PI: 1

• Context dependant memory:

  • previous research - Aggleton & Waskett (1999), Jorvik viking museum in york. determined the extent to which re-exposure to unique combination of odours present in museum
• Hypothesis -

  • IV = music v no music
  • DV = number of objects correctly recalled
  • directional hypothesis - there will be higher objects correctly recalled when tested with music than those tested without music
  • null hypothesis - no significant difference in number objects correctly recalled between those tested with or without and any difference is due to chance
• variables -

  • confounding : age, IQ, genre of music
  • extraneous : background noise, lyrics or not, time of day
  • pilot study - before; images showed for 30 secs, 20 secs for recall, 12 objects and no break between images shown and time for recall
  • pilot study - after; images shown for 20 secs, 20 secs recall, 12 items and no break in between
• Methodology :

  • lab experiment - done in controlled conditions, need the equipment (computer, smart board)
  • experimental design - independent groups (VI Form students), + quicker and easier as is less time consuming than matched pairs as isn't ethical test IQ to match students, - participant variables as may be differences which affect the results EG most of the group have higher IQ
• Sampling :

  • opportunity sampling - as is students in the VI Form who are willing and available at the time
  • + less time consuming compared to other methods such as systematic as don't need list of target population
  • -researcher bias as select people they think will take part ( may pick friends )
• Procedures:

  • same volume of music for everyone
  • 12 images, same image size shown to everyone, same position
  • music without lyrics to minimise distractions
  • 20 secs to memorise images
  • 20 secs to recall, with no break in between
  • everyday objects so not to surprise people or cause distress
• Methodology:

  • given a consent form to inform them that they have right to withdraw and gain informed valid consent (standardised instructions)
  • each student was randomly allocated to wither group A (with music) or B (without music), decided by putting 25 pieces of paper with group A and another 25 pieces with group B, paper wasn't put back into the tub
  • done in quiet, empty classroom to control for extraneous variables such as background noise
  • recalled objects were written on piece of paper and answers remained anonymous as name wasn't written on paper
  • gave a debrief at the end
• Ethics:

  • confidentiality - all data remained anonymous as only the scores were kept and the assigned number
  • risk of stress/anxiety or humiliation - p's maybe embarassed if their score is low but in the debrief were reassured and also informed of right to withdraw
  • valid informed consent - signed the consent form and were informed of aims and procedures
  • vulnerable participants - all p's were were over 16
• Results;

  • graphical representation = bar graph/ pie chart
• Reliability:

  • to assess the reliability - repeat experiment to test external reliability to check for consistency over time
  • internal reliability - use of standardised procedures and instructions means it cam be replicated easily
• Validity:

  • music with lyrics as can be a distraction to combat this we use the same pictures, same images and same sizes
  • use of pilot study allows changes to be made to make changes/modifications to the study
• Weaknesses:

  • background noise - in our study there was a music thing taking place at the same time and can cause differences in results and to improve this the use of a music room that is sound proof or a lab could minimise the effects of background noise
  • not done at same time of day - make sure to start the study at the same time of day either all done in the morning or do it in the evening
• Aims :

  • investigate whether there's difference in memory of recalling objects when learning objects with the context of music compared to different context (without music)
• descriptive statistics

  • mean as are fully representative as use all of the data gathered
• Inferential statistics:

  • ordinal - scores of words correctly recalled
  • difference - between group A with music and group B recall without music
  • independent groups - groups had different recall conditions (music or no music)
  • = mann whitney u
  • reject alternative hypothesis because observed value is 183.5 and critical value 175