Contact Author How the Experiment Works Pretend for a minute that you are a teacher who has a student who has asked for your help. This student indicates that they are spending hours a week studying for your exams, but no matter how hard they study, they do poorly on your tests.
If humanity is to continue to grow as a species our methods of learning must continue to grow and improve. This experiment illustrates how different methods of encoding can affect how information is retained. Nine hundred and ninety nine participants were presented with 26 pairs of words under both semantic and phonemic conditions and then tested to see how many they could recall.
Participants were also asked to assess themselves prior to the experiment. Memory and Self Assessment 3 Levels of Processing and their effect on Information Retention Do we perceive our ability to retain information accurately?
Significant time and effort has been invested into researching memory and the effect the depth of processing has on the ability to recall words. The reason that semantic encoding has resulted in a better word retention than phonemic is due to the variation in the depth of processing.
Sensory interpretations such as the sound or appearance of a word are processed at shallower levels and produce only shortterm recall.
Deeper levels of processing concern the meaning of the word and result in a more long-term recollection.
So, once the subject understood the meaning of the word, deep processing is not necessary. However, experiments show that there is a difference at the same LOP, for example, at the semantic processing one can check if a word fits on a phrase or appreciate it (Roediger & Gallo, ). Organization and semantic elaboration in . The levels-of-processing effect, identified by Fergus I. M. Craik and Robert S. Lockhart in , describes memory recall of stimuli as a function of the depth of mental processing. Deeper levels of analysis produce more elaborate, longer-lasting, and stronger memory traces than shallow levels of analysis. EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT LEVEL PROCESSING ON RETENTION For example, when the subject was to answer two questions at the Sh level his answer sheet contained (from Table 1) numbers 1 and 2 from the shallow set.
These levels are involved in semantic encoding, grouping words together depending on their meaning, CAT and DOG for example. The reason people estimate their ability to recall inaccurately could be one of a many.
The primary hypothesis of this experiment is that participants in the semantic condition, the deeper level of processing, will result in a higher percentage of words recalled.
The tertiary hypothesis is that people will overestimate their abilities and so the predictions for both conditions will be higher than the given value.
Memory and Self Assessment 4 Method Participants There were first year psychology students that participated in the experiment. The age and gender of the students was not recorded.
Procedure Participants were randomly assigned to either the phonemic or semantic condition. They were told to go to a computer open the web browser to the experiment, enter their name and select the condition they had been assigned.
They were then presented with a trial of six practice word pairs, presented one at a time for 30 seconds.
Whilst the word pairs were visible, the participants were asked whether they agreed or disagreed, if the words rhymed or were in the same semantic category. After the participants selected they were given feedback about whether the answer was correct or incorrect.
The participants then began encoding. During encoding participants were presented with 26 word pairs, one at a time for 30 seconds each. Participants then had to select whether they agreed or disagreed for each word pair. No feedback was given during encoding. Participants then began the recall phase.
During the recall phase one word from each of the previous pairs was presented on the screen, all 26 pairs were presented one at a time, participants were asked to enter the partner word. During this phase there was no time limit and participants were not penalised for incorrect spelling.
After this phase a result page opened, with a table indicating scores for each phase. Results The results illustrate that for both Table 1 the phonemic and Table 2 semantic conditions the mean actual recall score was lower than the mean estimated recall score.
Participants in the semantic condition had a higher mean recall than participants in the phonemic condition.
Memory and Self Assessment 5 Table three shows the combined results of both conditions, it shows that the estimated recall is greater than the actual recall. This supports the hypothesis that deeper levels of processing lead to greater ability to retain information. It would then be a logical conclusion to say that semantic encoding leaves a more long-term memory.Hypotheses and general method The “durability of the memory trace is a function of depth of processing.” “Stimuli that are attended to, fully analyzed, and enriched by associations or images yield a deeper encoding of the event, and a long-lasting trace.” “Memory performance would vary systematically with the depth of processing.”.
EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT LEVEL PROCESSING ON RETENTION For example, when the subject was to answer two questions at the Sh level his answer sheet contained (from Table 1) numbers 1 and 2 from the shallow set.
Craik and Tulving's experiments showed that retention would progressively decrease as levels of processing changed from _____ any result could be explained after the fact, by saying " so they must of used deeper level of processing" without really measuring the levels the subjects used the DRM effect where ppl falsely recognize the word.
This experiment is meant to examine the effect of depth of processing on recall or memory. The different questions you answered likely caused you to process the words differently.
Answering a question about whether a word fits into a sentence or not requires deeper processing than does determining whether a word is in all caps.
The levels of processing model (Craik and Lockhart, ) focuses on the depth of processing involved in memory, and predicts the deeper information is processed, the longer a memory trace will last.
Craik defined depth as: "the meaningfulness extracted from the stimulus rather than in terms of the number of analyses performed upon it.” Author: Saul Mcleod.
As deeper processing would logically take more time to execute than shallow processing (e.g. thinking of words that rhyme with a word vs. noticing whether a word is capitalized), it is unclear whether time taken to process, or level of processing is the actual cause of recall.