PSY 375 Module Four Lab Worksheet Template

docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

375

Subject

Psychology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by PrivateOyster3400

PSY 375 Module Four Lab Worksheet Template Complete this template by replacing the bracketed text with the relevant information. All responses to lab questions should be in your own words or paraphrased. Encoding Specificity Lab Data ● Insert your data in the table below. Study/Test Cue* Proportion Correct Weak/Weak 0.667 Weak/Strong 0.833 Strong/Weak 0.583 Strong/Strong 0.917 Lure 0.708 *Strong and Weak refer to the extent to which cue and target are related in meaning. Weak/Weak and Strong/Strong designate conditions where the cues, used at study and test, were the same. Weak/Strong and Strong/Weak designate conditions where the cues, used at study and test, were different. 1

● Insert a screenshot of the lab output below. Lab Questions ● Do your results support the encoding specificity hypothesis? Why or why not? Note: Consider what led to the best results—having strong semantic associations between cue and target, or matching cues at encoding and test? The encoding specificity hypothesis was supported by my results. The accuracy rate was higher when the cue used during encoding matched the cue used during the test, aligning with information found in the textbook. My findings revealed that performing better occurred when the conditions for encoding and test were the same or when the cue used was the same. It was hypothesized that having the same cue during encoding and retrieval would lead to improved recognition of the target, as the connections between strong cues would enhance retrieval accuracy. This is consistent with the data presented in the above chart, where better memory recall was observed when the test cue was effective, supporting my initial hypothesis. ● Describe a real or hypothetical example of a situation that demonstrates encoding specificity. Ensure that your example is original and not from course materials. I was a student who was studying for an upcoming history exam. I decide to study in my bedroom, where I typically relax and watch movies. Since my parents were distracting. As I study, I have my phone nearby and occasionally check social media notifications, causing distractions. I know I shouldn’t. When the exam day arrives, I suddenly realize that I cannot recall specific historical events that I studied diligently. However, when I come across questions related to government policies, I remember some vivid details from my study session. It turns out that I had watched a documentary on the same topic as one of the exam questions while relaxing in my bedroom a few weeks ago. I can see that the encoding specificity principle has come into play here. The context and distractions present during my 2

studying, which took place in my bedroom, played a crucial role in my later retrieval during the exam. The distractions and association with relaxation in my bedroom became linked to the study material, causing a specific association that improved my memory recall for governmental policies. However, the lack of recall for other historical events suggests that the encoding specificity effect did not extend to those topics. Levels of Processing Lab Data ● Insert your data in the table below. Condition/Task Proportion Correct Letter/Encoding 1.000 Rhyme/Encoding 1.000 Semantic/Encoding 0.800 Letter/Test 0.250 Rhyme/Test 0.450 Semantic/Test 1.000 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Condition/Task Proportion Correct Lure/Test 0.683 ● Insert a screenshot of the lab output below. Lab Questions ● Do your results support the levels of processing theory? Why or why not? Focus on how well you did in the test condition (relative to how you encoded) to answer this question. The results of my research support the stages of processing theory. In the experimentation phase, my analysis revealed that semantic processing outperformed both shallow and medium memory storage. This outcome was predicted, as individuals are known to utilize semantic information to facilitate recall. ● What is meant by deep processing ? How might you use this to improve memory in a real-world scenario? Describe a unique example. Be creative! Deep processing is a cognitive process that involves encoding information in a meaningful and elaborate way, allowing for better memory retention and recall. It goes beyond superficial processing, such as focusing on the physical attributes of information, and instead, involves making connections and relating new information to existing knowledge or personal experiences. I could use deep 4

processing to improve my memory by employing a unique example of creating associations. Let's say I have to remember a long list of scientific terms for my biology test. Instead of mindlessly repeating the terms or simply reading them on flashcards, I could create a memorable story connecting all the terms in a meaningful way. I might imagine myself taking a journey through a fantastical forest where the trees represent different topics within biology. As I explore the forest, I encounter various creatures that embody the scientific terms. For example, the word "photosynthesis" could be represented by a playful creature named "Fotosyn," who gobbles up sunlight and fried eggs with it. By visualizing this story and associating each term with a unique character or event, I engage my imagination, emotions, and creativity, effectively deepening the processing of the information. By employing deep processing techniques and incorporating our imaginations, we can bring life to mundane information, making it more memorable and enjoyable. During the labs I remembered more of the words that had to do with food because I love to cook. 5

False Memory Lab Data ● Insert your data in the table below. Type of Item Percent Recognized Original List Item 78.571 Unrelated Lure (not in list) 2.083 Related Lure (not in list) 100.000 ● Insert a screenshot of the lab output below. 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Lab Questions ● Did your results conform to those predicted for this lab? Why or why not? The findings of this lab did not provide direct support for the encoding notion. Upon examining the cue words, I quickly realized that there was no need to focus on them since I only needed to remember the target phrases. This likely played a significant role in my discoveries. I mistakenly believed that the cue-target combination in the second phase was identical to that presented in the first phase. The encoding specificity hypothesis suggests that the qualities of the encoded event and the features of the retrieval information interact with each other. Therefore, the hypothesis stated that if the cue used during both encoding and retrieval was the same, I would have a more precise recall of the target words. ● How did this study set participants up to experience false memory? Deese, Roediger, and McDermott also found people can be confident in their selection of the false memory item. Why do you think that is? Your answer will be graded based on the depth of your thinking. Participants are placed in situations where they may develop false memories due to the presence of words on a list that are related to a specific word, but do not actually include that word. These closely related words are easy to connect to other concepts, leading individuals to wrongly remember the target word as if it was included in the list. This demonstrates how simple it is for someone to have a false memory. Personally, I felt more certain about selecting the lure questions because they were the only part of the test that did not confuse me. It felt effortless and I quickly recalled the associated words. The activation of semantically related ideas during the memory encoding phase can create a sense of familiarity and enhance confidence in the false memory. 7

Module Question ● Compare and contrast levels of processing with encoding specificity. Describe a difference and a similarity. Levels of processing and encoding specificity are both theories that explain how information is stored and retrieved in memory. One difference between levels of processing and encoding specificity is the focus of each theory. Levels of processing theory suggests that memory depends on the depth of processing that occurs during encoding. It suggests that deeper processing, involving a more meaningful analysis of information, leads to better memory retention. In contrast, encoding specificity theory focuses on the match between the external cues present during encoding and the cues available at retrieval. It suggests that retrieval is more successful when the cues present at encoding and retrieval are similar (Olson, 1980). A similarity between levels of processing and encoding specificity is that they both recognize the importance of context in memory retrieval. Levels of processing theory acknowledges that the context in which information is encoded and retrieved affects memory performance. Encoding specificity theory emphasizes the significance of the match between the encoding and retrieval contexts in determining successful retrieval. Both theories recognize that memory is influenced by the specific circumstances surrounding encoding and retrieval. Olson, J. C. (1980). Encoding Processes: levels of processing and existing knowledge structures1 . ACR. https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/9667 Goldstein, E. B. (2019). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience, (5th Ed.). Cengage 8

Related Documents

PSY 355 Project One Template.docx

PSY 375 Module Two Lab Worksheet Template.docx

PSY 375 Module Five Lab Worksheet Template.docx

PSY 355 Module Five Milestone Template.docx

PSY 375 Module Six Lab Worksheet Template.docx

Psy205 Final.docx

PSY205 1-4 Short Paper.docx

PSY 375 Project Two Milestone Template.docx

PSY 355 4-2 Journal .docx

PSY 375 Project One Milestone Template.docx

PSY 355 Activity Journal.docx

PSY 375 Project Two Template.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780134477961

Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White

Publisher:PEARSON

Cognitive Psychology

Psychology

ISBN:9781337408271

Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.

Publisher:Cengage Learning,

Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...

Psychology

ISBN:9781337565691

Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780393265156

Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga

Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company

Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...

Psychology

ISBN:9781285763880

Author:E. Bruce Goldstein

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)

Psychology

ISBN:9781305652958

Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz

Publisher:Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780134477961
Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Publisher:PEARSON
Cognitive Psychology
Psychology
ISBN:9781337408271
Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.
Publisher:Cengage Learning,
Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...
Psychology
ISBN:9781337565691
Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780393265156
Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga
Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company
Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...
Psychology
ISBN:9781285763880
Author:E. Bruce Goldstein
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)
Psychology
ISBN:9781305652958
Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz
Publisher:Cengage Learning