Grant et al

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

To test for context-dependency effects caused by the presence or absence of noise during learning and retrieval of meaningful material

Question 2

Method and why is it that method?

Answer 2

• laboratory experiment
• Manipulation of variables/ controlled environment

Question 3

Independent variables

Answer 3

1. Read in silence, test in silence. (matching)
2. Read in silence, test with background noise. (mismatching)
3. Read with background noise, test with background noise. (matching)
4. Read with background noise, test in silence. (mismatching)

Question 4

Dependent Variable

Answer 4

Number of correctly answered questions:

• 10 short answer questions.
• 16 multiple choice questions.

Question 5

Experimental designs

Answer 5

Independent measures - participants only take part in one condition

Question 6

Sample?

Answer 6

-Opportunity sample

gathered by eight members of the Psychology lab class (5 each).

39 participants (1 participants results omitted due to because their performance was considerably different to others)

Age 17-56 years (mean 23.4 years), 17 female, 23 male.

Question 7

Details of experiment

Answer 7

8 members of the psychology class were assigned the role of experimenter

Experimenters randomly assigned their participants to each condition (4 participants selected by experimenters and 1 assigned by the instructor).

Question 8

Stimuli

Answer 8

Experimenters own cassette player and headphones

8 cassettes (copies from a master tape)-background noise recorded during lunchtime in a university cafe.

Background noise consisted of occasional distinct words/phrases, general conversation hum, sounds of movement of chairs and dishes.

Tape played at moderately loud level.

Question 9

Materials

Answer 9

•A two page, three columned article on Psychoimmunology (is the study of the interaction between psychological processes and the nervous and immune systems of the human body- Hales 1984).

Question 10

Materials - The Tests

Answer 10

• Short answer test 10 short answer qs derived from the multiple choice stems which could lead to a single word/phrase answer.
• •Multiple choice questions (MCQ). This included 16 questions containing a stem and four alternatives, testing memory for points made in the text.

Question 11

Procedure

Answer 11

• Instructions, describing the experiment as a class project and stating that participation was voluntary, were read aloud.•
• Participants were asked to read the given article once, as if they were reading it for a class assignment. They were allowed to highlight and underline as they read.
• Participants were informed that their comprehension would be tested with both a short-answer test and a multiple-choice test.
• All participants wore headphones while they read.•
• Those in the silent condition were told they would not hear anything over the headphones whilst those in the noisy condition were told they would hear moderately loud background noise, but that they should ignore it.•
• Reading times were recorded by the experimenters.•
• A break of approximately 2 minutes between the end of the study phase and the beginning of the test phase was incorporated to minimise recall from short-term memory.•
• The short-answer test was given, followed by the multiple-choice test.
• Participants were tested in either silent or noisy conditions and were informed of the condition before testing. Regardless of testing.
• The entire procedure took approximately 30 minutes.

Question 12

Results

Answer 12

There were individual differences in reading time, but no consistent differences between noisy and silent study conditions or test (retrieval) conditions.

No significant difference in reading times across the four conditions.

For both the short answer and multiple choice tests, performance was significantly better in matching conditions than in non matching conditions.

This suggests that recall is better when studying and testing are performed in similar environments in terms of the noisiness of the surroundings.

Question 13

Conclusion

Answer 13

• As there was no independent effect of noise on performance, the claim made by many students that noise does not affect their capacity to study is supported.•
• However as context dependence affects retrieval in both SAQ and MCQ tests students should study in quiet surroundings, as exams are typically held in silence.•
• Study and testing in the same environment leads to enhanced performance.

Response bias- Participants did not know the answer so merely looked at the wording of the question for cues.

Therefore the memory did not actually change, more like demand characteristics.

Question 14

Ethnocentrism Explain

Answer 14

This is because the sample only contained people from one culture- this means that the results cannot be generalised (applied) to people of other cultural backgrounds.

Question 15

Ethnocentrism Evidence

Answer 15

In Grants study all the participants are likely to be living in America. A country with a western culture that may focus more attention and importance on learning in this way, studying written material and completing written assessments in a classroom environment. This study may then not be relevant to other culture where content-dependency may still be important but in a different way.

Question 16

Sampling Baias - Point

Answer 16

This sample may be seen as a representative sample

Question 17

Sampling Bias - Explain

Answer 17

This is because it included P’s who were both males and females. This increases the likelihood that results can be applied to the target population.

Question 18

Sampling Bias - Evidence

Answer 18

Grant sample had similar amounts of males and females (17 f, 23m) read the article of Psychoimmunology and tested via short answer and multiple-choice questions.

Question 19

Sampling Bias - Weakness Point

Answer 19

However, he gathered the participants using an opportunity sample

Question 20

Sampling Bias - Weakness Explain

Answer 20

People who were available at the time of the study were asked to take part. This often creates unrepresentative samples as these participants often share similar characteristics and not a good cross-section found in the target population and therefore results cannot be applied to a wider group.

Question 21

Sampling Bias - Weakness Evidence

Answer 21

The sample in the matching and mismatching conditions were the experimenters acquittances (not necessarily students but more than likely) so this could led to a bias sample as the results would not represent what would be found if the researcher studied non-students.

Question 22

Reliability - Strength - Point

Answer 22

This study could be considered as high in reliability due to lots of standardisation put in place.

Question 23

Reliability - Weakness - Point

Answer 23

This study could be considered as low in reliability as not all elements of the study were standardised.

Question 24

Reliability - Strength - Explain

Answer 24

This means that the researcher ensures that all participants have the same experience. This increases the replicability of the study and the likelihood that if repeated by another the same results would be found.

Question 25

Reliability - Weakness - Explain

Answer 25

This means that not all participants had the same experience and therefore makes it harder for another researcher to repeat the study in exactly the same way, this reduces the chance that they would find the same results.

Question 26

Reliability - Strength - Evidence

Answer 26

This means that not all participants had the same experience and therefore makes it harder for another researcher to repeat the study in exactly the same way, this reduces the chance that they would find the same results.

Question 27

Reliability - Weakness - Evidence

Answer 27

There were 8 experimenters, each had their own cassette player. This equipment could have differed in its quality of sound (the uni café background noise), this may have changed the results as some P’s may have had better or worse results because of this.

Question 28

Validity - strength

Answer 28

P: High internal validity

E: This means that there is a high chance that only the IV is affecting the DV as there was a high level of control.

E: For example there was a 2 minute break between the study period and testing period to ensure that recall was not from short term memory but due to the matching or mismatching conditions.

Question 29

Background

Answer 29

Research has shown that context-dependence may play an important role in numerous situations, such as memory for studied material.

Grant et al were interested in determining whether environmental context-dependency effects would be found with the type of material and

the type of tests typically encountered in school.

Their focus is more on study conditions than on differences in classroom testing conditions because they hold that students have more control over their study environments than over their test environments.

Observations had shown them that many high school and college students study material in environments very different from those in which they are tested: study environments often include background noise from either family, friends or television, while test environments are typically quieter. Therefore, if context-dependency occurs with meaningful course material, students’ study habits could be harming their test performance.

Grant et al therefore aimed to show that environmental context can have a more positive effect on performance in a meaningful memory test when the test takes place in the same environment in which the to-be-remembered material was originally studied (the matching condition) than when the test occurs in a different environment (mismatching condition).

Question 30

Method evaluation - strength

Answer 30

P: Conducted in a controlled environment – lowered EV’s

E: This allows us to establish cause and effect (IV had affected the DV) = high internal validity

E: all P’s listened to the same background noise from a master tape, they all read the same article and completed the same short answer and multiple choice questions, they all had 2 min break in between finishing reading and taking the test and they all completed it in the same order.

Question 31

Data strength

Answer 31

­P: Quantitative data

E: numerical form so easy to compare

Short answer questions and multiple choice answer questions were recorded so easy comparisons could be made between the conditions, we know that 14.3 mean recall was achieved in the matching conditions for the MCQ and only a mean on 12.7 in the mismatching

Question 32

Validity - weakness

Answer 32

P: Low ecological validity

E: May not be able to generalise these findings to everyday study habits in real life.

E: Students knew they were taking part in an experiment and therefore they may not have demonstrated their true study habits. They may have tried really hard in the experiment to please the researcher (demand characteristics) or they may not have been trying hard because they knew it was only an experiment that would have no impact on their actual studies.

Question 33

Validity - weakness

Answer 33

P: Low ecological validity

E: May not be able to generalise these findings to everyday study habits in real life.

E: Students knew they were taking part in an experiment and therefore they may not have demonstrated their true study habits. They may have tried really hard in the experiment to please the researcher (demand characteristics) or they may not have been trying hard because they knew it was only an experiment that would have no impact on their actual studies.

Question 34

Data weakness

Answer 34

P: Not qualitative

E: There was no opportunity to explain why

P’s didn’t have the chance to say why they think they recalled as well/not so well. May have been due to a lack of concentration rather than whether learning and recalling was matched or not.

Question 35

Method evaluation weakness

Answer 35

P: However it was artificial situation = therefore demand characteristics could have impacted the study

E: P’s could have guessed the aim and then acted to benefit the study/or throw it

P’s may have realized that the study was about learning with/without noise as they were all wearing headphones. The task was artificial in some ways as we don’t necessarily learn and then are tested straight away