STUDIES - Glanzer and Cunitz (1966)

Question 1

Introduction

Answer 1

• Experiment

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

• Examine whether position of words influences recall, testing the primacy and recency effect
• Investigating the existence of two separate memory stores (STM and LTM)

PRIMACY: Better recall of items at the start of the list (early serial position)

RECENCY: Better recall of items at the end of the list (late serial position)

Question 3

Procedure

Answer 3

Sample:

• 240 army enlisted males

Variables:

• IV: Presence of a 30-second filler task (distraction)
• DV: Number of words correctly recalled from different positions in the list (beginning, middle, end)

Method:

• Independent measures design
• Participants were presented word list and separated into 2 groups:
  1) IMMEDIATE RECALL: Half of the participants were asked to recall words immediately after memorising them
  2) DELAYED RECALL: Half of the participants were asked to count backwards for 30 seconds before recalling the words

Question 4

Results

Answer 4

GROUP 1 - IMMEDIATE RECALL

• Showed recency effect as they had a higher probability of recalling items near end of list
• Showed primacy effect as they had higher probability of recalling items near start of list

GROUP 2 - DELAYED RECALL

• Did not show the recency effect because the filler task prevented better recall of later words
• Showed primacy effect as they were able to recall the initial words better so it wasn’t influenced by distraction

Question 5

Findings

Answer 5

• When there are too many words for them all to be remembered:
  1) Primacy effect results in first words being recalled
  2) Recency effect results in last words being recalled

PRIMACY

• Recall of early serial position items is better: Words at the beginning of the list will have more rehearsal and therefore a higher chance of entering LTM and being recalled

RECENCY

• Recall of late serial position items is better:
  1) Participants try to keep words in STM
  2) STM is limited to 7+/-2 chunks of information
  3) As new words enter STM, old words are bumped out
  4) Only words in STM are ones that have just been heard
• Filler task reduces recency effects as it interferes with STM

Conclusion: Shows that STM and LTM are separate memory stores

Question 6

Strengths

Answer 6

• Strong internal validity: Controlled lab experiment with highly controlled variables as participants had similar profile (male and army-enlisted)
• High replicability: Due to its controlled nature, it is designed following a strict method (example: 30-second delay is measured exactly)
• Offers evidence for two separate memory stores (STM and LTM) thus supporting the MSMM

Question 7

Limitations

Answer 7

• Sample bias: Limited to only one genre (males) and a specific job and profile (army-enlisted)
• Low generalisability: Can only generalise to one gender and job (cannot apply to all the population)
• Low ecological validity: Memorising a list of random words is unnatural and artificial, doesn’t happen in real-life environments