Lab Report Regarding Memory (Data & Question Attached)
User_934652
LabReportData-v02-6.pdf
PSY294 – Lab Report – Memory Span – Data Many theories of cognition propose that there is a short-term or working memory system that is able to hold a limited amount of information for a short period of time. The memory span experiment is one measure of working memory capacity. In this experiment, participants are given a list of items and asked to recall the list. The list length is varied to see at what list length participants will make make few errors. That list length is the memory span for that person on that task. Individuals with larger memory spans can better keep in mind different stimuli, and this seems to give them an advantage for a wide variety of cognitive tasks. Memory span has been linked to performance on intelligence tests, standardised tests, reading skills, problem solving, and a variety of other cognitive tasks.
The very existence of short-term memory is largely based on memory span types of experiments, as it was noted that memory span was approximately seven items (plus or minus two) for a wide variety of stimuli. This suggested a simple storage system that held approximately seven items. Later studies demonstrated that memory span could be systematically influenced by a variety of stimulus characteristics, including the type of item. These findings have suggested that the capacity of short-term memory is controlled by verbal processes. This experiment allows you to measure your memory span for three different stimulus types.
Methods On each trial, you saw a list of items presented one at a time in random order and were asked to recall the items in the same order in which they were presented. If you got a list correct, the list length increased by 1 for that type of material. If you got a list incorrect, the list length decreased by 1.
The independent variable is the type of material you were asked to recall: digits, letters, or words. Memory span can be measured in lots of different ways. In this lab, the dependent variable is the length of the last list you correctly recalled.
The first list of each type of item was 3 items long. The longest list that was shown was 10, so the maximum score possible is 10.
Independent Variable Our Independent Variable (IV) is “Type of List” or “List Type” or “Stimulus Type”: digits, letters, or words.
Dependent Variable Our dependent variable (DV) is the length of the last list that was correctly recalled.
Data The data were not screened for outliers. Demographic data were not recorded. The raw data are available on LMS under Lab 02, should you want it.
Analyses A repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted with an alpha level of 0.05.
It’s your job to interpret and present this data, in APA format, in your lab report.
If you are going to use a graph, and you should, then you have two options for error bars: 1) plot the standard error as the error bars, or 2) plot the 95% Confident Interval. If you are reporting the descriptives in text or in a table, then you can report the Standard Deviation (SD) found in the descriptives table.
Within-Subjects Factors
Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
ListType
Measure: Length
Dependent Variable
1
2
3
Digits
Letters
Words
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
Digits
Letters
Words
6.5271 1.30550 129
5.7054 1.33699 129
4.1705 1.06891 129
Multivariate Testsa
Effect Value F Hypothesis df Error df Sig.
ListType Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
.781 226.713 b 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
.219 226.713 b 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
3.570 226.713 b 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
3.570 226.713 b 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
Multivariate Testsa
Effect Partial Eta Squared
ListType Pillai's Trace
Wilks' Lambda
Hotelling's Trace
Roy's Largest Root
.781
.781
.781
.781
Design: Intercept Within Subjects Design: ListType
a.
Exact statisticb.
Page 2
Mauchly's Test of Sphericity a
Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
Within Subjects Effect Mauchly's W Approx. Chi-
Square df Sig.
Epsilonb
Greenhouse- Geisser
ListType .985 1.950 2 .377 .985 1.000
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Mauchly's Test of Sphericity a
Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
Within Subjects Effect
Epsilonb
Huynh-Feldt Lower-bound
ListType 1.000 .500
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Tests the null hypothesis that the error covariance matrix of the orthonormalized transformed dependent variables is proportional to an identity matrix.
Design: Intercept Within Subjects Design: ListType
a.
May be used to adjust the degrees of freedom for the averaged tests of significance. Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects table.
b.
Tests of Within-Subjects Effects Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
Source Type III Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F
ListType Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Error(ListType) Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
369.137 2 184.568 215.231 .000
369.137 1.970 187.381 215.231 .000
369.137 2.000 184.568 215.231 .000
369.137 1.000 369.137 215.231 .000
219.530 256 .858
219.530 252.157 .871
219.530 256.000 .858
219.530 128.000 1.715
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Tests of Within-Subjects Effects Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
Source Sig. Partial Eta Squared
ListType Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
Error(ListType) Sphericity Assumed
Greenhouse-Geisser
Huynh-Feldt
Lower-bound
.000 .627
.000 .627
.000 .627
.000 .627
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Page 3
Pairwise Comparisons Measure: LengthMeasure: LengthMeasure: Length
(I) ListType (J) ListType Mean
Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.b
95% Confidence Interval for Differenceb
Lower Bound Upper Bound
1 2
3
2 1
3
3 1
2
.822* .113 .000 .548 1.096
2.357 * .110 .000 2.089 2.625
- .822* .113 .000 -1 .096 - .548
1.535 * .122 .000 1.239 1.831
-2 .357 * .110 .000 -2 .625 -2 .089
-1 .535 * .122 .000 -1 .831 -1 .239
Measure: LengthMeasure: Length
Based on estimated marginal means The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.*.
Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni.b.
Multivariate Tests
Value F Hypothesis df Error df Sig. Partial Eta Squared
Pillai's trace
Wilks' lambda
Hotelling's trace
Roy's largest root
.781 226.713 a 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
.219 226.713 a 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
3.570 226.713 a 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
3.570 226.713 a 2.000 127.000 .000 .781
Each F tests the multivariate effect of ListType. These tests are based on the linearly independent pairwise comparisons among the estimated marginal means.
Exact statistica.
Profile Plots
Page 5
Style Guides These guides tell you how to write and format a psychology lab report.
Writing for Psychology 6th Edition Robert P. O'Shea, Wendy McKenzie http://prospero.murdoch.edu.au/record=b2721143
An interactive approach to writing essays and research reports in psychology 3rd Edition Lorelle J Burton http://prospero.murdoch.edu.au/record=b2154828
Background Reading and Tips One of the skills that these assignments require you to use and develop is being able to quickly distinguish between literature that is and isn’t relevant. Don’t get swamped reading up on many different theories, unless you have reason to think they will provide information that is directly relevant to our experiment.
Refer frequently to the lab report criteria posted on LMS.
You must go beyond the textbook and what was discussed in the tutorial. Use PsycInfo, Google Scholar, the library, etc. Do not cite internet websites that are not peer-reviewed. That is, only use published journal articles. Do not copy from or cite the slides.
Your hypothesis is very important. Your hypothesis would be a specific positive prediction about what you expect to happen, stated in terms of the variables you are measuring and manipulating. E.g., “Participants in group A will score more highly than participants in group B on measure C.” OR “If X is true, and we manipulate Y, then Z will happen.”
Your hypothesis should be a logical extension of the evidence and arguments you present in your Introduction. In your Introduction, you should construct a rationale for your hypotheses. Do not just base your hypotheses on the results obtained.
