Psy 348
Portland State University
The Results
Our research was dedicated to the problem of processing memory. To analyze this problem we created a list of 24 words and print it out on single sheets of paper for every one of our 70 participants. The participants were to remember and then to reproduce the words in 3 minutes. All the participants were provided with similar conditions. They set in the laboratory that was equipped with computers and had to type their answers with a help of a computer, so there were no obstacles. The participants were free to use any memorizing method.
During the research we’ve got the following results:
We haven’t got any deviation in the answers as the conditions for all of the participants were similar. The main point was to analyze the ways of processing information.
When we received our results, we made a graph in Excel to see the difference between the answers. You can see the graph below:
Discussion
According to their position in the table. The first two words and the last two words were the easiest to memorize. In accordance with this participants had to use other methods to remember words in the middle of the columns.
According to their structure. We can see that longer words were harder to memorize.
According to their connection (associations). The words that could be combined with the help of association were really easy to remember, for example, city – dry, cold – love, war – hate, nurse – doctor.
According to their opposition. This method was one of the best to remember the words and we can see it with the help of our graph. Antonyms were easier to remember, for example, evening – morning, pretty – ugly, cold – hot.
The research had purely scientific interest that is why there weren’t any non-naïve participants. The only limitation was the laboratory in which the experiment was held. We were interested only in the observation of a memorizing process that is why we had to eliminate an external stimulus.
Our research was based on the research of Craik and Lockhart. We can see that we supported their method of “shallow processing” of the information. We demonstrated that physical properties of the words matter. The next step in the developing our research can be testing of “deep processing” and “elaboration rehearsal” processes of memorizing (Craik & Tulving, 2016).
References
Craik, F., & Tulving, E. (2016). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal Of Experimental Psychology: General, (104), 268-294.
