AS Psychology Association on Memory

hey ppls, Im doing coursework on the Effect of Semantic Encoding on Recall (STM), can someone give me some general and specific background stuff especially other experiments and studies that i can look up on the internet :smile:

Reply 1

Amorya

OK, I'm feeling helpful :smile:

Craik & Lockhart (1972) came up with what's called the Levels of Processing approach to studying memory. They stated that there are three levels, and the more deeply we process information, the more likely we are to remember it.

The levels are:

1: Structured or Shallow processing. Primarily visual, based on what things look like. For example, is a word upper or lower case.

2: Phonetic processing. Based on what things sound like. For example, does a word rhyme with ___?

3: Semantic processing. Based on meaning and understanding. For example, does the word mean the same as ___?

Craik & Tulving (1975) did a study on whether the depth of processing would affect recall.

Aim – To investigate whether depth of processing would affect recall

Method – Laboratory Experiment

Participants were presented with words using a Tachistoscope (An apparatus used by psychologists that projects visual stimuli, a series of letters or figures, onto a screen at rapid speed for brief exposures to test visual perception, attention, memory, and learning).

They were the asked one of four questions about each word. These were:

Is the word in uppercase?
Does the word rhyme with…?
Is it a type of…?
Would it fit the sentence “….”?
(e.g. “he kicked the ___ into a tree”)

Each of these questions required participants to process information at different levels. Question 1 required shallow processing. Question 2 required phonetic/phonemic processing. Questions 3 and 4 required semantic processing – Participants were asked to answer yes or no, in each case Participants were then given an unexpected test of recognition.

Results – There were significantly recognised in the deep-processing/semantic condition.

Conclusion – Deep-processing leads to better recall than shallow or phonemic processing.

Hyde and Jenkins (1973) did a similar study, where participants were asked to do one of five tasks which involved rating or categorising words. The tasks that required semantic processing resulted in higher levels of recall. However, this study was criticised because of the ambiguity of whether a task required semantic processing.

The levels of processing approach was popular a while back, but it is an over simplification. One problem with it is how do we define depth? Most studies measure depth on how many words are recalled - but they also use this measure to test the effectiveness of semantic processing. This results in a circular definition.

Looking at why deeper processing aids recall: Many investigators believe that the key lies in memory connections, that link one memory to the next. At the time of recall, these connections serve as retrieval paths. Support for this idea comes from many sources, including the efficacy of mnemonics, techniques for improving memory. These mnemonics guide a person towards forming memory connections, and these connections can provicde dramatic improvement in memory. Some mnemonics, including the ancient method of loci, utilise imagery. However, imagery is effective in promoting memory only if the visualized items are imagined in some interaction -- linking the items to each other, just as one would expect if imagery is a means of promoting memory connections, and if it is the connections that improve recolleciton. (From Psychology - Gleitman, Fridlung & Reisberg)

Let me know if you want any more information.

Amorya

AS Psychology Association on Memory

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you