GENERAL PROBLEM: On Memory

SPECIFIC PROBLEM: To determine the effect of meaningfulness of information on the memorization

capacity of your subject.

AIM: To determine the effect of meaningfulness of information on the memorization capacity of your
subject.

BASIC CONCEPT: Memory refers to retaining and recalling information over a period of time, depending
upon the nature of cognitive task one is required to perform. Memory is conceptualised as a process
consisting of three independent, although interrelated stages. These are:

1. Encoding: The first stage which refers to a process by which information is recorded and
registered for the first time so that it becomes usable by our memory system. Whenever an
external stimulus impinges on our sensory organs, it generates neural impulses which are
received in different areas of our brain for further processing.
2. Storage: The second stage of memory where information which was encoded must also be
stored so that it can be put to use later. Storage refers to the process through which
information is retained and held over a period of time.
3. Retrieval: The third stage of memory which refers to bringing the stored information to our
awareness so that it can be used for performing various cognitive tasks such as problem solving
or decision making. One may fail to recall an information because they did not encode it
properly, or the storage was weak or they could not access or retrieve it when required.

There are multiple models of memory. According to the Stage Model, as proposed by Atkinson and
Shiffrin (1968), there are 3 memory systems:

• Sensory Memory: It has a large capacity but it is of very short duration (less than a second). It is
a memory system that registers information from the senses with reasonable accuracy. It is of
two types: iconic (visual) and echoic (auditory).
• Short Term Memory: Information that is attended to enters our short term memory which holds
small amount of information for a brief period of time (30 seconds or less). Information in STM
is primarily encoded acoustically (in terms of sounds).
• Long Term Memory: Materials that survive the capacity and duration limitations of the STM
enter the LTM which has a vast capacity. It is a permanent storehouse of all information. It has
been shown that once any information enters the LTM it is never forgotten because it is
encoded semantically (in terms of the meaning the information carries).

In recent years, psychologists have suggested that STM is not unitary, rather it may consist of many
components. This multi-component view of STM was proposed by Baddeley (1986) who suggested that
the STM is not a passive storehouse but rather a workbench that holds a wide variety of memory
materials that are constantly handled, manipulated and transformed as people perform various
cognitive tasks. This workbench is called the working memory.

Craik and Lockhart (1972) proposed the levels of processing view which suggests that the processing of
any new information relates to the manner in which it is perceived, analysed and understood which in
turn determines the extent to which it will be retained. One may analyse information in terms of its
physical or structural features. This is the first and shallowest level of processing. At an intermediate
level one might consider and attend to the phonetic sounds that are attached to the letters of the
information. However there is a third and deepest level at which information can be processed. In order
to ensure that the information is retained for a longer period, it is important that it gets analysed and
understood in terms of it meaning.

Herman Ebbinghaus (1885) introduced the device of nonsense syllables not for the purpose of having
something difficult to learn but to provide a large quantity of materials of fairly uniform difficulty
(uniform because entirely lacking in previously established associations between one item and another).
In preparation for his experiments, he constructed 2300 nonsense syllables by a mechanical process.
Each syllable consisted of a vowel with a initial and final consonants. Muller and Schumann (1894)
introduced greater precision by removing some inequalities in this process. They found that alliteration
or rhyming of neighbouring syllables made a soft spot in a list and that sometimes two adjacent syllables
spelled a familiar word and so were easily learnt. In English speaking countries, psychologists have
usually assumed that the syllables must not be familiar words and that they must consist of only three
letters. Glaze (1928) attempted to measure the meaningfulness of every nonsense syllable consisting of
three different letters. Glaze published syllables enable investigators to construct lists of probably equal
suggestive value. Glaze himself assumed that the best syllables were those of lowest association value
and are most lacking in suggestiveness.

Human beings acquire knowledge about objects, events and their features largely in terms of words.
Words then come to be associated with one another. Psychologists have developed a number of
methods to study this kind of learning in a laboratory setting.

1. Paired associates learning: This method is used in learning some foreign language equivalents of
mother tongue words. Here, a list of paired associates is prepared. The first members of the pair
(nonsense syllables) is used as the stimulus and the second (English nouns) act as the response.
The learner is first shown both the stimulus-response pairs together and is instructed to
remember and recall the response after the presentation of each stimulus term.
2. Serial learning: Here, lists of verbal items (nonsense syllables, most familiar or least familiar
words, interrelated words) are prepared. The participant is presented the entire list and is
required to produce the items in the same serial order as in the list.
3. Free recall: Here, participants are presented a list of words which are shown at a fixed rate of
exposure duration. Immediately after the presentation of the list, the participants are required
to recall the words in any order they can.

Furthermore, the learning method may also be employed for verbal learning. This method (also known
as learning-time method) measures the time, or number of learning trials required by the subject to
reach a certain standard or criterion of mastery. The learning method has the advantage of being
applicable to a great variety of materials which need not be divisible into separate items. However, the
problem with this method is that it penalizes the person who has trouble in mastering one particular
item. The subject may learn 95% of the list in six trials and take an additional six trials for the remaining
5%.

The aim of the present experiment is to determine the effect of meaningfulness of information on the
memorization capacity of the subject by making use of lists of meaningful and nonsense syllables.
DESIGN OF THE EXPERIMENT:

1. Specific Problem: To determine the effect of meaningfulness of information on the

memorization capacity of your subject.
2. Independent Variable (IV): Meaningfulness of information
3. Dependent Variable (DV): Memorization capacity of the subject
4. Stimulus: Lists of meaningful and nonsense syllables
5. Response: Subject will reproduce the items present in the list
6. Plan of Work: Length of the lists will be determined using separate lists for meaningful and
nonsense syllables. Suitable lists will be constructed to explore the memorization capacity of the
subject. Lists will be presented with the help of a paper window. 100% learning criteria will be
achieved for both lists of meaningful and nonsense syllables. Total time taken to learn the list
will be measured. Post Criterion Trial (PCT) will be taken to determine the memorization
capacity of the subject.

EXTRANEOUS VARIABLES CONTROL

1. Situation relevant variables:
Noise Will be eliminated as far as possible
Temperature Will be held constant as far as possible
Illumination Will be optimized as far as possible
2. Subject relevant variables:
Inter-subject differences Single subject will be used throughout the
experiment so problems arising due to inter-
subject differences will be minimized.
3. Stimulus relevant variables:
Exposure time Will be held constant
Difficulty level Will be held constant
4. Sequence relevant variables:
Practice and fatigue effect Adequate rest pause will be provided

PRELIMINARIES:

Name of the subject:

Age of the subject:

Condition of the subject: Fresh and Cooperative

Date of the experiment:

Duration of the experiment: 2:40pm to 3:10 pm

MATERIALS REQUIRED:

1. Lists of meaningful and nonsense syllables

2. Paper window
3. Stationaries
PROCEDURE: Rapport was established with the subject and adequate instructions were provided. The
experiment was conducted in 3 phases.

Phase I: Determination of Length of the Lists

1. List consisting of 10 CVC meaningful syllables was shown through the paper window to the
subject.
2. List consisting of 10 CVC nonsense syllables was shown through the paper window to the
subject.
3. Number of syllables correctly reproduced by the subject after a single exposure was noted.
4. Length of the list = Number of items correctly reproduced × 3

Phase II: Meaningful Syllables

List of CVC
meaningful Subject learnt up Rest pause
syllables was the entire list up to PCT was
was provided
presented to the 100% learning taken
subject through criteria.
the paper window

Phase III: Nonsense Syllables

List of CVC nonsense

syllables was Subject learnt up
the entire list up Rest pause PCT was
presented to the
to 100% learning was provided taken
subject through the
paper window criteria.

PRECAUTIONS:

1. The following rules of constructing nonsense syllables were followed:

• Nonsense syllables each comprising of 3 letters had to be developed with two
consonants and a vowel in between them (CVC format).
• Two consonants should not be repeated in the same row.
• The starting and ending consonants should not be repeated in consecutive rows.
• The same vowel should not be repeated in consecutive rows.
• A, E, I, O, U should not be used consecutively.
• Q, W, X, Y, Z should be avoided.
• C and K, B and V, G and J are not to be used in the same syllable.
• H is always used as a first consonant in the syllable, not in the last.
• Meaningful associations with the syllables should be avoided.
2. Each nonsense and meaningful syllable should be used once in the whole experiment.
3. Exposure time of each syllable was constant.
 4. Subject was instructed adequately regarding the experiment and care was taken that the
instructions were followed throughout the experiment.

INSTRUCTIONS:

Phase I: “Please be comfortable and relax. Please be attentive. I will present to you a list of syllables only
once. Write down whatever you can remember from that list in the sheet of paper provided to you.
Report to me in case of any difficulties.”

Phase II & Phase III: “Please be comfortable. I shall once again present a list of syllables to you one by
one. After each presentation please try to reproduce them to the best of your abilities in the same order
as far as possible. This process will continue until you can reproduce all the syllables correctly and in
proper order. Report to me in case of any difficulties.”

DATA: Attached.

COMPARATIVE CHART:

TOTAL NUMBER OF TOTAL TIME TAKEN (in PERCENTAGE OF

TRIALS TAKEN minutes) SYLLABLES CORRECTLY
REPRODUCED IN PCT
PHASE II
(MEANINGFUL
SYLLABLES)
PHASE III
(NONSENSE SYLLABLES)

REPORT OF THE SUBJECT: I found the experiment to be interesting. I performed a new kind of task here.
At times I found memorizing the words to be a little difficult. But the experimenter reassured me and
helped me out whenever I was stuck. It was a great experience overall.

FULL NAME SIGNATURE OF SUBJECT

INTERPRETATION:

CONCLUSION: It may be concluded that meaningfulness of the information does seem to have an effect
on the memorization capacity of the present subject.