The Effects of Memory Techniques on Word Recall

The assignment is a laboratory report on the effect of memory techniques on recalling words. The report requires two missing sections to be completed, including the title and abstract, as well as the discussion section where the study's results are evaluated in relation to the literature reviewed and potential future studies are considered.

[Please find below a template for the laboratory report to be submitted on Monday 8th January
2018 by 18:00 (6 pm). The report below is based on a study looking at the effect of memory
techniques on the ability to correctly recall words. Below you will find a partially completed
lab report with the methods, and results as well as the aims and hypotheses sections complete
for you. There are however, two sections missing, and it is these sections that we expect you
to complete in line with the teachings that we have provided you over the past few weeks in
the lectures and workshops. This template can be found in the ‘Coursework Information’ area
of the 250PY module on Moodle. Below you will find sections of the report already written
for you (in the blue Font colour), the sections in the black font colour are where we are
looking for you to add the missing details from your additional reading and critical
consideration of what the research is covering. Work your way through the black sections
replacing the text in black with the relevant details requested (please leave the font colour as
black, so we can see what you have added. Everything that is in black will count as part of
your word count. Once you have completed each section delete the notes which are in the
brackets and italics. Once you have completed the full report please delete this section].

Title [Give your research project a title, which clearly outlines what the study in the week
17 handout was looking to study. For quantitative reports the title needs to incorporate the
variables being studied, both the independent and dependent variables. Titles should not
usually exceed 12 words] (see slides 5 from the workshop 6 writing the 250PY report)

Abstract:
Outline of the study [your abstract is a summary of the 4 main sections of your research
report, you are recommended to complete this section last once you have completed the rest
of the report. The abstract needs to provide a clear but concise statement of the topic being
studied, and in quantitative research needs an outline of the hypothesis, a statement of what
is predicted. The abstract should also summarise key aspects of the methods for the study so
that the reader knows what was done. The abstract should then go on to summarise the
findings of the study, and finally a statement as to what the outcome of the study means in
terms of its implications. Please look at slide 7 the ‘Workshop 6 Writing the 250PY report’ in
the week 6 folder for details].

Title
Introduction (see slides 8-11 Introduction (Why you did it) section from the ‘workshop 6
writing the 250PY report’)

Aim and Hypothesis:
As sophisticated as memory is and as well as it serves us it is far from perfect, therefore, the
way that we encode information for retrieval and incorporate memory techniques is one way
in which we may be able to improve memory. The current research aimed to test as to
whether using the method of loci memorising technique enables for a better level of recall
compared to a standardised rehearsal of information memorising technique. An experimental
design was used to as to which technique was the most beneficial in the correct recall of a
series of words. Based on previous research literature (Kroneisen & Makerud 2017), it was
hypothesised that participants using the method of loci memorising strategy would recall
significantly more correct words than participants using a simple rehearsal strategy.

Methods
Design
A between-group experimental design was incorporated to study the effect of memory
technique (method of loci vs. standard rehearsal) on the ability to correctly recall words.
Participants were randomly allocated to either Condition A (method of loci) or Condition B
(standard rehearsal), where they were provided with instructions as to how they should
memorise a list of words. The study controlled for noise by requesting silence in the room
where memorisation and testing took part, additionally a scripted procedure ensured that data
collection was consistent for all researchers across the study.
Participants
Two hundred and twenty psychology students from Coventry University (UK) were recruited to
participate in the study using opportunity sampling. Students participated in exchange for course
credits. There were 176 females and 80 males (4 participants wished to withhold their gender) with a
mean age of 25.86 years (SD= 10.41) ranging from 18 to 56 years old. Ethical approval for this study
was granted by Faculty of Health Sciences at Coventry University.

Materials
Each condition had slightly different instructions in terms of the way that they should
memorise a list of 20 words given to them. Condition A (see Appendix C) requested that
participants use a method of loci technique
e.g. “The Method of Loci is a mental walk. As you imagine a journey from one
location to another you place any items you want to remember at specific
locations. The pairing of the items with a location should mean that when you
want to remember the items you simply retrace your mental steps.”.
Participants were also informed as to how they should recall the words on the list by retracing
their steps on the mental walk. In contrast Condition B (standard rehearsal; see Appendix D)
participants were given the instructions;
“I will shortly present you with the list of words, when I do just try to rehearse
and memorise as many as you can, do not try to use any specific strategies to
improve your memory. When I do give you the word list, please do not try to
write any of the words down”.
A list of 20 words was generated through the Paivio et al. Word list Generator through the
website http://www.datavis.ca/online/paivio/ which allows users to generate a list of words
with as many words as they wish, the generated list of 20 words controlled for variables of
syllables (2-4), number of letters (3-10), Kucera-Francis word frequency (1-100), imagery
rating (5-7), concreteness (5-7) and meaningfulness (5-7).

Procedure
Participants attended a PC suite where they were welcomed and met by the researcher who provided
them with participant information (Appendix A) as well as a consent form (Appendix B). Participants
willing to participate were asked if they were clear on the test they were to undertake, if unsure they
were provided with further instructions until happy to continue. Participants were sat down and given
time to make themselves comfortable before being provided with instructions as to how they should
memorise a list of 20 words that was about to be presented to them (Condition A or Condition B). All
participants were given 2 minutes to memorise as many of the words as possible. Researchers timed
the participant for 2 minutes and once time had passed the list of words was removed. Participants
were then presented with a recall sheet and requested to try their best to recall as many words as
possible in 4 minutes. Once the 4 minutes had passed the recall sheet was removed and participants
were thanked for their time and informed that they were free to go.

Results
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the correct recall scores for
participants in either the Method of Loci or standard rehearsal memory technique groups. All
assumptions for conducting an independent t-test were met. There was a significant
difference in mean scores for participants in the Method of Loci group (M = 16.04, SD=
3.39) and the standard rehearsal group (M= 14.60, SD= 3.26; t (218)= 3.22, p<.001).

Discussion
Your discussion section [your discussion section needs to do a number of key jobs; firstly
you need a clear statement as to whether you are going to accept or reject the alternative
hypothesis and subsequently reject or retain the null hypothesis as a consequence. Your
discussion should then go on to consider the study’s results in relation to the literature
reviewed at the beginning of the report, is it in agreement and does it support or is it
contradictory? Make clear to your reader as to how your findings relate to the literature, be
specific and relate specific parts of the literature covered in the introduction to your own
findings. Your discussion will then need to go on to critically evaluate the study design
(although this is a hypothetical study, you need to evaluate it as though it was real and was
yours). Discuss what any potential future studies would need to look at. You should then go
on to consider the implications and real world application of the study’s findings, if any, and
then finish with a conclusion. See slides 22-24 on the ‘Workshop 6 Writing the 250PY report’
]

References:
Kroneisen, M., & Makerud, S. E. (2017). The effects of item material on encoding strategies:
Survival processing compared to the method of loci. The Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 70(9), 1824-1836. doi:10.1080/17470218.2016.1209533