall the participants had to write down as many words as they could remember from the list. • The experimenter started the stopwatch as he said the word recall and timed the participants for 2 minutes, after this time he told them to put down their pens. • He then collated the results of the first list using Microsoft excel. • He then repeated the task with condition 2 and 3. • Once all conditions had been done the experiment was over and the participants were free to leave. • The experimenter then collated the results of the experiment.

RESULTS:

Graph 1 shows the frequency of total words correctly recalled. Condition 2 showed the best recall, when the words had a semantic link as in this condition the mean number of words recalled was 10.39 and the total number of words recalled was 509. Condition 1 showed the next best recall, where the words were high frequency/ imagery, in this condition the mean number of words recalled was 8.78 and the total number of words recalled was 430. Condition 3 showed the poorest recall when the words were low frequency/ imagery. In this condition the mean number of words recalled was 6.59 and the total number of words recalled was 323.
This shows that the best recall is when there is a semantic link between high frequency/ imagery words, and poorer recall is shown when the words are more unfamiliar or difficult.

Graph 2 shows the serial position curve of the 3 conditions. Condition 3 shows the best primacy/recency effect, as it is the most U-shaped out of the 3. All 3 of the conditions showed a fairly good primacy effect but only condition 3 showed any major signs of a recency effect.
This shows that with recency effect the best words to remember in the short-term memory are low frequency/ imagery words.

DISCUSSION:
The study was carried out in a psychology lab with all participants doing the experiment at the same time. This could show ethical issues as it does not allow for confidentiality, the participants were asked to raise their hand if they had given an answer so if one person had not remembered that specific word but the rest of the participants had then they be made to feel stupid and inadequate and cause them stress and worry that other participants had noticed it. This shows that the experiment does not follow the ethical guidelines of confidentiality or protection from harm.
The British Psychological Society (BPS) states that psychologists should keep results confidential or allow the results to be distributed as long as there is no personally identifiable information contained within the experiment.
It also states that psychologists should avoid harming participants either physically or mentally.
Another problem with the study is that the participants were all psychology students and therefore probably had a good idea of what the study was looking for. This could cause participant bias where they purposely alter their responses to please or displease the experimenter.
The study highlighted certain similar findings with previous studies, for example a study by Craik and Tulving in 1975 found that words that had been semantically processed were remembered better than those visually processed.
The experimental hypothesis of: there will be a difference in the number of words recalled depending on whether there is a semantic link between the words and whether they are words that are frequently used or not, and that most of the words recalled will be from the first and last few words in each condition. Was accepted because there was indeed a difference in the number of words recalled. The experiment was a success with a few ethical problems and other minor details that should be altered to improve future research.

REFERENCES:
Atkinson, R.C. and Shiffrin, R.M. (1968) Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K.W. Spence and J.T. Spence (eds) The Psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, Vol.2. New York: Academic Press.

BPS Code of Ethics & Conduct. March 2006; www.BPS.org.uk

Craik, F.I.M. and Lockhart, R.S. (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 11, 671-684.

Craik, F.I.M. and Tulving, E. (1975) Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 104, 268-294.

Murdock, B.B., Jr. (1962) The Serial Position Effect of Free Recall, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 482-488.
-----------------------

[pic]

[pic]

MARK:

Mar