classic study: baddeley

Question 1

who proposed the classic study? in what year?

Answer 1

Baddeley
1966b

Question 2

what is acoustic similarity?

Answer 2

words that sound alike

Question 3

what is semantic similarity?

Answer 3

words that have similar meaning

Question 4

aim of study

Answer 4

• to find out if ltm encodes semantically (based on sound) or semantically (based on meaning).
• Baddeley thought that if ppts struggle to recall word order it suggests that ltm is confused by similarity which means this is how ltm tends to encode (by meaning rather than sound)

Question 5

procedure of study

Answer 5

• lab experiment designed to test order recall of acoustically and semantically word lists
• mix of men and women volunteers from Applied Psychology Research Unit subject panel, Cambridge
• each group contained approximately 20 ppts
• ppts were assigned to one of four conditions as an independent group design
• four lists on 10 words were used (one list for each condition)
• each list of 10 words presented by slide projector. words were presented in correct order one at a time for three seconds
• after presentation, ppts were given ’interference task’ where six eight-digit number sequences were read out at one per second
• ppts had eight seconds to write down numbers**
• ppts then were allowed one minute to write down 10 word in ORDER they had been presented
• repeated four times (same list four times (independent group design))
• after four learning trials, ppts were given 15 minute interference task which involved copying eight digit number sequences at own pace
• after interference task, ppts were given surprise retest on word list order for the fifth time

Question 6

what is the iv?

Answer 6

acoustic similarity/semantic similarity

Question 7

what is the dv?

Answer 7

score on recall test of 10 words; words must be recalled in correct order

Question 8

what did the 4 word lists consist of?

Answer 8

• list a: 10 acoustically similar words
• list b: 10 acoustically dissimilar words
• list c: 10 semantically similar words
• list d: 10 semantically dissimilar words

Question 9

what did lists b and d act as?

Answer 9

control groups for list a and c. Baddeley was careful to ensure that all the words were one syllable (monosyllabic)

Question 10

how many lists did ppts get?

Answer 10

only one

Question 11

what did the interference task ensure?

Answer 11

that the ppts could not keep the word list in the stm by rehearsing it

Question 12

were the words visible in the card?

Answer 12

• yes
• as it was not a test of learning words, but a test of order the words; the word list in random order was made visible on a card in the room
• it was visible during learning, testing and the retest

Question 13

results of study

Answer 13

• recall of acoustically similar sounding words (list a) and acoustically dissimilar sounding words (list b) were ** very similar**. this shows that acoustic encoding did not affect ltm recall
• ppts found semantically similar words (list c) was much worse than semantically dissimilar words (list d) and recalled significantly fewer semantically similar words in retest

Question 14

conclusion of study

Answer 14

• showed that ltm learning was affected by meaning of words - evidence that ltm uses semantic coding - coding by meaning
• Baddeley showed that coding in ltm is different from coding in stm

Question 15

what statistical test did Baddeley use to get whether his results were significant or not?

Answer 15

• mann-whitney u test. this is appropriate because:
• Baddeley was looking for difference
• data collected was at least interval level - being number of words recalled in right order from 10
• experimental design was independent groups

Question 16

why did ppts do worse in semantically similar condition?

Answer 16

• ltm is good at semantic differences
• ltm is specially designed to ’put things into different boxes’ based on meaning

Question 17

strengths: reliability

Answer 17

• Baddeley’s 1966b study was laboratory experiment and used careful controls e.g. controlling time each word was displayed and same amount of time for recall test. tight controls means study can show cause and effect conclusions because of controls over extraneous variables
• study used standardised procedure, e.g. each ppt underwent four learning trials, interference task and re-test. study can be replicated to test for **reliability
• reduces memory to how well lists of 10 words is recalled when lists have certain conditions e.g. list of words being semantically similar/dissimilar. this is reductionist (study of something by breaking down into parts). reductionism can be a strength in that findings can be reliable and scientific body of knowledge can be built
• quantitative data collected - number of words recalled in right order out of 10

Question 18

strengths: validity

Answer 18

• results were measured in scientific way and objective way

Question 19

weaknesses: validity

Answer 19

• reductionism can be weakness if it means that findings do not represent everyday life (ecological validity)
• study took place in artificial environment (lab setting). lab research, like this, use experimental research that are not typical in way in which we use memory in everyday context, do not often learn lists of words and have to recall in correct order. this lack of ecological validity means ability to generalise findings to everyday (real life) is questioned (mundane realism)

Question 20

strength: application to real life

Answer 20

• study has ** useful application to real life** as it showed stm and ltm differences. knowing how memory works and differences between stm and ltm is useful e.g. students - creating mind-maps is good revision tool as students are deliberately putting info into different semantic categories in ltm

Question 21

weakness: application to real life

Answer 21

• reductionism can be weakness if it means that findings do not represent everyday life

Question 22

strengths: ethics

Answer 22

• all ppts were volunteers from Applied Psychology Research Unit subject panel, Cambridge. this means they had given their consent (not informed consent) to take part in experiment and were able to withdraw from study at anytime