The Verbal Imagery Occurs When

10), an embedded approach, investigating the complexity of relationships of graphophonic knowledge. Additional activities to support phonics instruction include building word lists based on common elements (Pinnell & Fountas, 1998, p. 157), segmenting words into onset and rime (Emmitt et al, 2013, p.12) and the introduction of high frequency or sight words through modelling and sight words games such as flash cards, sentence strips, bingo, word shapes and extensive reading (Fellows & Oakley, 2010, p. 219) ensuring students reach a point of automaticity (Konza, 2016, p. 157), as sight words feature sounds that contradict the rules for learning the 44 phonemes and the point of automaticity allows higher-level comprehension processes to occur due to available cognitive

In the last half century several theories have emerged with regard to the best model for human memory. In each of these models there was a specific way to help people recall words and

This experiment is based on previous research done. For example, in 1969, in a research by Bower and Clark, no difference in the immediate recall scores of both groups was noted, but when later asked to recall, those who used narrative chaining recalled an average of 93% of the words compared to the control group which only recalled an average of 13% of words. In another experiment, participants who used narrative chaining remembered six times more information than participants who learned by simply repeating the words to themselves (Loftus, 1980). Narrative chaining is particularly useful when a person wants to remember information in a particular order. The aim of the study is to investigate the effectiveness of narrative chaining on memory. It is hypothesized that in a group of 59 participants aged 10-69 years old, participants who use narrative chaining to remember a list of words will remember a higher number and percentage of words when asked to write down as many words as possible through serial recall compared to participants who use maintenance rehearsal.

There is reliable and dependable proof for first-letter access, there is only weak confirmation for syllable access. In both experiments, syllable figures did not contrast across confidence levels and a higher coincidence at confidence levels in the research. (Brown and Burrows, 2013). A Mnemonic is utilized to recollect, and it could be a phrase, a short song, or something easily recalled, and it can assist the individual in finding something that is difficult to remember. For instance, we may use a phrase like PEMDAS, which means, Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally". It stands for "Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication and Division, and Addition and Subtraction".

This supports the idea of an immediate memory store for items that are neither visual nor phonological and that draw on long-term memory to link the related words. It is used as both the Phonological Loop and the Visuo-Spatial Sketch Pad have specific roles and the Central Executive has very limited storage capacity so as a result there was no where to store both visual and acoustic information. The Episodic Buffer is an extra storage system that has in common with all working memory units, a limited capacity. It is handy and can integrate information from the Central Executive, The Phonological Loop, The Visuo-Spatial Sketch Pad and also information from the Long-Term Memory.

The hypothesis that in Experiment 1, words at the beginning and end of a list would be better remembered while in Experiment 2, words at the beginning would be better remembered, was partially rejected, while still being partially true. The hypothesis that a delay would in fact make a difference was supported. In both tests, words in the first third seemed to be remembered by significantly more of the participants. However despite the predictions, words in the last third of experiment 1 seemed to be not significantly more than words in the middle third. experiment2 did seem to fit with the hypothesis, as the words at the start seemed to be higher than the rest, but there was a absurdity on word 16, “ocean,” which was recalled 7 out of the 9 times. Apart from this, experiment 2 seemed to support the hypothesis.

The current study was created to retest reproducibility of Slamecka and Graf results about participants remembering words better when they generated the words than when they read the words in a sample of undergraduate students at Texas A&M University (Slamecka and Graf, 1978). Nineteen undergraduate students at Texas A&M University participated in an experiment where one group was given a set of words and were told to memorize the words. The other group was given one word and the first letter of the second word and was told to generate the second word. It was hypothesized that the group with the participants who generated the second word would remember those sets of words better than the other group. Results showed that the group who generated the second word significantly memorized the words better, the p value being < .05. More in depth explanations involving more variables are discussed such as the five rules, or the within subjects, and their effect on the generation effect as well as future directions.

On the other hand, Neath and Nairne (1995), assumed that lists with longer and shorter syllables, compared to lists with only short syllable words, would arrive at the same rate during the retrieval process. According to this, list arrangement does not matter; shorter words alone and shorter

Using paired wordlists of nouns, Bower and Gordon demonstrated this in their 1970 experiment. In their study, they had undergraduate students learn paired wordlists by one of four methods – rehearsal of the two words; reading a sentence in which one of the words acted upon the other (i.e. “The boy hit the ball.”); creating a sentence which linked the two words (i.e. “Nancy threw her bag on the table.”) or creating a mental image of the two words together (i.e. imagining a basket of flowers) (Bower & Gordon, 1970). Results found that students who employed imagery did better on recalling the word pairs in comparison to other methods and those who utilized rehearsal had the lowest recall rate out of the four groups (Bower & Gordon, 1970).

Results: Minimal-pairs treatment procedure was effective in decreasing process use over a short period of time. Several sound production errors improved concomitantly. Subject-A improved more rapidly than subject-B. Generalization to probe words occurred gradually.

Further evidence for the existence of the phonological loop comes from Conrads and Hulls (1975 in Passer, 2009) experiment in which they examined the effect of phonological similarity. They found that serial recall in a list of similar sounding words tended to yield poorer results with participants finding it difficult to remember compared to words that sounded different. It has also been found that recall in semantically similar words tended to have little or no effect, supporting the idea that verbal information is transferred in a phonological manner in working memory. In addition, Vallar and Papagno (1995 in Smith, 2007) found that the phonological store in brain damaged patients were dysfunctional.

This study is a conceptualized replication of the Howes and Solomon (1951) experiment investigating word accuracy and word frequency in short duration trials. It is hypothesized that words that appear more often in printed text (easier to access in the lexicon) will be more accurately identified rather than words that appear less commonly. A total of 83 participants in the study were presented with words taken from the Throndike-Lorge database. The words were presented for one second with a six second rest in the middle. This was done sixty times and the results suggest a moderate strong relationship between word accuracy and frequency. Though there are multiple factors that may have influenced these results.

Recalling the last goal to have the ability to comprehend anything about the research being conducted on the word length impact. It is critical to recognize what precisely it is. The word length effect is characterized as an occasion "when memory for memory of words is better for long words" (Goldstein, 2011, p.133). What this is basically saying is that words that only contain 1 syllable are easier to input, and later recall, from memory than words that are several syllables in length. The word length effect is one of the phenomena that is involved with the phonological loop of working memory (Goldstein, 2011).

This data is very similar to the study done by Huang, Tomasini, and Nikel (1977), where there was roughly a 50% difference between words presented in the beginning of the list and those presented later. The current study most resembled this study, as they both had to do with sequential positioning of words on a list, and short-term memory recall. The other two studies, performed by Asch (1946) and Furnam (1986), are harder to compare to the current study because they differ in setup, and give results in a different format. However, both studies confirmed the primacy effect theory, similarly to the current study.

When we are asked to recall items from a given list, we are able to do it without any problems. However, if we hear any sort of unrelated irrelevant speech, we are bound to mess up while recalling. According to Elliot (2002), “The irrelevant-speech effect refers to the finding of impaired recall performance in the presence of irrelevant auditory stimuli” (p. 478). When asked to recall, if one is exposed to unrelated auditory information, their recalling will not be as accurate. Taking this further, according to Mathews, Davies, Westerman, and Stammers (2000), “The irrelevant speech effect is not found with single repeated utterances, for example “a a a a a”, but does occur with irrelevant non-speech sounds such as or segmented glissandi (pitch-glides”