FREE ESSAY ON LEVELS OF PROCESSING AND MEMORY

LEVELS OF PROCESSING AND MEMORY

Levels of Processing and Memory 1
Abstract:
Craik and Lockhart (1972) developed a theory in which 
they discussed the levels of processing. The theory states, 
the more a word is processed, due to its meaning, the 
better the word is retained. In our experiment we presented 
subjects with a yes or no question pertaining to the meaning of a word or the appearance
of a word and then measured their reaction time. Subjects were then asked to recall as
many words that they could remember, results showed that there was a significant
difference in reaction times and the number of words that were recalled.
Introduction:
According to Dewey Rundus (1971) the more an item is rehearsed, the higher the
probability the item will be remembered. Herman Ebbinghaus (1885) concluded that in order
to remember and learn items we must repeat them. He developed the nonsense syllable,
which is a word that is composed of two consonants with a vowel in between. A nonsense
syllable could not be a real word (would not be found in the dictionary). Ebbinghaus
wanted to minimize the effects of association that have already been made with words that
we are familiar with. Using nonsense syllables he determined that frequency of appearance
is directly 
Levels of Processing and Memory 2
correlated with the amount one recalls (Lundin 1996). The rehearsal theory states that
recall should mimic reaction time in our experiment. The longer a word is kept in mind,
the better it will be recalled. Repetition plays an important role in the processes of
memory but it is not the only factor that affects how much one can recall. 
Craik and Watkins (1973) disputed that repetition improves memory. They performed an
experiment to determine that repetition didn't improve memory but that the speed which
the words were presented. Subjects were read a list of words, but before they heard the
words they were given a critical letter and were asked to remember the last word from the
list that began with that particular letter. Subjects thought that they could ignore the
other words on the list that did not pertain to the critical letter. The subjects were
then unexpectedly asked to recall as many words from the list that they could remember
and not just the ones that contained the critical letter. Craik and Watkins (1973 did not
find a relation between the amount of words recalled and rehearsed. 
Craik and Lockhart (1972) developed a theory in which they discussed the levels of
processing. The theory states, the more a word is processed, due to its meaning, the
better 
Levels of Processing and Memory 3
the word is retained. The time that one is exposed to the stimuli is of last importance
but the stimulus that is analyzed due to its meaning is more deeply processed and is
remembered better. 
The level of processing theory differs from Rundus (1971) theory on repetition. Rundus
felt that if one were exposed to a word repeatedly then they would be more likely to
recall it. Craik and Lockhart (1972), their theory of processing states that it does not
matter how many times or how long the word is shown, but if the meaning of the word was
thought about the meaning of the word, then the word would be more easily recalled.
Subjects:
Ten random college students participated in this experiment. Each subject was used in
both conditions. Each condition contained a question with ten words. Each subject
answered two questions, one pertaining to the meaning of ten words and the other
pertaining to the appearance of ten words. There was actually twenty answers, each
question was asked before each word was given. 
Levels of Processing and Memory 4
Apparatus:
To create our experiment my partner and I used the Aldus Superpaint program and the
Mindlab program on a Macintosh computer.
Procedure:
First we chose two questions. The question that pertained to the meaning words was " Is
this alive?" The question that pertained to the appearance word was "Are there more
consonants than vowels?" Next we needed ten words for each question that subjects could
answer with a yes or no response. It was very difficult finding words that would pertain
to both questions, but after a lot of thought and searching my partner and I found 10
words for each question that could pertain to one another.
Next my partner and I set up our experiment using Mindlab. Each trial contained one of
the two questions, and a word from the corresponding list. There were twenty trials all
together, ten appearance and ten meaning words. Each subject participated in this
condition. The question appeared on the screen for two seconds, and the suject6 would
then answer yes by pressing "y" on the keyboard or no by pressing "n" on the keyboard.
The computer randomized these questions so that the subject would not see the 
Levels of Processing and Memory 5
appearance question with ten appearance words or the meaning question with ten meaning
words in a row. The computer recorded the subjects' reaction time to answer each
question. 
After the first five subjects were tested, my partner and I switched the questions for
each trial. The appearance words then matched with the meaning question and the meaning
words then matched with the appearance question. My partner and I had to go back into
each trial in Mindlab and change the words around. We then proceeded to test the next
five subjects. 
After the subjects completed the first task, which was to answer the questions
accordingly, we then asked them to fill out a ticket for a lottery. Each subject that
participated in the experiment was entered into a raffle. After they had finished filling
out their ticket, which took approximately 30 seconds we then asked the subject to write
down on a sheet of paper how many words they could recall from the experiment. 
Results:
The mean for the reaction time of meaning words was 1.3 seconds and the mean for the
appearance words was 2.2 seconds. The means of the reaction times are significantly 
Levels of Processing and Memory 6
different, t[7]= 3.9, p*. 01. For the number of words recalled the mean of the meaning
words was 4.0, and the mean for the appearance words was 0.6. These results were
statistically significant, t[7]=6.8, p*. 001.
Discussion:
The mean reaction time was longer for the appearance words than for the meaning words.
There were more meaning words recalled than appearance words. The rehearsal theory would
say that since the appearance words were looked at longer, they should have been
remembered better, but that was not the case. The words that were processed due to their
meaning were recalled more frequently. Rundus (1971) would disagree with these findings.
He would have said that there should have been more appearance words recalled because the
subjects were exposed to them longer.
Bibliography
Levels of Processing and Memory 8
References:
Craik, F. & Lockhart, G. (1972). Levels of processing: A 
framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal 
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Craik, F. & Watkins, M. (1973). The role of rehearsal in 
short term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and 
Verbal Behavior, 12, 599-607.
Linden, R. (1996). Theories and Systems of Psychology. 
Lexington: D.C. Heath and Company.
Rundus, D. (1971). Analysis of rehearsal processes in free 
recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 63-77.