Effect Of Letter Rotation Angle And Learning Style On Response Times

In experiment 1, participants were instructed to press a key to determine if the stimulus was red, blue, yellow, or green. On the second half of the experiment, the stimulus appeared in grey with only one colored letter which was positioned randomly. Error rates for the experiment were below 2.5% for each condition, which is quite low. Experiment 2 was the same as experiment 1 except that there were 114 data collections instead of 288 and there were 36 practice trials instead of 72. According to experiment 1 and 2 it is suggested that the effect of

“Just as students have different personalities, they also have different ways of learing (Slavin, 107).” Learning styles are another important factor to incorporate when implementing the best learning environment. Learning styles are defined as an individual's mode of gaining knowledge. The most common learning styles addressed are auditory, visual, and kinesthetic. Auditory leaners understand information through hearing. Visual learners need more visual aids in the learning process, such as diagrams, webs, or pictures. Kinesthetic learners learn better by using manipulatives or by being physically involved in the learning process. Learning styles is a piece of the “backbone” of differentiated learning. Both are used to individualize instruction to help students achieve the most success.

Three hypotheses were being tested. The first hypotheses was whether global is faster than local. The second hypothesis was if letters are faster than shapes. Finally, the third hypotheses was based on ‘Interaction’ which investigates

In acknowledging the stated above we replicated a study developed by mead & Hampson (1996) involving the divided visual field paradigm and a phonological rhyme/non-rhyme task to test the speed and accurateness of either side of the brain.

When my student is writing and is decoding a word he visually knows what the word it supposed to look like and even if he incorrectly spells the word, the word seems to be visually similar to the correct spelling of the word. For example, in one of my students sample writings he wrote the word “crack” as “krak”. This was a phonetic misinterpretation, but he visually configured the word in which a reader could understand the word or expression he was trying to use in his narrative story. He also do not reverse letters or transpose letters , meaning that the letters have switched places such as writing “the” as “teh”. I have also observed that my student uses a lot of sight words in his writing samples which help to visually understand that some words such as “will” and “puddle” have two letters that repeat inside the

While Klein (2000)'s research did aim to recreate this phenomenon clearly, the current study differentiated its self by introducing the letters L and T as cues to which provided no information about the location of the target as the presentation. As presentation of a single cue meant it was four times more likely for a cue and a target to appear on the same side. The purpose of this variation was that a majority of previous studies had presented the facilitation effect and the IOR effect in a scenario where the cues were equally as

Shape is also processed in the Inferior Temporal Cortex, which leads me to believe that changing the shape of my words will increase the reaction times of my subjects. After all, if two things being processed is confusing, won’t three things create more confusion? But on the other hand, if the subjects can’t read the words that are shaped into a circle, it may be easier for them to say the incongruent ink color!

Certain factors, such as sequential biases and spatial restrictions, may also increase the probability of mirror-writing in children. Furthermore, childhood mirror-writing might originate from the generalization that almost all actions can be performed in reverse. In regards to adults, involuntary reversed writing is observed after a stroke, when a right-handed person is forced to write using the non-dominant hand. Studies have shown that even adults without any brain damage have demonstrated some reversal when requested to write with their left hand. This supports the motor hypothesis and suggests that mirror-writing results from the inability to modify a right-handed action for left-handed execution. Despite the proposed differences, another hypothesis associates child and adult mirror-writing through the idea of ‘directional apraxia'. Adults may lose the knowledge of direction in writing, which implies that the direction of action is stored separately than the action itself. According to this approach, reverse writing should affect the left hand for rightward scripts and vice

This also supports another point from the lecture. It is harder to confirm evidence but easier to eliminate alternative explanations (Psych 240 lecture, 9/07/16). Here, the researchers, based on their current results, could only infer that the top-down processing affects both target and distractor. There could be other speculations that propose alternate explanations for findings in the future. Currently, this research study has provided enough evidence to eliminate alternative explanations that the interactions are due to the change in category. The second experiment changed the font to show the distinct differences between S, 5 and O, 0 and the results demonstrated the effect of incongruency was significant in both letters and

moreover, for incongruent scores the “some college” group scored 1102.97, college grads 1253.03 milliseconds, high school grads 1306.03 milliseconds and lastly less than high school 1508,76 milliseconds. Although there is difference on scores and educational level, we didn’t see a difference in within the groups on reaction time. The group of “some college’ were faster in the congruent words by 203.9494 milliseconds, and the high school grads were faster by 234.5270 milliseconds, and the less than high school group by 263.2739 milliseconds, and the college grads by 265.2001 seconds when comparing it to incongruent words.

The revolutionary study by, Stroop (1935) used 5 different colors; purple, brown, green, blue, and red in a color-word naming task. Subjects had to say the color of the word while it was printed in different color ink. For example, the word “blue” would be written in the color red. They first did this using the colored words and then repeated the process with the words printed in black. They found that the colored word condition suggested a 2.3s longer reaction time than the black word condition. This is due to the inference of automatic word reading in the color word condition.

The image above shows how our eyes focus on the top half of the text. The top paragraph is very difficult to read but the bottom paragraph is still mostly legible even though the lower halves of the letters are covered. This is because the primary identification of each letter takes place using the top half of the letters, not the bottom. Similarly speaking, the right half of letters is more recognisable than the left half. Once we start to subconsciously recognize the shapes of common words and letters, we begin to read faster.

We are replicating J.R. Stroop’s original experiment The Stroop Effect (Stroop, 1935). The aim of the study was to understand how automatic processing interferes with attempts to attend to sensory information. The independent variable of our experiment was the three conditions, the congruent words, the incongruent words, and the colored squares, and the dependent variable was the time that it took participants to state the ink color of the list of words in each condition. We used repeated measures for the experiment in order to avoid influence of extraneous variables. The participants were 16-17 years of age from Garland High School. The participants will be timed on how long it takes them to say the color of the squares and the color of the words. The research was conducted in the Math Studies class. The participants were aged 16-17 and were students at Garland High School. The results showed that participants took the most time with the incongruent words.

Design and Stimuli. The experiment was run using a within-subject design, and consisted of 105 trial sessions. The experiment included seven different rotation angles, and for each level of a rotation variable (e.g. 0 degrees, 60 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees), 15 trials were presented. In each trial, participants were shown an original pair of three-dimensional figures. The task involved contrasting each pair of three-dimensional items, and then deciding whether the items were of a non-mirrored or mirrored orientation. The apparatus was set so that the left stimulus could be rotated, and that the size of the stimulus would equal 300 pixels. There was a 1000 millisecond delay before a stimulus was presented on screen for each trial, and the center of each stimulus was located 0.15 from the fixation stimulus on screen. The stimulus or rather the figure presented would remain on screen until participants responded by pressing ‘s’ for an identical item or ‘m’ for a mirror reflection.

The goal of this rendition of John Stroop’s classic Stroop Effect experiment is to obtain and demonstrate the reaction time needed to mentally process the tasks given (colors and words) under the two different conditions (congruent and incongruent). A prediction of the result was made using the speed of processing theory, which implies that different tasks are processed cognitively at different rates, showing the difference in processing rates (times) for relevant and irrelevant information to the tasks. In our rendition, the classic experiment was slightly altered to include incongruent and congruent information, as well as the basic words and names tasks. Using the speed of processing theory we were able to make a hypothesis in