186 • CHAPTER 7 Long-Term Memory: Encoding and Retrieval
are examples from the encoding part of the experiment for each condition. Note that
participants in both conditions heard the same set of target words.Examples From the Meaning Condition- Sentence: The blank had a silver engine.
Target word: train
Correct answer: “yes” - Sentence: The blank walked down the street.
Target word: building
Correct answer: “no”
Examples From the Rhyming Condition- Sentence: Blank rhymes with pain.
Target word: train
Correct answer: “yes” - Sentence: Blank rhymes with car.
Target word: Building
Correct answer: “no”
In the retrieval part of the experiment, participants from both the meaning group
and the rhyming were given a rhyming recognition test. (There were other retrieval
conditions in this experiment, but we are going to focus just on the results for the rhym-
ing test.) For the rhyming test, participants were presented with 32 words that rhymed
with one of the target words presented during encoding, and 32 words that did not
rhyme. The rhyming words presented in this test were always different from the target
word and the rhyming word (if any) presented during encoding. For example, the target
word train was the rhyme for pain in encoding, as above, but the word presented in the
rhyming test was rain.
The participants’ task was to indicate whether each word presented during retrieval
rhymed with one of the target words they had heard during learning. Thus, when pre-
sented with the word rain the participant would answer “yes” if he or she remembered
train from before.
The percentage correct for target words that received a correct “yes” response dur-
ing encoding is indicated on the right in Figure 7.15. These results show that partici-
pants who were in the rhyming group during encoding remembered more words than
participants who were in the meaning group during encoding. The key to the better
performance of the rhyming group was that they experienced the same type of task
(rhyming) during both encoding and retrieval. This result is an example of transfer-
appropriate processing, because for the rhyming group both encoding and retrieval
were based on sound.
This result is related not just to the idea of matching encoding and retrieval, but also
to levels-of-processing theory. Remember that the main idea behind LOP theory is that
deeper processing leads to better encoding and, therefore, better retrieval. LOP theory
would predict that participants who were in the meaning group during encoding would
experience “deeper” processing, so they should perform better. Instead, the rhyming
group performed better. Thus, Morris’s experiment makes two important points: First,
deeper processing at encoding does not always result in better retrieval, as LOP pro-
poses. Second, matching the encoding and retrieval tasks results in better retrieval.- Retrieval cues are a powerful way to improve the chances of remembering
something. Why can we say that memory performance is better when you use
a word in a sentence, create an image, or relate it to yourself, all techniques
involving retrieval cues? - What is cued recall? Compare it to free recall.
TEST YOURSELF 7.2
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.