Research Support
Topic:Working memory model
Name
Landry and Bartling
Aim
To investigate whether or not articulatory suppression would
influence recall of a written list of phonologically dissimilar letters
in sequential recall.
Sample
The participants consisted of thirty-four undergraduate psychology
students.
Method
● The participants were tested individually. In the
experimental group, participants first saw a list of letters
that they had to recall while saying the numbers '1' and '2'
at a rate of two numbers per second (an articulatory
suppression task). The control group saw the list of letters
but did not carry out the articulatory suppression task.
● There were ten lists each consisting of a series of 7 letters
randomly constructed from the letters F, K, L, M, R, X and
Q. These letters were chosen because they don't sound
similar. The experimenter presented one letter series at a
time. The participants received an answer sheet with seven
blanks in each row. Before the experiment started, each
participant viewed one practice list in order to become
acquainted with the procedure.
Results
The results showed that the scores from the experimental group
were much lower than the scores from the control group. The
mean per cent of accurate recall in the control group was 76%
compared to a mean of 45% in the experimental group. Although
the difference in the means was large, the standard deviations
were nearly identical with SD = 0.13 for the control group and SD
= 0.14 for the experimental group. A T-test was calculated and
found a significant difference of p ≤ 0.01.
Conclusion
The results supported the experimental hypothesis as the mean
per cent of accurate recall in the control group was higher than the
mean percent of accurate recall in the experimental group. In line
with the Working Memory Model, articulatory suppression is
preventing rehearsal in the phonological loop because of
overload. This resulted in difficulty in memorising the letter strings
for participants in the experimental conditions whereas the
participants in the control condition did not experience such
overload.
Strengths
Weaknesses
P
P
E
E
A
A
L
L