grant Flashcards
what is meant by cue dependency
the idea that when a to-be-remembered item is stored in our memory, other pieces of information also present at the timea re stored with it. these extra pieces of information can later act as cues to aid recall
what was the aim and hypothesis of the study
aim- to demonstrate the positive effect of context upon memory
hypothesis- memory will be improved if you encode and retrieve memory in matched contexts vs mismatched contexts
who were the participants
39 participants age 17-59 (17f/23m) from iowa state university.
opportunity sampling- 8 psychology students who would be acting as experimenters each found 5 aquaintances to take part
describe the method of the study
lab experiment with an independent measures design
IV: whether the condition of the study and the test was matched/ mismatched
DV: their performance on a 10 short answer recall test and a 16 multiple choice recognition test
describe the materials used by grant
background noise was recorded during lunchtime in a university cafeteria (general conversation/chairs/dishes)
-the tape was played at a moderately loud level
an article on psychoimmunology was chosen to be the studied material as it would be accessible but not previously studied by participants
the short answer test was always administered first to ensure tat recall of information from the article was being tested nd not recall of information from the multiple choice test
describe the procedure
each of the 8 experimenters took each of their 5 participants through one of the 4 conditions. they were informed that their comprehension of the psychoimmunology article would be tested with short answer and multiple choice tests. participants were allowed to highlight and underline the article but could only readit once. all participants wore headphones and reading times were measued as control measures. a two minute break between the study and test time were given to minimise recall from the STM. the short answer test was answered first so th multiple choice questions couldnt act as cues. participants were then debriefed on the purpose of the study
describe the results found in grants study
those in the matched conditions recalled information better than those in the mismatched conditions
-for short answer questions the average score was 6.45/10 in matched vs 5/10 in mismatched
-for multiple choice questions the average score was 14.3/16 in matched and 12.7/16 in mismatched
there was no overall effect of noise found, so silent/silent did not do better than noisy/noisy
what did grant conclude
studying and testing in the same environment leads to enhanced memory performance. this would support cue dependene as it suggests some of the external context is encoded at the same time as the to-be-learnt material and later acts as a cue to the memory and therefore improves memory
it is better to revise for exams in silence since they are sat in silence
comment on the methodology of the study
lab experiment allows for the control of extraneous variables so we can be more sure of cause and effect e.g we can be sure the matched conditions caused the difference in memory performance and not the number of times the article was read for example, as this was controlled. this increases internal validity.
comment on the design
independent measures removes the chance of order effects being an extraneous variable as each participant only saw one condition. if this was not the case then after having read the psychoimmunology article multiple times, the participants willbe practiced and get a better score regardless of the contexts matching or not
open to individual differences as each participant only sees one condition, perhaps by chance participants with a better memory ended up in the matched conditions so the results were based on individual skill, not context dependency
comment on the ethics of the study
ethical as consent was gained from participants (we know this as they turned up to the lab) and the task itself of reading an article and completing 2 short tests was not distressing so PoP was adhered to
comment on the ecological validity of the study
high in ecological validity as students revising and being tested on what they know is a typical activity in their everyday life, so results on context dependent memory may be quite true to real life
low in ecological validity as the task was fairly artificial so this may alter how our memory responds to contect e.g we would not usually revise a topic we’ve never learnt, with cafeteria noise playing. this also reduces external validity
comment on the reliability of the study
standardised procedures in place e.g all read the same psychoimmunology article and had a two minute break. all wore headphones and completed the activities in the same order, therefore making it easy to replicate the study
comment on the sample
as the sample was collected by opportunity sampling, theres a high risk that all the participants were very similar in character as each of the 8 experimenters probably chose those closest to them. therefore the results on context dependent memory may not be generalisable beyond this type of person, so the population validity is low
ethnocentric as all participants were from the usa but a wide range of ages so arguably not age biased
how is grants study useful
useful in education as we know to match revision contexts to test contexts to improve recall e.g study in silence as ecams are in silence
allow revision in the exam hall prior to exams
revise with similar things on your person e.g perfume or a bracelet
useful in policing as eye witnesess can be taken back to the scene of the crime when recalling to match contexts, or be shown evidence/pictures to reinstate the scene- context reinstatement (cognitive interviews)
