Grant et al

Question 1

sampling method

Answer 1

snowball - 8 students asked 5 friends

Question 2

sample

Answer 2

23 male 17 female age 17-56

Question 3

method

Answer 3

lab, independant measures design

Question 4

procedure

Answer 4

-researcher test P individually
-read article w highlighter either in noisy or quiet conditions
-2 min break
-given short and multiple choice Q tests (test sat in same condition as learning)

Question 5

equipment

Answer 5

-cassete of audio from uni canteen
-double sided A4 article on psycho-immunology
-16 multiple choice Q
-10 short answer Q

Question 6

Main findings

Answer 6

–P remembered significantly more when tested in matching noise/silent conds

Question 7

short answer Q findings
mean scores

Answer 7

silent silent = 6.7/10
noisy noisy = 6.2/10
mismatching = 4.6 and 5.4/10

Question 8

multiple choice Q findings
mean scores

Answer 8

matching = 14.3 /16
mismatching = 12.7/16

Question 9

Conclusions

Answer 9

there are context dependancy effects for new info
it has real world applications

Question 10

ethics

Answer 10

had informed consent and were debriefed
BUT protection from harm as might have an anxiety from tests

Question 11

control

Answer 11

all wear headphones in study/test phase to control effect of headphones as a contextual clue

Question 12

population validity

Answer 12

freinds of students aren’t generalisable to wider population of non students

Question 13

Aim

Answer 13

whether manipulating study contexts produced positive context-dependancy effects on memory