Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Grant (Procedure (Stimuli: (a) each experimenter provided his/her own…
Grant
Procedure
Stimuli: (a) each experimenter provided his/her own cassette player and headphones. The eight cassettes were exact copied made from a master tape of background noise recorded during lunchtime in a uni cafeteria. The tape was played at a moderately loud level
(b) a two page, 3 columned article on psychoimmunology as the to-be-studied material
(c) 16 multiple choice questions (recognition test) and 10 short answer questions (recall test). The short answer test was always administered first.
Instructions stating participation was voluntary were read aloud. Asked to read the given article once and were allowed to highlight and underline as they read. Informed that they would be tested with both a short answer test and a multiple choice test . All participants wore headphones while they read. Those in silent told they won't hear anything, noisy told they would hear moderately loud background noise but ignore it.
Each experimenter ran one participant for each of the four conditions and an additional participant for one of the conditions as assigned by the instructor. Experimenters randomly assigned their participants to their five conditions.
Reading times were recorded by the experimenters. A break of approx 2 mins between end of study phase and test phase to minimise recall from short term memory. The short answer test was given followed by multiple choice test. Tested in either silent or noisy conditions and told which condition before testing. All participants wore headphones in testing.
At the end of the testing phase participants were debriefed. The entire procedure lasted about 30 mins.
Findings
Participants performed better on both tests in the matching condition (silent-silent: 6.7/10 on short answer) compared to the mismatching condition (silent-noisy: 4.6/10 for short answer test).This shows that studying and testing in the same environment produced better results
-
Overall, the participants performed better on the multiple choice test than the short answer test showing they are better at recognition than recall.
Results suggest participants in all groups spent roughly equal amounts of time studying the material.
Conclusions
There are context dependancy effects for newly learned meaningful material regardless of whether a short answer test or multiple choice test is used to assess learning.
-
Aim
To show that environmental context can have a more positive effect on performance in a meaningful memory test when the test takes place in the same environment in which the to-be-remembered material was originally studied (matching)than when the test occurs in a different environment (mismatching).
Sample
Eight members of a psychology laboratory class served as experimenters, each experimenter recruited 5 acquaintances to serve as participants (opportunity).
There were 39 participants, ranging in age from 17 to 56 years (M=23.4), 17 were female, 23 were male (1 participants results were omitted)
Research method
This was a laboratory experiment using independent measures design
IVs: whether the participant read the two page article under silent or noisy conditions. whether the participant was tested under matching or mismatching conditions.
-The first IV- study context (silent vs noisy) and the second IV- test context (silent vs noisy)were manipulated in between-subjects factorial design, producing 4 conditions.
DV: the participants performance on (a) a short answer recall test and (b) a multiple choice recognition test.