Number of participants in each group wasn't the same. It was Group 1 (audio 1) had 13, group 2 (audio 2 ) had 13, and group 3 (audio 3) had 12. Different amounts of people give different averages, which may have contributed to why group 3 had a higher average number of words recalled.

all students were given the same amount of time to remember the words

How people recorded their list of words wasn't the same. Some people did it on their laptops, some in their psychology notebooks or planners. Different mediums of collecting raw data could have impacted the results because there is a chance people opened their word documents during the audio was running. This could have led to a shift in focus that could have affected their results.

distractions of other people typing/ writing, can throw person of track as their mind shifts to focus on the distractions

the anxiety and stress induced when other people finished when you were not

timer was distracting, would make loud noises that distracted the owner of the phone, as well as the people around.Instead of individual timers a group one run by the conductor that could not be seen to the students would have been more efficient so that they could completely focus on listing down the words they remembered.

results cannot be generalized to wider population, neither represent adequately Year 11 Students due to their prior knowledge in memory recall. Could present as bias.

Allows objective quantitative data which can allow us to research more into participant variables and their effect as well

discrete number system is used for calculating the dependent variable (the amount of words). This allows for efficient data collection through quantative data.

this is important as different words could have been easier/harder to recall, because this is not the independant variable and could wouldn't have shown the proper effect of the audios.

The audio was the voice of the same women. The depth, accents and timbres of different voices could affect the ability to remember certain words or understand the description

only one independant variable, allowed for better focus on how the positive-imagery association alone effected memory recall

The errors that could be caused due to the subjective nature of the self-rating system is that the average confidence levels could be entirely incorrect values of that groups confidence. Therefore, it cannot be completely concluded whether music confidence also played a role in the amount of words recalled

Audio 3 that has description that evokes positive-imagery, but there's no guarantee that it's positive for the participant, or if they are even able to visualize it.

Validity of this: if accurately and honestly collected, it can withstand possible bias

Reliability of this: number of words is quantitative data that is in the form of discrete numerical results. Can be easily put into the form of graphs and tables in order to analyze the impact of positive imagery clearly

reliability on "honesty". People could have lied about results which would effect average group recollection results

Participants also participate in other classes that may have widened the diversity and uniqueness of the sample group in opposed to only taking one subject.

If needed, researchers are able to use this curated data to get an insight of how positive-imagery and emotion related to memory impacts year 10/11 sace psychology students. This can be used to compare the data to other Psychology SACE students among other schools, or compare Glenunga’s Year 10/11 SACE Psychology Students to the 10/11 sace students in Glenunga taking other subjects.

Lower literacy levels due to personal educational background, and if English isn’t their first language could have affected their ability to remember the words

For example, they could feel anxiety doing this at school, feeling like it was like an exam, but at home they could feel more calm.

Short description of words distract from remembering the word that was actually trying to be remembered (cannot do repeating the words pattern or anything like that)

distraction of other people typing, whispering, or other peoples audios leaking through ineffective headphones

description of the words, especially for audio 2 could have done the opposite effect and made the person focus on the other words in the description, not memorizing the actually listed word.

Improvement- would be beneficial next time to further test the participants music confidence through questions such as asking whether they play a musical instrument, and if so, for how long. This could allow the investigators to further research and understand the impact of participation variables much as music knowledge.