Contempory study: Sebastian and Hernandez Gil (2012)

Question 1

Define digit span

Answer 1

longest sequence that can be held in the STM at 1 time

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

Investigate the development of the phonological loop by using verbal digit span as their measure.

And compare results to anglo-saxon kids and elderly people and people with dementia from and earlier study

Question 3

Procedure: What was the type of experiment

Answer 3

field experiment in schools

Question 4

Procedure: DV and IV

Answer 4

IV - year group of students

DV - mean verbal digit span

Question 5

Procedure: how many participants were there, and where were they from

Answer 5

575 schools kids from pre schools, primary schools and secondary schools in Madrid.

Both private and public schools were used

Question 6

Procedure: what was the age range of the kids

Answer 6

5-17

Question 7

Procedure: how did researchers make sure no child had cognitive imparings

Answer 7

no child selected had repeated a year

Question 8

Procedure

Answer 8

Sequences of random digits were read out to the child, length of digit increased by 1 each time they got it correct

Participants had to recall them in correct order

Question 9

results

Answer 9

from the ages of 5 to 11, digit span increased steadily, then from 11 years to 17 years the increase slowed down and stabalised.

Question 10

Results: mean digit span of 5 year olds vs 11 year olds

Answer 10

5 year olds = 3.76
11 year olds = 5.28

Question 11

Results: mean digit span of 11 year olds vs 17 year olds

Answer 11

11 year olds = 5.28
17 year olds = 5.91

Question 12

Results: difference between spanish school kids and anglo-saxon elders

Answer 12

the elders only had a higher digit span than the 5 year old group

rest of the age groups scored higher than elders

Question 13

Conclusions

Answer 13

Digit span increases up to adolences in both the spanish and english study.

• Spanish children increases until 17 years, english increases until 15 years.
• avarage digit span was lower for spanish children than english children

Question 14

Strength of generalisability

Answer 14

Sebastian and Hernandez Gil are testing a universal cognitive function everyone is likely to have.

Question 15

Strength of generalisability: how is this a strength

Answer 15

we are likely to have a working memory that will work in broadly similar ways

Question 16

Strength of generalisability: why is it a strength

Answer 16

because of this, it can be representative of the wider population

Question 17

Weakness of generalisability

Answer 17

the study they compared findings with had a small sample size

Question 18

Weakness of generalisability: evidence of small sample size

Answer 18

earlier study with people with dementia only had 9 participants

Question 19

Weakness of generalisability: how do small sample size affect the findings

Answer 19

small sample sizes reduce power of statistical statistical tests and make Type I errors more likely to happen

Question 20

Weakness of generalisability: what does this mean for the findings

Answer 20

makes the conclusions regarding phonological loop of old people questionable

Question 21

Strength of reliability

Answer 21

The study had several standardised procedures

Question 22

Strength of reliability: evidence of standardised procedures

Answer 22

researchers made sure each word was read for each participants 1 second at a time.

• these procedures made sure experience from each participants remained the same

Question 23

Strength of reliability: what does this mean for the results

Answer 23

This means the findings are not affected by the differences in how to procedure was followed

Question 24

Weakness of the validity

Answer 24

researchers relied on their observations on whether children presented learning impairments

Question 25

Weakness of the validity: evidence of this

Answer 25

children were not directly tested and researchers relied on children or parents to state whether they had impairments

Question 26

Weakness of the validity: how does this affect the results

Answer 26

children could’ve had impairments to cognitions without knwoing, this affects the results reducing validity