Transcript Effect of Modality on Short Term Memory

Effect of Modality on
Short Term Memory
Shannon Hooven
Sarah Kamplain
Abby Ramser
INTRO
 Memory: the way in which information is represented
and stored cognitively.
 Peterson and Peterson found that there is a distinction
between various types of memory.
 If information is not rehearsed, it will not be remembered or
capable of being retrieved for later recall.
 Hamilton argued that the capacity of short-term memory was
seven units.
 Baddeley argued that the span of memory is determined by the
speed at which information is rehearsed.
 Proposed that for verbal material, people had an articulatory loop in
which they can maintain as much information as they are able to
rehearse in a fixed period of time.
INTRO cont.
 Webster (1980) hypothesized that the
organization of memories in short term memory
is enhanced by the characteristics assigned to
them as a result of the modality in which they
were presented and the required response type.
 Thompson and Clayton (1974) found that when
information was presented in an auditory
modality, recall drastically declined as the delay
increased.
HYPOTHESES
 Current research proposes the way in which
stimuli are presented to participants will affect
the way in which they recall the information.
If stimuli are presented in a visual modality, recall will be
better if they are required to write down the words (i.e.
visual – visual).
If stimuli are presented orally, they will be better recalled
if participants are required to speak them back to the
researcher (i.e. auditory – auditory).
METHOD
Participants
18 participants ranging in age from 18-22
 6 Males
 12 Females
Equipment
 Gateway computer with an Intel Pentium 4
processor and a EV700 monitor
 Microsoft Power Point
METHOD cont.
Stimuli
One-syllable words ranging from three to five
letters each
 66 size Times New Roman black font on a
white background in the center of the screen
 Experimenters read the list
Each of the lists was comprised of seven words
The words were presented three seconds apart.
METHOD cont.
Procedure
Informed Consent
First task: visual-visual
Second task: visual-auditory
Third task: auditory-visual
Fourth task: auditory-auditory
Conditions were counter-balanced
Debriefing
VISUAL STIMULI
List 1
 Fish
 Eye
 Shoe
 Bone
 Leaf
 Dog
 Nose
List 2
 Belt
 Cat
 Ice
 Rug
 Tree
 Lamp
 Sock
AUDITORY STIMULI
List 1
 Hair
 Bird
 Fire
 Cake
 Ear
 Boat
 Cloud
List 2
 Chair
 Hat
 Bed
 Dog
 Wall
 Cup
 Ring
RESULTS
Means
visual visual
visual auditory
auditory visual
auditory auditory
6.336806
4.881944
5.736111
5.520833
Number Recalled
RESULTS cont.
7
6
5
Written
Spoken
4
3
2
1
0
Visual
Auditory
Presentation
RESULTS cont.
Significant main effect found for responses
in written form (F(18) = 13.35, p < 0).
Significant interaction found between the
visual presentation of stimuli and the
written response (F (18) = 3.13, p < .03).
Trend toward the oral response being
significant for the condition in which stimuli
were presented orally.
DISCUSSION
Results indicated that information was
better remembered when presented
visually.
This could be because of the overwhelming and
constant exposure to written text in a variety of
settings (i.e. school, media, etc.)
Responses in the auditory modality could
have been inhibited as a result of the way
in which the words were read.
Timing in between words and pronunciation