baddeley 1966b

• What was the aim of the study?


  To investigate the influence of acoustic and semantic memory word similarity on learning and recall in LTM.
• What type of experiment was it?


  A lab experiment was designed to test sequential recall of acoustically and semantically similar word lists and it was an independent groups design.
• How many lists were used in experiment 3?


  List A = 10 acoustically similar words e.g. Man, can, cat, map...

  
  

  List B = 10 acoustically dissimilar words that were match in terms of frequency of everyday use to list A (pit, few, cow, mat etc)

  
  

  List C = contained 10 semantically similar words (great, large, big, broad, etc)

  
  

  List D = contained 10 semantically dissimilar words that were matched in terms of frequency of everyday use to list C (good, huge, deep, late)
• What was the role of lists B and D?

  They acted as baseline control groups for list A and C
• How many participants were in the study and where were they recruited from?


  There were 72 participants, men and women, who were recruited from the Applied psychology research unit.
• How were the lists presented?


  Each list of 10 words was presented via projected at a rate of 1 word for every 3 seconds in the correct order.
• What happened after they had seen the lists with the projecter?


  Pps were required to complete six 8 digit sequence recall tasks to block the effect of STM.
• What did they have to do with the list of words?

  They had to recall the word list in 1 minute by writing down the sequence in the correct order.
• Was the test to see if they could learn the words?

  No, it was so they could test the sequence order, the word list in random order was made visible on a card in the room
• How many times was this repeated?

  It was repeated over 4 learning trials.
• What happened at the end of the trials?


  The groups were given a 15 minute interference task involving coping eight digit sequences at their own pace they they were given a surprise retest on the word list sequence.
• What were the results of the test?


  Recall in the acoustically similar condition (list A) and the acoustically dissimilar control list (list B) were very similar, including at the retest.

  
  

  In LTM, acoustic similarity did mot affect the recall of the word order.

  
  

  REcall in the semantically similar list condition (list C) was much worse than in the semantically dissimilar words control condition (list D).

  
  

  Semantic similarity affected recall in the LTM.
• What were the conclusions of the study?


  LTM is affect by semantic similarity but not acoustic similarity.

  
  

  The results showed that LTM learning was affected by the meaning of the words more than if the words sounded alike.

  
  

  This is evidence that LTM uses largely semantic encoding unlike short term memory that uses acoustic.

  
  

  Also shows that encoding in the STM is different from Encoding in the LTM.
• Name three strengths of the study?


  The study was high in reliability as it was conducted in a controlled lab environment using a set of standardised instructions. (Same amount of words for each list and presented at the same rate of 1 word per 3 seconds) This means that the study can be regarded as replicable and if repeated there would be consistent results.

  
  

  There is high internal validity as cause and effect can be established between the IV and the DV due to the highly controlled nature of the experiment. (Following the four trials Baddeley used a 15 minute interference task and surprise retest to measure the recall of the short term memory.

  
  

  Baddeley's study has positive contributions and applications so society. Knowing how memory works can help people with dementia. STM can be improved by using sound and rehearsal and LTM can be improved by attaching meaning.
• Name three weaknesses of the study?


  The study has low ecological validity as it was conducted in a lab setting using artificial tasks. Its not the typical way in which we use memory in an every day context and we do not often learn lists of random monosyllabic word therefore the ability to generalise Baddeley's findings to every day memory contexts such as learning in schools can be questioned.

  
  

  There is opposing evidence for Baddeley (1966b) from Frost (1972) and Nelson and Rothbart (1972). Frost showed that LT recalled was related to visual as well as semantic encoding. Nelson and Rothbart found evidence of acoustic encoding LTM.

  
  

  The study is reductionist in that it simplifies memory to the recall of a list of words. A most holistic approach to study memory might be less scientific but more valid and applicable to the use of memory in every day life.
• What study is this?


  The Cognitive classic study ;)