Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Psychology presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Psychology presentation

3,196
views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,196
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Effects of Word Presentation Modality and Word Visualizability on Memory Ann P. Beck, Roberto Araujo, George R. Foss, and Roy G. Biv San Jose State University
  • 2. Theoretical Background •  Words are usually remembered better when presented visually than aurally (Smith, 1985; Jones, Ragalooshian, and Bosner, 1992) •  Visual imagery is helpful in encoding words into memory (Rork and Wendel, 1972; Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern, 1997) – these studies always used visual presentation of words
  • 3. high visual imagery word cow
  • 4. low visual imagery word truth ?
  • 5. Question •  If words are presented aurally, will visual imagery still be helpful? •  Our hypothesis: No. Visual mode must be active in order to use visual imagery.
  • 6. Our Hypotheses 1.  high visual imagery words remembered better than low visual imagery words 2.  visually presented words remembered better than aurally presented words 3.  interaction: the effect of visual imagery will be greater for visually presented words than for aurally presented words
  • 7. Method •  Participants: 40 participants (23 females, 17 males) – SJSU students •  Procedure: participants were presented with 40 words, which they then recalled by writing down the words in any order
  • 8. Method (continued) •  Design: – IV #1: visualizability of word (high visual imagery, low visual imagery) •  within subjects – IV #2: modality of word presentation (visual, auditory) •  between subjects – DV: number of words correctly recalled
  • 9. Example of word list cow truth respect book belonging spoon …
  • 10. Results
  • 11. Results (continued) •  no main effect of modality –  F(10, 1) = 2.41, p > .05 –  visually presented words recalled slightly better than aurally presented words, but not significantly different •  main effect of visualizability of word –  F(10, 1) = 4.35, p < .05 –  high visual imagery words recalled significantly better than low visual imagery words •  interaction –  F(10, 1) = 6.57, p < .05 –  the effect of visualizability is greater for visually presented words than for aurally presented words
  • 12. Discussion •  High visual imagery words are remembered better than low visual imagery words •  Visual imagery is a more helpful tool for memory when words are presented visually than when they are presented aurally •  We did not find that words are remembered better when they are presented visually than aurally. This may have been due to difficulties reading the visual words. –  two subjects reported difficulty reading the words, which were in 10-point font
  • 13. Note! •  I didn’t include the “theoretical impact of the study” in this example