AbstractA single subject study took place where a male, university student,willingly took part in helping determine what type of stimulus informationis more easily remembered. The two types of stimulus introduced weremeaningful (CVC) and randomized (CVC).
The number of errors made among thetwo stimuli was also studied. This experiment was done using a computergenerated program on verbal learning. Using this program, the subject waspresented with seven items of stimuli (CVC) and was to remember what eachstimuli was in the correct order. It was found that there are more correctresponses when meaningful stimulus is used and the speed of responding tothe stimuli is faster when a meaningful CVC is used, rather than in randomfashion. IntroductionRemembering is the retrieval of information, which is stored inmemory. The act of remembering takes place when a correct response isgiven to a certain stimuli presented.
Forgetting is a weakening of thisstimulus-response relationship. The Purpose of this experiment is to determine what type of stimulusinformation is more easily remembered, be it in randomized manner ormeaningful. When are more errors made in remembering the stimuli, amongthese two types of stimuli used (CVC). Also, when a correct response isgiven, which was the type of stimuli (CVC) that caused this to occur.
The design of this experiment on verbal learning has bothwithin-subject and between-subject variables. The within-subject variablesare the words (CVC) that are stored in the computer which are the defaultwords to be used. The between-subject variables are the number of stimuliused and the choice of the stimuli using the experimenters own words (CVC). The independent variable for this lab is the number of stimuli presentedand the type of stimulus word (CVC) that was used, being both randomizedand meaningful. The dependent variables are the number of errors made andthe mean correct response latency (speed of responding).
Number of errors will be highest in the randomized ordered stimuli,and the speed of responding will be slower in the randomized stimulicondition. Method A single subject, male, twenty years of age in first year ofUniversity volunteered to take part in this experiment on Verbal Behaviour. The apparatus used in this experiment was an IBM compatible computer,a monochrome monitor (non-colour), and a Raven dot matrix printer. Runningon the IBM compatible was a computer generated program on Verbal Learningfrom which this experiment originated. Procedure:The first step in this experiment requires that the experimenter getthe computer and program ready for the student. The computer, monitor andprinter were to be turned on .
When the computer was ready and flashing acursor, Caps Lock was to be pressed, so all letters will be in capitalform. The name of the program to be run (VL) was to be typed into thekeyboard. When the program had loaded, a menu showed up on the screen, andVerbal Learning (selection 8) was to be run. A timing number was to bekeyed into the computer (3. 578) and then the Serial Learning feature was tobe chosen (option 1).
After the above steps, the rest of the experiment wasentirely up to the experimenter. After the timing number was entered, the experimenter could eitheraccept the default values for the parameters of the experiment alreadystored in the computer, or could change any of the parameters. For the first part of the experiment, the number of stimuli waschanged (option 1) from ten to seven stimuli. The stimuli (CVC) used inthis part of the experiment were in a randomized fashion. Listed below arethe parameters for the first part of the experiment and the words (CVC)used : 1) Number Of Stimuli = 7 2) Inter-Trial Interval = 3 sec.
3) Maximum Stimulus Presentation Time = 5 sec. 4) Duration of Correct Answer Display = 5 sec. 5) Completion Criterion = 3 Totally Correct Trials. CVC Used In Randomized Fashion From Default Settings:Stimulus Word 1) TEF 2) BUW 3) HAJ 4) QIH 5) YUJ 6) KEJ 7) ZAHThen it was time for the subject to participate.
The subject had fiveseconds to view each of the seven stimulus words, which were to beremembered in the correct order. There was a three second delay betweeneach of the seven words. After this inspection interval, the subject wasto type in the correct response in the exact order that the stimulus wordswere shown to him. This response was to be keyed within 5 seconds. Thisprocedure continued until the student had correctly completed three fulltrial periods of seven words. When the three correct trials were done, a screen showed up whichcontained the preliminary data analysis.
Further data analysis were to beexamined so the options on the following screens to be selected were 1)analysis of error/error latencies For each stimulus, 2) number of errors orcorrect responses and 3) display data in digital form. Both thepreliminary data analysis and more data analysis information was printed. The second part of the lab consisted of exactly the same procedurementioned above, except for the stimulus words to be remembered, which wereselected by the experimenter. These words were CVC with a meaningfulvalue. Listed below are the parameters for the second part of theexperiment and the words (CVC) used : 1) Number Of Stimuli = 7 2) Inter-Trial Interval = 3 sec.
3) Maximum Stimulus Presentation Time = 5 sec. 4) Duration of Correct Answer Display = 5 sec. 5) Completion Criterion = 3 Totally Correct Trials. CVC Used In Meaningful Fashion From Experimenter:Stimulus Word 1) SAM 2) GOT 3) CAR 4) KEY 5) FOR 6) HIS 7) MOM Results & DiscussionIn the first part of the experiment, where the subject was presentedwith words in a randomized order, the total number of trials that thesubject took to complete the criterion of 3 totally correct trials was fivetrials.
This shows that there were in all, five errors made and thirtycorrect answers given (figure 1). The mean correct latency was 3. 643011which was how fast the subject responded to the stimuli. For every trialthat occurred among the five trials, there was a mean of 1 error per trialand six correct answers. Looking at the analysis of errors for eachstimulus word, there were no errors in stimulus 1,2 or 3.
In stimulus4,5,6 there was one error made in each of them. In the last stimulus,7,there was 2 errors made in trying to remember what the stimulus was. Thisshows that the primacy effect where recognition is highest for the firstitem and lowest for the last item is clearly demonstrated in part one. In the second part of the lab, in which very meaningful words wereused as stimuli for the student to remember, there were zero errors made intotal (figure 2). The total number of correct responses was twenty one,which meant that every response given by the subject was absolutelycorrect.
The mean correct response latency was 1. 740399. Among the words(CVC) that were used in this second part were very easy to understand, andmeaningful enough to remembered easily. This accounts for the zero errorsthat were made. These results clearly show that when presented with a randomized orderof stimuli and a meaningful set of words, the number of errors will behigher in the randomized condition. Also the speed of responding to thestimulus will be very quick in the meaningful form (1.
740399) rather thanin the randomized order (3. 643011). The difference between these two typesof independent variables is greater than two times difference in speed. Basic capacity which is the amount of information in short term memorycan show improvement with development.
One of the ways to help rememberinformation is in the methods of the strategy used in relation to the taskto be performed, such as where there is information that is meaningful. Mental strategies to be used in helping memory are rehearsal, semanticorganization and elaboration. In rehearsal, if there are lip movements andrepetitions, the more the better for the memory. In semantic organization,information which is reorganized in a more meaningful way is easier toremember.
This includes bunching and categorizing. Lastly, elaborationusing the techniques of what is meaningful to us, will be remembered. Thisgives us a chance to improve our recall. Learning has been reached when the subject gives correct answers toall the stimuli presented. This was best shown in the second part of thislab, where no errors were made and responses were even quicker than in partone.
It is known that increasing the inspection interval (maximum stimuluspresentation time) will improve performance in the time allotted to give aresponse called the anticipation interval. The measure of learning seems to vary with the independent variablessuch as the number of stimuli and type of CVC used, whether they aremeaningful or randomized. The last factor when dealing with this sort of experiment is thatperformance of memory in remembering the stimuli was better, since therecognition testing immediately followed repetitions of the words. Ifthere was a long delay or no delay, then memory performance will suffer.
