Andrade (doodling) Flashcards
Doodling
It’s to draw patterns/pictures while thinking about something else or when you’re bored
Day dreaming
It’s a temporary escape from reality by forming mental pictures, usually in spontaneous episodes/other experiences
What is the aim of the study
Does doodling help information processing or either enabling them to attend more effectively OR by enhancing their memory
Hypothesis
Doodling helps with information processing
Sample
- 40 pps
- 35f, 5m (predominantly female)
- 18-55 yrs old
- 2 males control group, 3 in doodling
- members of Medical Research Council
- paid small amount of money for taking part
- divided into 2 groups, 20 each
- pps were involved in a previous study prior to being in this one (researchers asked if they could spare 5 mins for this)
Control group = 20
Doodling group = 20
Research method = lab exp
Materials used in study
- audio cassette tape
–> monotone
–> 227 words per min
–> played at comfortable listening volume - script included 8 names of people attending party
–> 3 ppl + 1 cat can’t come - shaded shapes of 1cm diameter on A4 paper
- pps in doodling condition used pencil
–> 10 shapes per row
–> alternating rows of circles + squares - 8 place names were mentioned
- 4.5cm wide margin
- wrote on lined piece of paper
General instructions read (to both groups)
- tape is going to be played
- pretend the speaker is a friend and has called to invite you to a party
- the tape is dull but doesn’t need to be memorized as not needed
- write down names of people who will definitely/probably attend party except for yourself
- ignore names of people who can’t come and don’t write anything else
Procedure (doodling condition)
- paper was given and told neatness and speed didn’t matter when shading
- listened to tape (2.5 mins) and wrote names down
- when recording finished, experimenter collected sheets and talked to them for a min
- pps were asked to recall names of people who could come to the party and then name places mentioned when finished
- other half did the reverse: places –> names –> names of people attending the party
- apologized for deception (surprise memory test/counterbalancing)
Why was a surprise memory test given?
If they weren’t given a surprise memory test then it would create demand characteristics because pps would start focusing/paying more attention to remember
Primary and concurrent task
Primary task: monitoring telephone message
Concurrent task: doodling
(had to do both at the same time)
IV and DV
IV: whether it was doodling condition or control condition
DV: memory recalled
- monetary information
- incidental (other unrelated information)
Operational definition for DV
Correct answer - false alarms = final score
eg: name of person - name of person NOT going to party = final score
eg: mishearing = “Greg” for “Craig” (seen as correct answer)
Results
Shading of shapes:
- range of shaded shapes = 3-110
Suspicion of memory test:
- 3 from “doodle group” and 4 from “control group” were suspicious of memory test
Results from doodle group
- shading of shapes mean = 36.3
- wrote down 8 names correctly mean = 7.8
- monitoring performance = mean - 7.7, SD - 0.6
- false alarm = 1 pp
- suspected memory test = 3 pps
- memory test = 7.8
- no. pps who didn’t doodle = 1
- actively remembered = none
- overall = 7.5 (mean)
- no. of pps who scored 8 = 15
- pps in doodling condition recalled 29% MORE than control group
Results from control group
- shading of shapes = none
- wrote down 8 names correctly mean = 7.1
- monitoring performance = mean - 6.9, SD - 1.3
- false alarm = 5 pps
- suspected memory test = 4
- memory test = 7.1
- no. of pps who didn’t doodle = none
- actively remembered = none
- overall = 5.8 (mean)
- no. of pp who scored 8 = 9
Results of monitored and incidental info
- pps in doodling condition recalled a mean of 7.5 pieces of info (names & places)
- pps in control group recalled mean of 5.8 pieces of info (names & places)
- monitored names recalled BETTER than incidental places
- removing data from pps who were recalled better
Quantitative data strengths & weaknesses
STRENGTHS:
- easy to score, compare, contrast
- objective (no interpretation required)
- data can be represented in graphical/visual form
eg: tables, graphs, etc
WEAKNESSES:
- doesn’t explain the “why” in the study
Mechanisms
- doodling helps stabilize arousal at optimal
–> keeps boredom away - doodling reduces daydreaming
–> keeps daydreaming away - doodling adds concentration
- daydreaming takes away concentration
- doodling adds resources to the central executive resources (primary task)
–> doodling vs daydreaming
Limitations of the study
- daydreaming was NOT measured (thought probes could be used in the future)
- sample could’ve been larger and more varied (to generalize findings to more people)
- low ecological validity
Strengths of the study
- DV operationalized (improves validity)
- reliability (study can be used repeatedly which improves replicability)
- standardized procedure
–> pps given same audio recording
–> doodles have same lined paper
—> all pps went through same debriefing process
Results: monitored and incidental
- monitored names recalled better than incidental names
- pps in doodling condition recalled MEAN = 7.5 pieces of info (names & places)
- pps in control condition recaled MEAN = 5.8 pieces of info (names & places)
- pps in doodling condition recalled 29% more than control group
- removing data from pps who suspected a test didn’t alter the pattern of results
