More essays like this: An additional aim was to compare the effectiveness of recall and recognition in retrieving long term memory for a common object.
Get Full Essay Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues. Discussion As was expected the results show that it appears to be easier to recognise features of an everyday object such as the 50 cent coin utilised in the experiment than it does to recall them.
Three of the participants were of a young age and so it is feasible to assume that they may have more exposure to the lower currency of money than would the older participants. Six participants took part in the experiment, three were assigned to the recognition task and three to the recall.
The recall group were asked to draw the features of both sides of the coin. The remaining three participants were also from memory, required to answer a series of yes or no questions relating to features that might be on the coin, in addition they were asked to rate from high, medium or low how confident they were of their answers Results Analysis of the recognition task involved recording the participants answers that were correct and rated with a medium to high level of confidence, onto a table.
It was hypothesised that the participants would fare much the same as those in previous studies and that they would find it difficult to recall or recognise certain visual details of the coin. This could be due to the fact that the heads side is the same across all coin currencies, with exception to the reversal of Elizabeth II and New Zealand on earlier coins.
Acknowledging the two memory tests and each side of the coin as the variables being examined the aim was to explore the accuracy of long term memory. However when required to remember specific details of an item that most would be extremely familiar with it becomes apparent that memory is not as simple as one may think.
Furthermore it was expected that the participants assigned to the memory recognition task would achieve higher results than those assigned to the recall task and that the details of the heads side of the coin would be easier to remember than those of the tails side. The results also found that for both the recall and recognition groups memory was more accurate for the heads side of the coin, with all of the recognition participants getting the details correct, than it was for the tails side.
The recognition group were required to answer yes or no to a series of questions relating to specific features of a N.
The overall mean percentage being Materials The equipment consisted of six work sheets, three sheets for the recall task which contained four circles for the heads side of the coin and four circles for the tails, and three sheets which contained 16 questions and an answer confidence rating scale for the recognition task.
The fact that this was not the case would suggest that explicit memory for recalling a common object from long term memory is not quite as reliable as recognising visual cues in order to retrieve the same information. It was also apparent that memory for both of the groups was predominate for the heads side of the coin than it was for the tails side.
Figure 1 shows the overall percentage. Using the visual details of the US penny, their experiment showed that among their participants, those in the group assigned to memory recognition were superiour to those assigned to memory recall. Most of us can recognise everyday objects, people we have met or other everyday aspects involving memory with little or no though at all.
According to Matlin, deeper levels of processing produce better retrieval so this may also explain why certain features of the coin that immediately distinguish it from others and identify it as a 50 cent are easier remembered than those of less identifiable importance.
A series of studies conducted by Nickerson and Adams asked how detailed and accurate is ones memory for a common object. The dominance of memory recognition could be due to the fact that the process involves the aid of prompts in order to jog the memory, while memory recall on the other hand offers no such cues and so retrieval is based solely on how deeply the information has originally been processed Matlin, Long term memory for a common object.
The hypotheses that the recognition group would score higher than the recall group was supported as was the theory that the heads side of the coin would prove easier for both groups to remember than the tails side. The mean percentage score was then calculated resulting in the final score.
This could be due to the fact that the process for recognition involves memory prompts while the strategy for recall relies directly on how the visual information has been previously stored in the memory. Surprisingly only one participant in the recall group correctly recalled the 50c icon on the tails side of the coin and for the recognition group only one participant remembered to include the mountain while this feature was included by all of the recall participants, additionally of interest was the fact that the participant from the recognition group rated their incorrect response choice as high while the majority of this particular participants other answers while correct were only rated medium.
Procedure Three of the participants were randomly assigned to the recall task, this required them to draw from unaided memory the features they believed to be on each side of the 50c coin.
The findings of this experiment are hardly surprising as they are consistent with the findings of the previous studies conducted by Nickerson and Adams This difference was true for both the heads and tails sides of the coin.
However the difference was not of any particular significance as there was only one recall participant who omitted a vital detail and as was with the recognition participants all other features were present and correctly placed.
Furthermore as is stated in Matlin studies show that adult memory is generally not very reliable when retrieving explicit memories and so this would suggest that a child would be more likely to have success with such tasks, for these reasons we would need to consider whether the vast age difference between the participants had an impact on the findings of the experiment.
While this experiment verifies previous studies, there are a number of confounding variables that should be considered. For one, the sample size was extremely small and thus not very representative of the population as a whole. It was concluded that deep processed memories, as in the way that certain distinguishing features of a coin or other everyday familiar objects are easier to retrieve than details of the same object that do not hold as much relevance and thus shallowly processed within the memory.
Method Participants There were six participants who were selected for this experiment, these consisted of family members of the experimenter and family friends. This data was then converted to percentage form for both the recall and recognition tasks, and for the heads and tails sides of the coin and entered onto a third table.
Their age ranged from 12 to 40 and there were four males and two females. Get Access Memory Recall and Recognition for a Common Object Essay Sample The aim of this of this study was to investigate the accuracy of long term memory for a common object and more precisely to examine the differences between memory recognition and recall.
As was expected the results indicated that the scores for recognition were higher than that for recall. On each sheet was a space for the participant to record their sex and age.Nickerson & Adams (): Long-term Memory for a Common Object Question The broad research question that is being asked in this experiment is, “How accurately and completely do people recognize common objects?”.
Nickerson, Raymond S.; Adams, Marilyn Jager Cognitive Psychology, v11 n3 p Jul Five experiments investigated how completely and accurately adults remember the visual details of the common United States penny. We will write a custom essay sample on Nickerson & Adams (): Long-Term Memory for a Common Object specifically for you for only $ $ /page Order now.
Nickerson & Adams (): Long-Term Memory for a Common Object Essay Nickerson & Adams (): Long-term Memory for a Common Object Question The broad research question that is being asked in this experiment is, “How accurately and completely do people recognize common objects?”.
Long-term memory for a common object*1. Jones, ; Nickerson & Adams, ) Discover more publications, questions and projects in Long-Term Memory. Project. COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 11, () Long-Term Memory for a Common Object RAYMOND S.
NICKERSON AND MARILYN JAGER ADAMS Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.Download