Monday, October 14, 2019
An Investigation into the Effect of Organisation on Memory
An Investigation into the Effect of Organisation on Memory    Research Previous research has been done by other psychologists into the affect of organisation on memory. In 1953 Bousfield asked participants to try and learn 60 words  consisting of 4 categories, (animals, peoples names, professions and  vegetables) with 15 examples of each all mixed up. Bousfield found  that when participants free recalled (recalled in any order) they  tended to cluster similar items, Eg; if someone recalled onion it  was very likely that other vegetables followed. Although participants  had not been told of the categories, the fact they recalled in  clusters suggested that they had tried to organise the data. Bousfield  called this trend categorical clustering.  Another study took place in 1967 by Mandler, where subjects were given  lists of random words and asked to sort them into a given number of  categories (between 2 and 7). Once sorted the participants were asked  to recall as many of the words as possible. The results showed that  recall was poorest for those who used 2 categories and increased  steadily by about 4 words per extra category. Those with 7 categories  recalled approximately 20 more words than those who used 2. Mandler  argued that the great number of categories used, the greater amount of  organisation was imposed on the list.  However my particular study is inspired and based on a later one by  Bowers et al in 1969, in which data wads organised by conceptual  hierarchy. In this study participants were required to learn a list of  words which were arranged in a hierarchical structure. See appendix 1.  The participants studied were split into 2 groups, on group were given  the list in the correct hierarchical form, the other group were given  the same words in a similar structure however the words were mixed up.  Short-term memory is believed to have a capacity of 7à ±2 chunks of  information, which can remain there for approximately 20 seconds  without rehearsal.  Chunking is a process that apparently increases the capacity of  short-term memory by relating and combining the incoming information  to knowledge that we already possess in long term memory. In chunking  we organise information giving it a structure and meaning tit did not  already have, so although we can only recall around 7 chunks a  meaningful chunk can be very large  Rationale  =========  The results of Bowers study showed that the list organised by  conceptual hierarchical order did indeed promote a higher recall of  words than the list arranged in a random order. The organised list  proved to have an average of 65% words recalled correctly whereas the  disorganised list only recalled an average of 19% correctly.  My study is based on the above conceptual hierarchy model. My model  will mimic Bowers by having a main heading which splits into several  subheadings in a hierarchical form, these headings will then have a  list of appropriate words underneath.  However, as Bower used the theme of minerals, splitting into  categories such as alloys and metals etc. I am going to use the  general theme of food splitting in fruits, salads and vegetables.  Aim  ===  The aim is to investigate the affect of organisation on memory by  finding out if people remember more words from an organised list than  they do from a disorganised list of words.  Hypothesis  ==========  As there has been previous research into the affects of organisation  on memory I will do a 1 tailed hypothesis.  à ¨ People will remember more words from an organised list of words than  from a disorganised,  Null hypothesis  ===============  à ¨ There will be no difference between the number of words recalled  from the organised list compared with the disorganised list. Any  difference will be due to chance.  Method    Design  ======  For this type of study into memory I will use an experimental method  in the style of a laboratory experiment because I feel it is the most  suitable method. It allows the precise control of variables and  enables it to be replicated easily.  It is the aim of this study to find out which variables are  responsible for affecting memory. Its is only by the experimental  method we can alter and control these variables.  The design will be independent measures, which means that it consists  of 2 groups of different individuals  Therefore it is an independent measures design because we will  obviously need 2 separate groups of individuals  those who do the  organised list and those who do the disorganised.  The task takes place in the recreational centre in the college. This  is in the participants own settings rather than in a laboratory. This  should reduce the stress and pressure of the situation and promote  natural behaviour.  Variables  =========  The variables are controlled  whether the participant is given the  organised list or the disorganised list to memorize.  à ¨ Independent variable  The independent variable is the factor which I have manipulated and  controlled. In this case it is whether the list of words is organized  into categories or whether it is disorganized.  à ¨ Dependant variable  The dependant variable is what is affected by the independent  variable, it is also measurable. This is how successfully people  remember. I can measure the dependent variable by recording how many  words are recalled.  *The two lists contain the same words, Universal words were chosen for  the lists so that no one would have any expertise or advantage  over anyone else. The theme of food is a universal topic that  everyone has certain degree of knowledge about, less obvious  everyday foods were also used to prevent people simply guessing at  common foods.  Sample and Participants  =======================  In order to conduct my research I will need some people to study. The  participants used are called a sample. The type of sample I have  chosen to use is called an opportunity sample. This means that I will  use anyone that is available at the time the experiment is conducted  providing they are over the age of 16.  I chose this method because it is the most convenient; I will study a  total of 40 people. 20 will do the organised list (consisting of 10  male and 10 female) and the other 20 will do the disorgansied list  (also consisting of 10 male and 10 female). The participants will all  be students of Stafford College, therefore should be of similar ages  and social background.  Apparatus  =========  à ¨ Organized list  Appendix 2  à ¨ Disorganized list  Appendix 3  à ¨ Blank paper  à ¨ Pen  à ¨ Stopwatch  Ethics  ======  à ¨ Participants must be over 16 years of age.  à ¨ Participants should give informed consent to take part.  à ¨ Confidentiality is of the utmost importance  no names will be  recorded  à ¨ Subjects are free to withdrawn from the study at any point, even  after it has been completed they can request their results are not  used.  à ¨ To avoid any psychological harm or damage to self-esteem,  participants should be praised and thanked for taking part.  à ¨ Subjects will be fully debriefed to the true nature of the study  after completion.  Procedure  =========  The study is carried out in the recreational area of a college. Myself  and my fellow researcher will approach students and by following the  standard instructions (Appendix 4) will ask them if they would mind  participating in the study. If they agree then they will be provided  with either an organised list or a disorganised list of words to  memorise.  The participants are given 2 minutes to study the list of words, this  is then taken off them and another 2 minutes is given for them to free  recall and write down as many words as they can remember on a blank  piece of paper.  When this time is up each participant is fully debriefed. Each  potential participant is approached addressed  debriefed the same way  using the prepared standardized instructions (appendix 4)  This is so that what I say to each person doesnt have an influence on  their behaviour or their ability to recall data.  Controls  All variables excluding the independent variable must be controlled  and kept consistent for each participant. This will ensure the results  obtained are as accurate and reliable as possible.  à ¨ Each participant is given the same duration to memorize and recall  the data, namely 2 minutes  à ¨ The task will be carried out in the recreational area of the college  for each participant.  à ¨ The researcher will communicate with the participant using the  prepared standardized instructions so all participants are treated the  same.  à ¨ Each participant will be debriefed and thanked in the same manner  using the standardized instructions.  Table of Results  -  The tables below show the number of words recalled by each participant  for both the organized and disorganized list.  Organized List  Disorganized List  Participant No.  Words recalled  Participant No.  Words recalled  1  16  1  6  2  16  2  6  3  17  3  7  4  14  4  7  5  17  5  5  6  15  6  6  7  14  7  6  8  16  8  5  9  15  9  6  10  16  10  7  11  16  11  6  12  12  12  5  13  15  13  6  14  16  14  4  15  14  15  5  16  17  16  7  17  14  17  6  18  13  18  7  19  18  19  7  20  16  20  6  Measures of Central Tendency  -  Organized List  Disorganized List  Mean  15.35  6  Median  16  6  Mode  16  6  Range  6  3  15.35  à ¾Ã ¾ = 0.697 * 100 70% is the average number of words recalled from  the organized list.  22  6  à ¾Ã ¾ = 0.272 * 100 27% is the average number of words recalled from  the disorganized list.  22  Results Analysis  The results displayed in the table clearly show that when words are  arranged in an organized structure it does improve memory and the  ability to store and recall information.  The average number of words recalled from the organized list is 15.35,  thats 70% of all the words recalled. Whereas the list arranged in a  random order only recalled an average of 6 words, thats only 27% of  the total words recalled.  These figures show what an obvious effect organization imposes on  memory. It seems to apparently increase memory capacity.  Short-term memory has a limited capacity of approximately 7à ± 2 slots  of information. This is supported by the fact that an average of 6  words were recalled from the disorganized list.  However an average of 15 words were recalled from the disorganized  list, this is much more data than can be stored in short term memory.  This is evidence that a process called chunking took place. Chunking  is a process which involves relating and combining information to  knowledge already stored in long term memory. This apparently  increases the capacity of short term memory by giving data a structure  and meaning it did not already process therefore increasing the size  of a meaningful chunk. So although we only have the ability to store 7à ±  2 slots of information in STM, A slot can be very large.  In the case of the organized list, chunking would most likely occur by  relating and combining the information into the already structured  groups of salads, fruits and vegetables.  From the results I have obtained I can confidently conclude that my  hypothesis can be accepted that a greater number of words are indeed  recalled from an organized list compared with the same list of words  in a random order.  I can therefore reject my null hypothesis that the results produced  were not due to chance but due to the structure that organization  imposes.  Discussion  -  à ¨ Implications of the study  My results support the hypothesis that people do indeed recall more  words from an organized list than from a disorganized list. The  average number of words recalled from the organized list was 15.35  compared to just 6 from the disorganized list, so this is clearly  true.  My study was based on a previous study by Bowers in 1969; The results  I produced are comparable to those obtained by Bowers.  Table comparing the result of my study and Bowers study  My Study  Bowers Study  Average words recalled  % of Words  Average words recalled  % of Words  Organized  16.35  70%  16.9  65%  Disorganized  6  27%  4.94  19%  The results are quite similar although my results have a higher  percentage of words recalled for both the organized and disorganized  list compared to Bowers results, however it must be taken into account  that more words were involved in Bowers list:  26 compared to the 22  words used on my list. This will have an affect on memory as the  participant is challenged to remember more words. Also different  themes were used, Bower used that of minerals  Whereas mine involved food. This could affect the ability to recall  especially if some of Bowers participants had more specialized  knowledge then others, the same can be said for the theme of food.  With these factors in mind, on the whole my results are similar to  those obtained by Bowers.  à ¨ Validity  The study does show that organisation can aid how effectively we  remember data and can be regarded as accurate and reliable. However  the experimental method that was used lacks in ecological validity.  Although the study took place in a recreational area, so therefore in  the participants own settings, it is not however a natural everyday  scenario to need to remember words in this manner, it is an artificial  situation. Apart from these factors I did attempt to make the test as  valid as possible. For example I tried to use everyday universal words  that people would be familiar with and no one would have any  particular advantage or knowledge over anyone else. Also I tried to  make the variables as clear as possible because variables can affect  peoples memory ie.  Whether they are given the organised or  disorganised list, However it is crucial that they werent told what  the list is as itd give the participant some insight into the true  nature of the experiment and give them an advantage. Overall, I think  that my study is a good representation of the affect organisation has  on memory.  à ¨ Improving Validity  To improve the validity of this research it needs to be performed in a  more realistic scenario, an idea f this would be to change the method  to make it more valid. I could do this by doing my research in the  form of exam revision so it would be more like a field experiment. I  could do this by creating a situation in which 2 groups are given one  week to study for a small test. One group is encouraged to revise  using an organised method, structured into categories and subheadings,  whereas the other group are left to their own methods.  Another idea is to use the same method used by Rubin and Olsen. They  tried to create a valid test by asking university students to recall  professor and they subjects they taught by giving one group an  organised list to study and the other a list in random order.  à ¨ Reliability  I used the experimental method in the style of a laboratory  experiment. This method is usually very reliable and accurate as it  allows manipulation and full control over the variables (i.e. Whether  the participant is given the organized or disorganized list) I can be  fairly sure that if I repeated my research I would get very similar  results to what I have obtained.  I had strict controls and kept factors constant, such as time to  memorize and recall, this should ensure that results recorded are  accurate. I also used a set of standardized instructions and procedure  which I followed when asking a student to participate, this was to  make sure that what I said to each person didnt have any effect on  their ability to recall words. However, the sampling method used  called opportunity sampling can be seen as biased because the  researcher chooses who to take part and who doesnt.  à ¨ Improving Reliability  To improve reliability I could have used the sampling technique of  matched groups. This consists of 2 groups of people which are  matched by age gender background etc. i.e.  for every person there is  someone to match them in the opposite group,  Also I could use a wider range of participants of different ages and  people from different parts of the country (they would still need to  be matched for the other group)  Also I could test a larger number of people than 20 per list.  à ¨ Generalization of Findings  A generalization could be made from my results that organization does  indeed prove to increase the capacity of memory and the ability to  recall. However it needs to be taken into account that the study was  conducted in one small area and participants were all students of  similar age and social background, so it can be argued that it is  unreasonable and inaccurate to generalize and apply the results to  everyone. For example, it would not be reasonable to apply the results  of a small select group of young adults to the older generation.  The study on the whole was not a natural scenario so it isnt  reasonable to conclude that it is how people would behave in real  life.  à ¨ Application to Everyday Life  This study could be applied to help people in everyday life. Some  ideas of how it could be used is to aid in exam revision for example,  by revising from notes arranged in an organised manner should organize  the date in the brain and promote better recall in exams and therefore  better exam results.  Another idea is that it could help people with learning difficulties,  if they learn from material arranged in an organized and structured  format using subheadings etc it will give it a structure and meaning  it did not already have and it should be easier to learn and store the  information.    
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment