Grant et al

Question 1

Sample

Answer 1

39 participants
17-56 years
(17 female 23 male)
oppurtunity sample with a snowballing effect - 8 psychology students each picked by 5 participants

Question 2

Strengths of sample

Answer 2

Highly generalisable due to mix of ages 17-56
High population validity
Representative
2x2 factorial design

Question 3

Design

Answer 3

independent measures
1-out of 4 conditions

Question 4

Weakness of Design

Answer 4

Individual differences
for example if you work better in a noisy condition they may test well

Question 5

procedure

Answer 5

All participants were given the same information
They werent given a time period
they were given a break

Question 6

The test

Answer 6

IV : study and test codnitions matching or mismatching
noisy - in the cafeteria at lunchtime with usual sounds - played through headphones
silent - noise cancelling headphones

the test was short answer questions and multiple choice

Question 7

Results

Answer 7

• no consistent differences between noisy and silent study conditions and retrieval
• Whether the info was learnt in noisy or silent conditions didnt make a difference to either test conditions

-Performance for both tests was significantly better in matching conditions than non matching ones

Question 8

Research method

Answer 8

Strength - Highly controlled and standardised
- same silent and noisy conditions
- same instructions
- timed 2 min break between learning and testing

Ecological validity - may be asked to leard and test in different enviroments

Weakness
Evs cant be standardised
- initial reading time noted but not controlled

Question 9

Quantative data

Answer 9

Strength
-Straight forward comparisons with other conditions
- larger amount of data can be collected quickly

Weakness
-Qualitive data could have added to fulness of findings
-NO analysis of essay style questions
- some work better with extra stimulation

Question 10

Ethical Considerations

Answer 10

Strengths
minimal ethical issues
-aware of participation
-no deception
-debriefed after
-enough information for informed consent
-aware of right to withdraw
-asked if they have any questions

Question 11

Validity

Answer 11

Strengths
- construct validity - high levels of control
-use of realistic materials
-more ecologically valid than other memory tests

Weakness
-lack of realistic content
-low external validity/temporal validity - would longer periods of study have the same results
-boredom, lack of motivation, less time studying may mitigate benefits of matched conditions

Question 12

Reliability

Answer 12

Strengths
- standardised
-materials
-procedure
-similarity in pattern of results across test conditions

Weakness
- 8 different students acting as experimenters so timing of inital reading task could not be controlled

Question 13

Sampling BIas

Answer 13

Strength
- good age spread and balance between male-female

Weakness
- Bias
- Low population validity chosen by 8 student experimenters so unlikely to be representative sample
- Demand charcteristics - knowing their friends were the experimenters