Experiment 1
Experiment 1 is a partial-conceptual replication of Collins and Quillian’s (1969) study on the hierarchy network model for the organization of semantic memory. The purpose of experiment 1 was to test Collins and Quillian’s hypothesis stating that response time for category searching should be slower as a function of an increasing number of levels separating a category subject and it’s predicate term on the semantic hierarchy model. We use the same basic procedure as Collins and Quillian’s experiment, except that we utilize a single category for predicate terms as opposed to multiple categories at level 2 of the semantic hierarchy model.
Method
Participants and Apparatus. 23 NYU students, taking lab in human cognition, received course credit for their participation in the experiment. The experiment was administered on standard PC’s or Macintosh computers over a single class period.
Design and Stimuli. The experiment was run using a within-subject design, and consisted of one independent variable. The independent variable is the number of levels in the hierarchy separating the subject and predicate terms. There are three levels of the independent variable – 0 levels of separation, 1 level of separation, and 2 levels of separation. The type of sentence stimulus presented to subjects, whether it was defined by a “property” or a “superset”, was an additional factor taken into account when analyzing the data. Stimuli consisted of 144 TRUE and FALSE sentences
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
Low levels of processing include operations like counting the letters in words and higher levels of processing might include forming semantic relationships such as understanding what the words’ meaning is. According to Craig and Lockhart who formulated this theory memory recall would improve as the information is processed in greater depth. However it has been hard to define exactly what depth is and it has been found that there are other factors that make people remember things. (Zachmeister, E.B., Nyberg 1982)
Attention is thought to be selective-focused on one subject at a time. Traditionally, it has been assumed that automatic processing is involuntary, it does not require attention, and is relatively fast; whereas, controlled processing is voluntary, does require attention, and is relatively slow. We can conclude from this that the more we repeat a certain material or tasks the more it becomes automatic and effortless to us.
In each trial, the participants were presented with a sequence of words on the left side of the window. Each word was presented for one and a half seconds. After all the words were presented, the response buttons were presented on the right side of window. These response buttons were labeled with words from the sequence along with new distractor words that were not part of the sequence. The goal of the participants was to click on the response buttons and identify all the words that were part of the sequence. The independent variable for this study was the types of words that were presented on the test (response buttons). The dependent variable was the percentage of each types of items reported.
Throughout the course of history, the phenomenon of psychology has drawn countless psychologists and scientists to further comprehend the depths and fascinations of the human mind and body. Using experimentation as a source of obtaining and recording desired information regarding the new realizations of the mind, cognitive scientists continue to fathom at the intricate revelations the mind has to offer. Although the complexities of the mind have brought scientists to puzzling conclusions, scientists have used a series of experimental steps to conclude how and why the processes of the brain can change the actions and personalities of an individual.
Purpose: The purpose of the experiment was to see if there was any correlation between the spatial presentation of stimuli and a change in comprehension and memorizing information.
Powell (1986) conducted a study in which individuals viewed a photo or slide. Individuals were required to scan images and decide on an image for the entire display (Powell, 1986). Objects were pointed to, and subjects were asked to identify its location (Powell, 1986). The subject was asked to close his or her eyes and were shown another image. The subjects were to decide if the object was in the correct position (Powell, 1986). The subjects would hear one of the objects and was required to focus on the object while keeping the entire image in his or her mind (Powell, 1986). When the next object was identified, the subjects were to move from the first object to the second watching a black dot moving in a straight line (Powell, 1986).
Human memory is flexible and prone to suggestion. “Human memory, while remarkable in many ways, does not operate like a video camera”
The second experiment is focused on semantic priming in accuracy paradigm. The prediction it was designed to address is whether ambiguous novel compounds facilitate recall accuracy to monomorphemic associates of both parsing choices. The procedure was altered by adapting the morpheme recall task and by having a pre or post primes compound
Anderson, J.R. & Lebiere, C. (2003). The Newell Test for a theory of cognition. Behavioral and
They found that it was not just when the task involved a question but also when the question involved verifying assertions. In their study they manipulated the place of focus by switching up the sentence. Instead of ‘How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the ark?’, they stated ‘It was Moses who took two animals of each kind on the ark’. This did not disprove the central thesis of Erickson and Mattson’s study. This study did , however, lead to the discovery of shortcomings in their work because they did not methodically examine the effects of semantic relatedness. They could have done this by utilizing names that were empirically shown to be either highly related or
The experiment consisted of 6 trials that contained words such as: sleep, bed, tired etc. The participants were asked to look at the rectangle on the screen before starting the trials. In the first trial, the participants were asked to press the “start trial” button because a fixation dot would appear in the middle of the screen. The participants were asked to stare at the computer until a sequence of words appeared, with each word was presented for one second. After a full sequence was presented, a set of buttons were shown, each labeled with a word. Some the words were on the list, and some were not. The participant’s task was to click or tap on the buttons to indicate which words were in the sequence. The sequence of words consisted of the actual words shown or related or unrelated words. For example, some trials consisted of all sleep related content to see if the participant would select items that were related or select items that were not in the sequence. After identifying the words that were shown in the sequence, they would receive feedback on the accuracy of their memory. After the participants were done
Prior to the early 1970s the prominent idea of how memories were formed and retrieved revolved around the idea of processing memory into specific stores (Francis & Neath, 2014). These memory stores were identified as sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory. In contrast to this idea, two researchers named Fergus Craik and Robert Lockhart proposed an idea linking the type of encoding to retrieval (Goldstein, 2015). This idea is known as the levels of processing theory. According to this theory, memory depends on the depth of processing that a given item is received by an individual (Goldstein, 2015). Craik and Lockhart stressed four points in supporting their theory. First, they argued that memory was the result of a series of analyses, each level of the series forming a deeper level of processing than the preceding level (Francis & Neath, 2014). The shallow levels of processing were believed to hold less importance and are defined as giving little attention to meaning of an item. Examples of which include focusing on how a word sounds or memorizing a phone number by repeating it over and over again (Francis & Neath, 2014) (Goldstein, 2015). The deeper levels processing involve paying close attention to the meaning of an item and relating that meaning to something else, an example of which would be focusing on the meaning of a word rather than just how the word sounds (Francis & Neath, 2014) (Goldstein, 2015). The second point Craik and Lockhart
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.
This article goes into depth about encoding and retriaval experiments testing recognition without awareness, and implicit and explicit memory through images. The scientists conducting the experiment were looking for a correlation between images and recognition without awareness. The scientists leading the experiment divided 45 undergradute students into two groups; they had 24 students in the full attention encoding group and 21 students in the divided attention encoding group. They then tested these students' recognition without awareness with