Evaluation of coding, capacity and duration (P2)
- Created by: Lishamxrie
- Created on: 21-01-19 17:48
View mindmap
- Evaluation of coding, capacity and duration
- S: Bahrick's study has high external validity
- Real life, meaningful memories were studied (peoples faces)
- Produced higher, more accurate results than lab studies
- However, confounding variables are not controlled, for example, pupils looking through their year book to remember the faces
- L: Baddeley didnt use meaningful material
- The words used in the study had no meaning to the Pp
- When processing more meaningful material, people use semantic coding even for STM tasks
- Means that the results of the study have meaningless application and results are not generalisable
- L: Jacobs study was conducted a long time ago
- Early research often lacked adequate control of extraneous variables
- E.g. some Pp may have been distracted whilst learning and therefore do not perform as well
- Results are not valid due to confounding variables that were not controlled
- However, other research has come to the same conclusion, making his research valid
- Early research often lacked adequate control of extraneous variables
- L: Miller's study may have overestimated the capacity of STM
- Cowan reviewed other research and concluded that it was only 4 chunks
- Suggests 5 items is more probable than 7
- L: Peterson and Peterson's study uses an artificial stimulus
- Remembering constant syllables does not represent anything in real life
- Can be argued that the study lacks ecological validity
- However, we do sometimes try and remember 'pointless' things, such as phone numbers
- Remembering constant syllables does not represent anything in real life
- S: Bahrick's study has high external validity
Comments
No comments have yet been made