This research tests the memory theories of levels of processing proposed by Craik and Lockhart (1972) and encoding specificity presented by Wiseman and Tulving (1976). Craik and Lockhart (1972) assert that stimuli that are semantically related are encoded more deeply than stimuli that are related physically. Wiseman and Tulving (1976) state that encoded information must be retrieved in the same way in which it was encoded. These two theories come together in the current experiment where the subjects rate the relatedness of word pairs on either rhyming or categorization. Then the subjects complete a free recall or cued recall from the word list. It is hypothesized that the category encoded words will be easier to retrieve in both the cued and free recalls and that the congruently encoded and retrieved words (e.g., category encode and category recall) will be easier to retrieve. The results affirm the hypotheses resulting in a significant interaction between encoding and retrieval, and a significant difference between the means for the category and rhyming words.
Keywords: levels of processing, encoding specificity, rhyming, category Levels of Processing and Encoding Specificity
Craik and Lockhart’s (1972) levels of processing model introduces a shallow and deep processing system as a route to which information enters into long term memory. “Specifically, we suggest that trace persistence is a function of depth of analysis, with deeper levels of analysis associated with more elaborate, longer lasting, and stronger traces” (Craik and Lockhart, 1972, p.675). Shallow processing would be the physical characteristics of a stimulus, deep processing would be semantic characteristics of a stimulus. Craik and Lockhart (1972) argue that se...
... middle of paper ...
...eived auditory instructions for both conditions, which may have resulted in confusion during the experiment. A more controlled environment with separate testing environments for the subjects in each condition would ensure no confusion regarding instructions.
This research may be expanded to look at the impact of different types of stimuli on memory encoding and retrieval. Visual or pictorial stimuli could be replaced by word stimuli to observe the differences in memory performance of word versus pictorial stimuli. An expansion of the research could also include colored words as a way to relate the word pairs to discover the impacts of colored stimuli on memory. An experiment could be constructed to measure the relation of rhyming words and random word pairs written in the same color. This research may expand the current knowledge of memory encoding and retrieval.
Over the years, memory have been researched and debated, however there are two theories that have explained extensively and are highly recognised by psychologist in the cognitive field of psychology and scientist alike, on how we process experiences and turn them into memories. These theories include the Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) Multi-store Model of Memory and Baddeley and Hitch (1974) Phonological Loop Model of Memory. This essay aims to compare, contrast and evaluate these models of memory, with supporting evidence and empirical research.
Human memory is flexible and prone to suggestion. “Human memory, while remarkable in many ways, does not operate like a video camera” (Walker, 2013). In fact, human memory is quite the opposite of a video camera; it can be greatly influenced and even often distorted by interactions with its surroundings (Walker, 2013). Memory is separated into three different phases. The first phase is acquisition, which is when information is first entered into memory or the perception of an event (Samaha, 2011). The next phase is retention. Retention is the process of storing information during the period of time between the event and the recollection of a piece of information from that event (Samaha, 2011). The last stage is retrieval. Retrieval is recalling stored information about an event with the purpose of making an identification of a person in that event (Samaha, 2011).
There are different levels of information processing, this is called the levels of processing theory (Goldstein, 2008). This theory was proposed by Fergus M Craik, a senior research scientist at the Rotman Research Institute of Baycrest and Robert S. Lockhart, a professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of To...
Mulligan, N. W., & Picklesimer, M. (2012). Levels of processing and the cue-dependent nature of recollection. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1), 79-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.10.001
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80(5), 352–373. doi:10.1037/h0020071
Do you ever wonder how our brains can remember so many things? Our minds are a lot like computers “we can draw on our past experiences in order to use this information in the present” (Sternberg, 1999). “Memory is a group of related mental processes that are involved inacquiring, storing, and retrieving information” (Psychology, page 228). “We have 3 main stages of memory our sensory memory, short- term memory, and long term memory.” I will be stating some interesting facts about each one. Beginning with our sensory memory, one of the facts I found from the book was that “The very brief time information is held in our sensory memory you “select,” or pay attention to, just a few aspects of all the environmental information that’sbeing registered
ability to recall (Kassam et al., 2009) thus resulting in a deeper encoding of the
McNamara, T. P. and Holbrook, J. B. 2003. Semantic Memory and Priming. Handbook of Psychology. 445–474.
In the long term memory the info learned becomes more and more abstract with time. The language arrived to a conceptual memory, the visual memory arrived to an analogic memory: visual- spatial but in fact an info is encoded with the two means: verbal and visual (a picture is named). These two codes are very complementary; visual codes are good for global spatial info but bad for a sequential order and verbal codes are good for the order of encode and analyze.
Furthermore this article expands upon this subcategory of memory by describing the two types of tasks involved with it: verbal-production ta...
Craik and Tulving did a series of experiments on the depth of processing model. They had participants use a series of processing methods to encode words at different levels; shallow, moderate, and deep. The subjects were shown a series of words and ask questions about the words that would provide a "yes" or "no" response. At the shallow level they were asked questions about whether or not the word was written in capital letters. At the moderate level of processing, the subject was asked questions as to whether or not two words rhymed. Finally, the subjects were asked about words in sentences and whether or not they fit. This was the deep level of processing. After participants had completed the task they were then given a surprise recognition test with the words that they were just asked questions on (target words) and then words that they have never seen before (distraction words). The results of the experiment showed that people remembered the words better that were at deeper level of processing (Craik and Tulving 1975).
Roediger, H. L. III, & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803-814
There were 32 (22 female and 10 male) participants in this word recall experiment. Participants were of traditional and nontraditional college-age. The participants were from various academic majors; however, all participants were currently enrolled in one of three sections of an experimental psychology course. All of the experimental psychology students taking part in this experiment had previously completed a course in general psychology and psychological statistics earning a grade of “C” or better. The participants took part in the experiment as a learning experience for the class.
Atkinson, R.C. & Shiffrin, R.M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control process.
Tulving, E. and Craik, F. (2000) The Oxford handbook of memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.